Neither one will win,but Obama is the better canidate.
2006-12-06 01:39:09
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
I think it's far too early to assume either Clinton or Obama will be the party nominee. (I find it interesting that you refer to the man by his last name and the woman by the first name!) A lot could happen between now and then, and people we don't even know now will come forward to vie for the nomination. Also, neither Obama nor Clinton has yet declared an intent to seek the nomination.
That all being said, I do understand why the Barrett report is not released to public view: it was too recent, and contains information that could jeopardize national security and/or could be considered legally libelous (it could make unfounded/unproven statements that could damage the careers of whoever is mentioned - that's illegal). We are all protected by these laws and efforts. The American people do not have a right to all forms of government documentation, they should not for good reason, and they never will - just like you and I feel the government doesn't have a right to every private detail about our lives...
I think talk about the Barrett report RUINING Clinton is a lot of political posturing. I wouldn't take it any more seriously that the nutjobs screaming that Bush will be impeached.
I am not going to vote Democratic, so I can look at this very objectively - I don't have any emotion in it. Clinton is a terribly well-educated, terribly experienced candidate for any political office, and terribly talented. The only things which work against her seriously are that she is female and she is Bill Clinton's unfortunate wife (uh...or maybe that helps....LOL). She is also one of the most respected legislators by both parites.
Obama, while seemingly a very nice man with a kind heart, amazing good manners, amazing speaking abilities (and he's kind of handsome too), lacks the experience to be a president. He would be in way over his head. While he doesn't, as you say, carry real baggage (at least none that we know about), his lack of experience, pertinent background, and know-how will eventually become glaringly obvious to prospective voters. I think if he were ever, say, to be matched with an experienced person in a debate, the poor man would be lost.
It kind of cracks me up that the likes of Oprah Winfrey first proposed Obama run for president. As if OPRAH knows what is best for all of us - - the fact that she would talk up someone because he is charming and black, rather than that he is experienced and black, shows that her judgement is based more on race than logic and real understanding of the political world....
But I like Obama - if he weren't far left, I would like him more. LOL. It will be interesting to see what he makes of himself politically as the years go on and he gains an experienced voice and outlook. Meanwhile....we won't see him in the next presidential election, believe me.
ASKEW
http://askew.blogharbor.com
2006-12-06 13:40:51
·
answer #2
·
answered by Mac 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
Obama stands a chance. No baggage no exp. is a good thing.
But I have one concern: The race issue. Are mainstream Americans ready for it...? Are they liberal? Is he going to be constantly in greater danger (like Bobby Kennedy)?
Other than that, Obama would be the next Prez.
2006-12-06 09:40:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by Nightrider 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
I would rather see Obama as Prez over Hillary any day...and that comes from a staunch Republican.
2006-12-06 13:17:25
·
answer #4
·
answered by Agent99 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
What I think doesn't matter, I will say this. All Political strategy involves, a Gopher, a Stand up and a Decoy...which one is Hilary???
2006-12-06 09:40:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
They are equally dangerous, in my opinion.
2006-12-06 14:09:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by softspot 3
·
0⤊
2⤋
NEVER HAPPEN..............NOT IN 08
2006-12-06 14:19:45
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋