We have the BEST, to heck with the rest.
2007-02-10 05:58:39
·
answer #1
·
answered by m c 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
Thats exactly what I think. Bush isn't a conservative, but he has more conservative values than the Republicans who are running in '08. The only reassuring thing about Giuliani and McCain is their support for the war, but both are so liberal that I am reluctant to support them. McCain is more conservative than Bush, and is my first choice for Republicans (unless Gingrich runs), but I don't think he's going to win. Hopefully he'll be the VP on the Republican ticket. I would definitely vote for Bush if he could run again, but i'm probably in the minority on that one.
2007-02-10 06:43:09
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Your question make me think about a list of who I wouldn't want for president, no matter what. So, in order of fear for this country's well being here is my list of the worst possible candidates:
Hillary Clinton and Al Gore tie for the worst possible choice. Perhaps with medication and years of therapy one or the other of them may learn to live in reality but I doubt it.
Any democratic candidate. The country really doesn't need them. Look at history, at the end of every democrat's term the country has been in bad shape in several different ways. It isn't that they've all been bad people. Jimmy Carter had good intentions and is a truly brilliant and compassionate person. But as an executive he is hopeless.
A bought and paid for republican. I'm not sure if any of them aren't bought and paid for but if you find one, let me know.
An environmentalist. Most of the time they hate the entire human race and would likely try to outlaw all of us.
A religious fanatic. Yes, I know 98.298546% of all republicans seem to have that problem. But I needed another catagory.
Any person who is a public employee or a union representative. They have spent years learning to screw the system already. Lets not make matters worse.
A used car salesman. At least we know they are usually more honest than the average politicians. Most of them are realists at least.
Any person who stands to gain or who's friends or family stand to gain by their presidency. For example a person who has oil company ties or corporate ties of any sort.
Ok, so have I managed to irritate 2/3 of the readers here? Not really sorry, it was fun. I'm sure I managed to eliminate 99% of all potential candidates. As a suggestion, does anybody have a pet orangatang they'd loan the country for a few years. I can promise the creature would have all the luxuries and be well treated. If it couldn't read, write and speak it certanly would be better than any president we've had lately.
2007-02-10 06:15:44
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
that's totally humorous how possible positioned the burden of u.s. issues on purely the Shoulders of the president. all of us seem to forget Democrats and Republicans interior the domicile and Senate are basically as though not greater to blame for the matters interior the rustic right this moment. With over a hundred and fifty armed conflicts happening interior the worldwide right this moment how is it that u.s. takes a murdering genocidal dictator our of potential and we are the evil of the worldwide? and of path Bush did no longer positioned us there on my own an just about unanimous vote interior the senate and domicile positioned us there too. and then a similar human beings tied the palms of our militia and did no longer enable them to end the job in a well timed way. regrettably all the individuals who're at present interior the working for president have contributed to our issues basically as much as Bush has. So none of them are nicely worth a pile of airborne dirt and airborne dirt and dust to me. If Ron Paul would run i'd vote for him. yet no person wish him the two via fact he will do what desires to be carried out to place this usa appropriate returned. that's no longer continually something human beings see as primary.
2016-11-03 02:10:22
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree with Damn Good Dawg, anyone except Hilary. I think of the choices you laid out, Giulianni would prolly be the best. Seeing how fast and effective he dealt with 9/11, he would be pretty good in office. I too dont like that fact that he stands for gay marriage and abortion as well, but he looks alright.
2007-02-10 06:02:12
·
answer #5
·
answered by Gray Fox 2
·
3⤊
0⤋
Anyone except maybe Frist or George Makaka Allen would be infinitely better than Bush. You think Bush is smarter than McCain?? Based on what? You just want to be told what to think! Bush is the worst president since US Grant, maybe the worst ever!!
2007-02-10 05:57:57
·
answer #6
·
answered by chucklogic 2
·
0⤊
3⤋
Are you kidding? A blind monkey with autism and a peg leg would be better than Bush. I have never seen such an idiot in action. He is an embarrassment to the US.
He ought to go back to his ranch and suck on some ribs and sauce. Jerk that he is.
2007-02-10 10:55:04
·
answer #7
·
answered by GiddyGiddyGoin 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Quite frankly, I don't see why anyone would want the job. Talk about stress. No matter what you do you are bound to displease someone. Also, I don't think Bush is at all smart.
2007-02-10 06:02:50
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
The problem is you are looking for a protectionist not a representative of the people like you should be. I sense selfishness and fear in you just buy your question. Let me guess, you also don`t think a woman can keep you safe as a man from terrorist. You also seem to have a civil rights issues.
2007-02-10 05:59:43
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
3⤋
I hope Al Gore will candidate for America. His time has come.
You need him !
Lt : First you need a country to rule. If we don't make a change really
don't matter who is running things. You don't have to be a specialist or a fanatic to see there is something wrong with the Environment .
Hey, but that's not exciting, "we" need wars and stuff to watch the news and blame immigrants, "we" need blood and conspiracy , ...wake up.
2007-02-10 05:56:52
·
answer #10
·
answered by Machiavelli 2
·
0⤊
3⤋