Is there ANY single "wannabe" worthy of being President?

Question

Dems:
Obama - not enough diplomatic experience & questionable background.
Clinton - She supported her husband's bombing of Iraq and the invasion by the Bush admin. Now she wants to reverse the stance and say she made a mistake. Who wants a "flipper"?


Repubs:
Guiliani - most famous for being a victim of the WTC attack on New York and for having been married three times.

McCain - Voted for finance reform, but now says he has to raise millions to get elected. Supports an unpopular war and does anything to make the evening news - a 'glory hound'

Seems to me, none of these people are even shining examples of llegislators... why would we want ANY of them as President? Or, are we, as usual, just voting for whom is most likely to win AS a republican or democrat?

What do YOU think? Don't just weigh who will end a war, or win a war, but which of these is qualified to hold the World's most powerful political office?

Answer 1

RUDY is the top candidate . We'll never find any person without sin . For we are ALL guilty of such .

Answer 2

Here's a fact you should find comforting:
In presidential elections without an incombant, the poll leaders 18 months before the election are mostly nowhere to be seen come election day.

Because at this point in time, the poll leaders are there because of name recognition. Their lead falters when other pols start getting media face time during the nomination run.

I would even go so far as to predict that none of these 4 will be heading a ticket come November 2008.

Answer 3

I suppose the word "qualified" needs to be defined, since all of the above mentioned pols are "qualified" by virtue of their being elected to public office. Now, if by "qualified" you mean "deserves" the office of President, that's an entirely different story. You point out some very good weaknesses in the candidates, but at the moment I think the clear front runners are Hillary and Rudy. Hillary is going to find herself in deep poo with the left wing of her party, not only for her support for the Iraq War Resolution, but the fact she won't back up her newfound convictions by defunding the war effort. She's attempting to triangulate and keep herself from being pigeonholed but that's only going to go so far. Candidates like Edwards and Kucinich are going to force her to deal with her duplicity on this issue in debates, unless she skips them. Not good.

Likewise, Rudy is going to be savaged by the conservatives over his troubling marital history and an apparent inconsistent stand on abortion, gun control and gay right. Despite his recent interview on Fox with Sean Hannity, there will be a segment of hard core conservatives who will not support Rudy. This will make securing the nomination difficult, especially in extremely red states in the South. Rudy also seems to embrace Bush's ideas on immigration, which again does him damage in the right wing territory of the Republican party.

In the end, I think people will hold their nose and vote for the person who will least likely impact their lives...with the threat of increased taxes, an expensive and potentially disastrous "national healthcare" scheme, I think Hillary goes back to being New York's junior Senator while we see a socially liberal, economically conservative Rudy in the White House. Just my 2 cents worth.

Answer 4

You're trying to weigh their moral value, and there's your mistake. You should look only at their experience and potential, and not at their personal lives (Giuliani) or whether they changed their minds about something (Clinton.) Personally, I'd rather have a leader with the integrity to admit they made a mistake than one who desperately clings to the wrong path in the hopes that tenacity can make it the right one, at the expense of hundreds of thousands of lost lives.

At any rate, when deciding who to vote for, look at the issues, their stance on them, and what kind of leader you think they'll be. The President is not a legislator - that's for Congress. The President is there to lead this nation with integrity and loyalty and open-mindedness.

Vote for that person, if he or she exists.

Answer 5

LOL do you mean as worthy as the present President? Man I dunno where are we gonna find another:

1. National Guard Deserter during the Vietnam War to be our Klueless Kommander in Khief;
2. A Convicted Felon (1973 drunk driving arrest);
3. If Ted Kennedy is a murderer because of Chappaquiddick, then what is Laura Bush? She killed her boyfriend in an auto accident years ago. Is she a murderer too?
4. Speaking of Laura Bush, everyone talks about Hillary Clinton's failures as First Lady. What has Laura done in 6 years, except make jokes about her husband and admit he used cocaine?
5. Where will we find another President whose VP still owns stock in Halliburton, which was given a no bid contract worth billions?
6 Where will we find another President who will lie about Hussein having nuclear weapons?
7. Where will we find another President who claims to "support the troops", but sends them into battle with no body or vehicle armor?
8. Where will we find another President who goes on vacation, while the country is under attack, from friends of his and is father's?

Answer 6

Guiliani-he handled the WTC pretty well, and also New York city(thought what's going to happen after WTC? riot/looting?)

Clinton/Obama/McCain tied for last place though because all of them have flaws and like to talk more than do.

Answer 7

No. If they are running for President, they are politicians. Politicians need to stay out of government. But only politicians are capable of running for office. Catch-22.

Answer 8

Tom Tancredo: Conservative values, not a zealot, strong on security.

I don't know any of his skeletons, but I'm sure they are there somewhere.