If they both run, who would you vote for, Hillary or Guiliani? Why and why not?
2006-11-15 02:43:03 · 11 answers · asked by me 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
I'd go with Hillary. Men have been running the country from the beginning. It's about time we see what girl power can do.
2006-11-15 02:46:13 · answer #1 · answered by Tish 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Ya know, I'm definately a democrat and female, but I don't think I could bring myself to vote for Hilary. I would have to vote for Guiliani, besides I like what he did in NYC. He seems to be a no nonsense sort of guy who gets the job done. I'm still rooting for President Gore though!
I have to completely disagree with Tara below. How does managing a large city like NYC have less to do with running a country than say, just being a Senator? I guess being a former President's wife would be pretty good experience, but I doubt that on it's own being a federal office holder would lend more expertise to the job!!! That doesn't even make sense to me! To me running a large city would be more like running a country! The point is, he did an excellent job "managing" NYC, and taking charge when it was necessary! That shows experience and the skills necessary to get the job done!
2006-11-15 10:48:31 · answer #2 · answered by carrieinmich 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well Hillary tried to keep her old man in line.... a loud mouth doesn't get the job done. Guiliani most definately.... brains, well spoken, and knowledge of the common grit of the streets.
2006-11-15 12:07:10 · answer #3 · answered by VISUAL ILLISIONS 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Probably Hillary. I like Rudy and all, but being the mayor of a city, even New York City, doesn't qualify you to be the chief executive. Hillary has at least held federal office. Here she edges Rudy out a bit for me because she is a democrat and a woman. If Rudy became governor of New York first, he'd be a great candidate.
2006-11-15 11:19:24 · answer #4 · answered by Tara P 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Hillary can accept that her husband "slick willy" cheated and lied to her and she can still live with the fact that she was completely humiliated in front of the entire world? Imagine how other world leaders will see her? As a push-over or wimp? I wouldn't want that to be the head of my country.
2006-11-15 13:50:19 · answer #5 · answered by Chris D 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't even want to think about the 2008 election yet. Maybe sometime in 2007.
2006-11-15 11:12:59 · answer #6 · answered by JB 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Guiliani. Simply because he is not Clinton.
2006-11-15 10:45:19 · answer #7 · answered by clsga 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
They are both good, but if Barrack Obama runs he will win the nomination for the Dems, and I would vote for him.
2006-11-15 21:45:02 · answer #8 · answered by Ian C 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would not vote, exercising my right to free expression and sending a message that neither candidate is - in my opinion - capable, qualified, or honorable enough to serve as President of the United States.
__________________________________________________
Check out the blog: BUSHWACKER!
www.blogger.com
http://al-aback.blogspot.com
___________________________________________________
Now, if you put someone honorable, like Colin Powell or John McCain, in the race, I'll not only vote, I'll campaign for them!
Voter apathy is tied directly to the lack of voter choice.
If I only have to choose between a Vega and a Yugo, I probably won't buy either one. Voters need more - and better - choices when it comes to the most important leadership position in the entire country. -RKO-
2006-11-15 10:52:16 · answer #9 · answered by -RKO- 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Giuliani because he's intelligent, charismatic, capable, caring, honest and forthright. Everything that Hillary isn't
2006-11-15 10:47:28 · answer #10 · answered by ? 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋