Michael Savage for President?

Question

Before the praise or insults start flying:

He is not a radical liberal or a Neo Con, although he has conservative values.

He is not a Republican or a Democrat.

He is not a big fan of Bush.

He is not homophobic, he simply disagrees that the rest of society should have to bend over backwards to accomodate their lifestyle.

He considers himself an independent.

And a very loud and opinionated one at that!

Answer 1

He's a moron though, and that does not lend to being a good president. I'm not saying the world should be politically correct by any stretch of the imagination, I'm merely saying that there are times to be non-"loud and opinionated".

Answer 2

i does now no longer vote for Michael Savage for President, if he ran, on the whole because of the reality he's purely too emotionally volatile to be a solid President. He could make the same mistake that the Bush administration made out of appearing too unilaterally, distinctive than he could take this unilateralism to much greater powerful extremes that now no longer even the dogmatic Bush administration could have dared to take it. He has spent a large number of his political occupation vilifying the whole left by characterizing the whole left as sharing the same philosophy and lines as people who're on the radical fringe of the left wing pass. This predilection, by Michael Savage, to portray the contest so unfairly, capacity that he may well be actually too destructive to cooperation, whether that cooperation may well be solid for the country. Having listened to Savage, on his instruct the Savage u . s ., and having examine his books “The Savage u . s .”, “The Enemy indoors of”, and “Liberalism is A psychological ailment”, i'm going to actual say that his very own attitude is so skewed by previous injustices he perceived he became undertaking to, by political correctness from the left, that he could probable on no account be a ordinary Commander and chief. Any guy who believes that international family contributors is for the susceptible, and extols the virtues of preemptive conflict shouldn’t be President of u . s .. Any guy that believes determination has been actually deleterious to u . s . shouldn’t be President. Any guy who believes that we've been a greater helpful u . s . indoors the Nineteen 1950s than we are right this moment shouldn’t be President. Any guy who glorifies the barbarity contained indoors the previous testomony, and believes that we could opt to repeatedly be wakeful such barbarism to right this moment’s international shouldn’t be President. So no, i does no longer in any comprehend vote for him.

Answer 3

If he has the great qualities you mentioned then it is obvious he would become a lousy President. It is doubtful if he would be able to win the support of even the Neo-Libs, ( those weirdo's who have been taught to give-a-way everything of other people).

If he is honest, he might get a few rural voters to give him a vote or two.

Answer 4

That man has big ones and he would have my vote. He is a straight shooter and takes no crap. He exposed Pelosi for what she is with tape of her at a fascist meeting discussing hatred for America

Answer 5

No way. He is just as bad as Michael Moore just on then opposite side. You never would want anyone from the far left or the far right as President

Answer 6

I could live with that. I agree with most of what he says

Answer 7

He doesn't want to be President. Therefore, the question is moot.

Answer 8

you know i absolutely love michael savage. but he is way too over the top. he takes things way out of proportion. he'd nuke iraq till it was gone. but don't get me wrong i love the guy but he ain't no president candidate lol.

Answer 9

He has some good stuff to say but generally I disagree with him. In my opinion he is to far to the right to get the majority of the vote.

Answer 10

If he is really so that you say, he would be suitable.