I agree, he seems more personable than Hillary. He seems to relate well to all walks of life and he is very bright (a good mix of book and street smarts whereas Hillary only has book smarts) and charismatic. Hillary talks a good game but I have a feeling that her administration would be a repeat of the current one, an administration that caters to the whims of the rich and powerful.
2007-03-04 18:29:50
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
I agree he would be someone that can bring the country together and make the USA a shinning light. His strength for what is right is admirable. The problem is experience. If he were to run as Vice President or stay in the Senate longer he would gain the respect due him.
We need a candidate that can get our country motivated and fast. Hillary and Bill have world wide connections and that is paramount at this time of our history. We have alienated ourselves in the world, it is time to stand down, admit our errors and move on.
2007-03-07 15:56:06
·
answer #2
·
answered by GO HILLARY 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think both are a bad choice. Here's my question...
Why didn't Clinton or Barack visit Enterprise last weekend?
They both came to Selma, Alabama for the civil rights memorial which is commendable. But if they want to be the next US President, then why didn't the visit the storm-devastated area of Enterprise, AL, which is only 129 miles away & show compassion & concern for those US citizens. BTW, Enterprise is near a Army base (Ft. Rucker) & many of the Enterprise students are "Army brats". It think this move just proves that they are trying to manipulate those who they think they can.
2007-03-06 05:48:02
·
answer #3
·
answered by SusanB 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I like Barack Obama very much. But I think that Hillary Clinton is our best choice for the Presidency. She has far more practical experience and I find her tough brilliance a plus in this world atmosphere. I would like to see Obama be her VP. If he were to get the nomination I would support his candidacy though.
I've seen the poll numbers and we're going to be looking at them bob up and down for almost two more years. This is only the beginning. The landscape may be very different for both Obama and Clinton a year from now. It's going to be nothing if not the most interesting Presidential race in most of our lifetimes.
2007-03-04 18:09:32
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋
i do no longer watch FOX yet I agree, Hillary would be a extra effective president. Obama needs time to collect his strategies so he does something as properly err, uhh, umm mmm, properly uh.... possibly with the help of 2016 he will have the means to end an entire sentence without stuttering for words.
2016-10-02 09:59:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Im sorry to shoot down that dream; but only GOD---or should I word it like this; "ONLY when a president effectively leads a nation back to the GOD of all, and is NOT AFRAID to speak the NAME OF THE LORD JESUS CHRIST--will this country ever be one that is a shining light!"
I AGREE wholeheartedly that if I HAD TO choose....the vote would go to Obama. I am literally in ABSOLUTE FEAR for our country over the possibility of Hilary becoming president. I do not understand why others cannot discern her intentions? Just look at her....she even looks EVIL!!!
PS..whomever it was that called her the "wicked witch of the East".......I'd give you 1000 points if it were possible; ya hit that one right on!~ :)
^*7*^
2007-03-05 05:31:07
·
answer #6
·
answered by º§€V€Nº 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
I like Hillary and Obama alot. Fortunately I have plenty of time to make up my mind. I went to see Obama speak in South Carolina. He's definitely has the charisma thing going on. Obama has never faced the kind of heat that he will next fall. It will be interesting to see how he handles the intense pressure.
2007-03-04 18:33:26
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Yes,
From Obamapedia
"In a 2005 post on the liberal weblog Daily Kos, Barack Obama argued that Democrats must not only try to defeat the Republicans, they must work to build trust in government: "The bottom line is that our job is harder than the conservatives' job...whenever we exaggerate or demonize, or oversimplify or overstate our case, we lose. Whenever we dumb down the political debate, we lose. A polarized electorate that is turned off of politics, and easily dismisses both parties because of the nasty, dishonest tone of the debate, works perfectly well for those who seek to chip away at the very idea of government because, in the end, a cynical electorate is a selfish electorate."
Why should I vote for Barack Obama in 2008? - Obamapedia
Obama's campaign for President is built on the premise that the Democrats must "disagree without being disagreeable" and unite America to solve issues of historic importance. He focuses on his ability to overcome partisan bickering, to work across the aisle, and to produce real results. The idea that someone would be able to unite America and get the government to productively work on important issues sounds idealistic. Understanding that cynicism, Obama stresses that Americans must embrace the 'audacity of hope.' Hope is an irrational belief, a faith in optimism, but hope is also a unifying emotion, one that resonates with people across the globe. By emphasizing that we should all believe in the possibility of a new type of politics, Obama has converted many people, including Republicans, to believe in the possibility of the anti-Bush, a non-ideological leader that respects those who disagree with him and works to find not the Democratic solution, not the Republican solution, but the best solution. Campaigning to replace Bush with a unifying leader, he has struck a chord across the country—as shown by polls, book sales, enormous crowds, and website groups. In this crucial juncture in history, he has the potential to improve how Americans perceive politics, leading to more trust in government and solving some very difficult problems.
All of the Democratic candidates more or less support the same issues and hold similar values. The candidate's Iraq plans, health care plans, energy plans, ethics plans, and education plans differ in details, but they all aim for the same general progressive goals: pulling out of Iraq, introducing universal health care, reducing America’s dependence on oil, battling climate change, strengthening national security, ridding Washington of corruption, and improving our schools. The specific details of the plans aren’t too significant; what matters more is the actual ability of the candidate to create the political will for change. Obama, unlike the most of the other candidates, has a history of working across the aisle and listening to opposing viewpoints, and is stressing a united America within his campaign. If he was elected, Obama would do a better job of not only passing the necessary legislation by incorporating other peoples points of view, but also persuading the American people that he is acting in their interest. An American president who is elected by saying, ‘we’re all in this together and we all have a stake in each other’ will do a better job of persuading Republican voters that America is moving in the right direction. If Obama’s nomination fails, another Democratic may be able to win the presidency, but the Republican voters would not respect— four out of ten Republicans voted for Obama in his Illinois Senate Race —the other Democratic candidate as much Obama. Because of his ability to appeal to moderate and Republican voters, an Obama election will improve the long-term image of the Democratic Party. We don't want another Bush...Ever."
2007-03-08 16:35:24
·
answer #8
·
answered by Jake B 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Anyone including Mickey Mouse would make a better president than Hillary.
2007-03-04 19:49:37
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Yes I do agree with you. Hillary has some good points, but I think Edwards would have a better chance of winning overall. And I think he would do an excellent job also.
2007-03-04 18:05:48
·
answer #10
·
answered by Joy K 4
·
3⤊
1⤋