John Edwards and Barack Obama are two of the most well spoken and charasmatic democrats around. America needs a change like them.
2006-12-02 08:03:58 · 21 answers · asked by WP Redux 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Edwards/Obama vs. Giuliani/McCain - now that would be fun!
2006-12-02 08:06:52 · answer #1 · answered by Buddha 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I believe they could win. I would oppose them, but I don't think the world would end if they were to be elected.
I've voted in every presidential election since John F. Kennedy defeated Richard M. Nixon in 1960. I've been on the losing side in five of those 12 elections (1960, 1964, 1976, 1992, and 1996), and on the winning side in the other seven (1968, 1972, 1980, 1984, 1988, 2000, and 2004). In retrospect, after the dust settled on their records in office, which were truncated in both cases, I ended up admiring Jack Kennedy and, let's say, not admiring Richard Nixon. So in terms of my preferences looked at after the fact, you could say I was on the winning side in eight, rather than seven, of the last 12 elections.
Just for the hell of it, I went back and noted that five presidential elections were held during the period when I was alive and kicking on this Earth but prior to the time when I was eligible to vote and did vote for the first time in the 1960 election: (1940, W: Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1944, W:Franklin D. Roosevelt, 1948, W:Harry S Truman, 1952, W:Dwight D. Eisenhower, and 1956, W:Dwight D. Eisenhower). Looking at the results of those elections retrospectively (i.e., assumng that I would have known how each of the candidates would do in office prior to voting rather than having to wait and see), and figuring out how I would have voted if I had been eligible to vote in those elections, I would have been on the winning side all five times.
Would I have been happier if my candidates had won all 12 times in the presidential elections from 1960 to the present? No, I would not have been happier; I would have been significantly less happy in the case of the 1960 election, if Richard Nixon had won, as noted above. In fact, every election after 1960 would have been up for grabs if Nixon had won in 1960.
I've never thought about it exactly this way before, but I am very happy to have lived during the terms of office of four of the greatest presidents, in my opinion, in the history of our country, two Democrats and two Republicans: Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Harry S Truman, Dwight David Eisenhower, and Ronald Wilson Reagan. John Fitzgerald Kennedy showed great promise and might also have made my personal Presidential Hall of Heroes if he had lived to serve another term.
2006-12-02 09:22:33 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Obama is a great speaker and and a charasmatic individual...but so far those don't seem like great reasons to vote for him for president.
We do need a change, but I'm just not sure that I would vote for him -
2006-12-02 08:18:10 · answer #3 · answered by what's up? 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Edwards is a much better VP choice... he lacks the experience and all out charisma... Obama would have the charisma, but again I would prefer he say in the senate and gain some experience... For either to win they either need to be the VP candidate, or have a VP candidate with undeniable political experience and wisdom... and the VP candidate must be very active in campaigning.
2006-12-02 08:06:35 · answer #4 · answered by flawed broadcast 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I agree that both of them are charismatic and good speakers, but both are also very inexperienced. I also think Hillary would not be a good choice. I think she could win the primary, but would be torn apart in middle America, where they are not yet ready for a woman president.
2006-12-02 16:59:13 · answer #5 · answered by dwaynedolly 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
How about Gore / Edwards or Obama
2006-12-02 08:12:47 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Conservatives pick the U. S. to break down. Had McCain gained, the U. S. would have collapsed late in 2009. the rustic does no longer exist immediately, and McCain would were the stunning president.
2016-11-30 01:33:04 · answer #7 · answered by molander 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Edwards is loathed in the South and West (excluding California). Hard to see them pull it off.
2006-12-02 13:00:04 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
I live in N.C. Edwards would be awful he's done nothing for his state what could he do on a fed. level.
2006-12-02 12:50:20 · answer #9 · answered by josh m 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
John Edwards is too youthful and Obama rhymes with Osama and I don't think this country is ready for him yet.
I like Clinton-Edwards maybe.
2006-12-02 08:05:50 · answer #10 · answered by Kodoku Josei 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋