I say we need a democrat, that's my vote this time. Second, in these problems overseas, let's bring everyone home, and focus on the country as a whole, we all need to help each other out. Let's get the illegals out, centralized healthcare for everyone. Let's pull out and come home. It's time to take care of family before we start feeding the neighbors.
2006-11-03 04:34:11
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
7⤋
Our next president should be a Democrat. Then the country can get back on it's feet and ready for the next adventure into Republican fantasy land.
We've driven Iraq into the hands of Iran and the two counties will someday face us as the unified country of Persia. Then, LOOK OUT! What we sould do in Iraq is to quit sputtering around wasting lives and turning more of the Iraqis against us. BUT we can't just walk out until we fix the water and the electricity and the hospitals and anything else we destroyed with Bush's war. Remember what Colen Powell said.
Incidently, in Briton, Canada and Mexico an overwhelming majority of the people consider George Bush to be a bigger threat to world peace than Kim Jong-il. North Korea is currently on a conciliatory course with the U.S. and should be OK for a while, unless our government antagonizes them beyond reason, which seems to be one of Bush's special talents. But with the help of Red China, maybe we can get by on our present course.
2006-11-03 06:44:51
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Vote for me for president in '08.
I believe that the federal government should focus on inter-state affairs and foreign policy. Let each individual state enact their own laws. If California wants legal marijuana, then the feds shouldn't tell them they can't do that. If Massachusetts wants gay marriage, then why should a Senator from Wyoming say they can't?
Here's my stance on some other issues:
abortion is a necessary evil
welfare is keeping the poor down and should be limited
the borders should be closed
the war on drugs is a war on people and a huge waste of money
universal healthcare should be privately funded by those that think it is possible
foreign aid should be privately funded by those that want to (American tax dollars for Americans!)
Term limits for congress (that way they won't be so concerned with getting re-elected and will focus on the issues)
Anti-PC
Anti-Affirmitive Action (aka Reverse-discrimination)
Anti-lobbyists/special interest groups
Get congress on the same retirement plan (Social Security) as the rest of us
we need to research alternate energy sources
Iraq- get American troops out of action and into a 100% training role
Iran- propose that IAEA agents supervise the building and operation of nuke reactors. I think patience with Iran is the way to go because the next generation of Iranians is disillusioned with the current leadership.
DPRK- Kim Jong Il is crazy and can not be trusted. He already broke his promise to Clinton and that is why he has nuke tech now. We should talk to the military commanders in N.Korea and let them know that the US has no intention of a first strike, but that a response strike will be devastating.
2006-11-03 06:54:39
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Edwards or O'Bama (at this point) because they can do what Kennedy and Reagan were able to do. Kennedy and Reagan did not run campaigns in which they told us we should be in fear and they were they only ones who could prevent disaster. They both used the message that we can always become a greater, better nation. They showed us an image of a brighter future and encouraged us to reach for that.
We have got to start talking to Iran and North Korea again. Diplomacy does more to prevent conflict than silence and threats. It is time the United States stopped relying on third parties to conduct diplomacy for us.
As for Iraq. We need to first listen to our millitary leaders and ascertain what is feasable at this point. With that information in hand I would seek partners in hte Islamic world who would be willing to move in with peacekeeping forces while we move out. True, that might enable Iraq to form an Islamicgovernment, but the truth is they will probably move that way when we are gone anyway.
2006-11-03 05:41:40
·
answer #4
·
answered by toff 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
John McCain should be our next President. McCain doesn't pander to anyone. He spent years as a P.O.W. which in my mind gives him moral authority. He is a centrist which is why neither Dem's or Republicans love him. That right there is good enough for me. You also need a V.P. so lets say Colin Powell. Again a centrist who has a mind of his own. He has plenty of experience, and would also look great in 8 years as the country's first African American President.
As far as the Axis of Evil, we need to pull some plays out of Reagan's Playbook. You wouldn't see a bunch of little dumb asses like this if Reagan were President. He'd take them aside and give them a little history lesson. Maybe a few films from Nagasaki and Hiroshima. You left out what might be the biggest problem of all, Hugo Chavez. There are actually people in this country who listen to his drivel. Chavez is like Hitler. No one listened to him or worried very much about him until it was too late, and that my friend is what I fear is happening with Hugo Chavez. And he's quite a bit closer than Germany.
2006-11-03 05:44:16
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
I think Rudolph Giuliani would make an excellent president.
to answer your second question, i don't think there is anything we can do in the short term that would really make a difference. this has been and is going to be a long process, but i think ultimately we should keep doing what we are doing. however, if we see there are improvements or changes we need to make, then by all means, stand up and do what is right! Admitting the need for change or improvement is the responsible thing to do; not saying so can get America into a lot of trouble.
2006-11-03 06:00:53
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
you're good, human beings ought to pay greater interest to what is going on in congress, it relatively is getting some capacity back, even although no longer sufficient, in my estimation. The congress that exceeded the patriot act replaced into very republican controlled; it relatively is not unfair to call it a rubber stamp for the Bush administration. Republicans replaced the policies so as that democrat legislations never have been given out of committee, never got here up for a vote for 6 years. vote casting documents can point out a congressman's positions, regardless of if, analysis is mandatory. A consultant could have voted no on a particular version of a invoice that he generally needed enacted, yet which had a rider which replaced into unacceptable to him.
2016-10-15 08:19:39
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Non of the possible candidates have a platform done yet. I will vote for the candidate who comes with a good platform with solutions for the problems and not for a campaign slogan, political party, or what they've done in the past that is not relevant to the problems we confront. Now where is that person? I don't know. So the answer to your question would be the lesser of 2 evils.
2006-11-03 06:10:22
·
answer #8
·
answered by Jose R 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Barak Obama should be the next President because he seeks unity & bipartisanship, something the current President never sought. Iraq, well, we need to pull some of our troops out of their & send them to Afghanistan to stop the Taliban from coming back to power. Iran must be pursued by the U.S. with the U.N. in imposing new economic sanctions that cut off the money flow to the government, while helping aid the poorest people in that country. N. Korea's government needs to be financially strapped so its dictator cannot acquire weapons of mass destruction, but the U.N. must come to the aid of a dying poor people in that country with food, medical assistance & possible money that the people, not the government, get to move to better housing or provide them political assylum to other countries. China has to start helping the North Korean people, & stop Kim.
2006-11-03 05:57:15
·
answer #9
·
answered by RHD100 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
If I were 35 I would say me, and I would not be associated with either of the big two political parties. I think we need to start showing those now leading Iraq we are going to be bringing trooops home, if nothing else to get them moving quicker. I do think it is difficult there and to achieve a democracy in Iraq will take years, if at all. All we can do is pressure the leaders and pull out where we can, recognizing that if we pull out too quickly all the lives already lost will be for naught.
We need to lay down the hammer w/ Iran. Sanctions away.
In N. Korea, I think it is great 6 party talks should be underway shortly, that is better than bi-lateral and will be more successful (more support typically equals more likely success).
If not me, Mit Romney.
2006-11-03 04:49:33
·
answer #10
·
answered by straightup 5
·
1⤊
3⤋
There has not been one candidate so far that I am willing to support. You can look at my past answers and questions and see that I am on the conservative side most of the time. The two so far that stick out to me have been Joe Biden and Barak Obama. I would vote for either of these two men over any Republican name that I have heard so far. Biden believes that we cannot just cut and run out of Iraq. If we leave that region on unstable it will cause more harm than good to the rest of the world.
As for Iran and North Korea, I think the world needs to be preparing for war. They are both playing the rest of the world for fools. They have communicated, they have sold weapons to each other. They are playing a game with us. Just look at the news when one is in the headlines, the other is no where to be seen. Case in point North Korea test a nuclear device and Iran is being quiet. North Korea agrees to return to the six-party talks and then Iran starts test firing missles. They will flex their muscle in the world community, until it gets to the point where the world will not do anything much like Iraq before this latest war. Once Iran and North Korea are in a postition, much like Iraq where there were countless sanctions filled against them and the world community was unwilling to act, they will begin to prepare an attack on the USA directly under our noses. We need to be ready to fight North Korea and Iran it is imminent.
2006-11-03 04:52:29
·
answer #11
·
answered by 3rd parties for REAL CHANGE 5
·
6⤊
3⤋