Is there any reason to vote for Clinton over Obama?
Clinton is pro-war and conservative on some social issues.
Obama has clear standards and objectives.
Isn't it a clear choice?
2007-04-24 17:09:19 · 23 answers · asked by Dr. Bradley 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
"Terrie"
You might be right to an extent.
I think the fact that Obama hasn't been in Washington for very long should be a good thing.
He is very experienced in policy making and foreign affairs.
2007-04-24 17:15:34 · update #1
♥ obama forever ♥
confident, intelligent & charming
2007-04-24 19:14:23 · answer #1 · answered by polly-pocket 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I watched the Democrat press release with all the candidates the other day, and sadly it showed just how incompetent Obama is. I was hoping he'd shine and leave the others in the dust. Maybe his lack of experience was the problem, but he really came of as ignorant and uninformed on issues. He's cool, but not much of a leader.
It was also unfortunate that Hillary seemed to be the most intelligent by far, but we all know she's just saying what she thinks we want to hear. We all know we can't trust her to do what she says, but I still think she'll win the Democrat primary.
Edwards came off as a complete loser. Did you see how long it took him to answer questions? He's not too bright, is he? He was good at suing doctors out of business and raising the cost of health care in N. Carolina. An evil, evil man, but I really thought he was smarter.
I don't know who the others were.
None of this will matter when the primaries start, but it's interesting to get a taste of them ahead of time.
2007-04-28 11:29:39 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
i like Hillary. Obama looks he may be a quite good candidate, yet i'm worried approximately his loss of adventure. he's a great speaker, yet he hasn't performed something yet. He commonplace a job as Illinois Senator yet has thoroughly ignored his responsibilities! He has been asked approximately various subject concerns correct to me, an Illinois resident, yet replied that he have been busy and did not comprehend correct to the subject concerns. Its his activity! a minimum of he's honest nonetheless, and in all fairness Hillary may be neglecting her activity as Senator too
2016-10-30 05:52:48 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Barack Obama is a favorite as an underdog while Hillary Clinton might win for the influence of Bill Clinton as former President.
VOTE for your choice as US President on my 360 degrees blog and know who will likely win.
2007-04-24 18:49:01 · answer #4 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Clinton isn't pro-war. She's pro-whatever someone giving her money wants her to think. She had a big bproblem with Don Imus, but didn't have any issues taking 800k from Timbaland, whose lyrics are 100 times worse than anything Imus has ever even thought to himself. Her platform has somehow become to keep her husband as far away from her as possible.
Obama, on the otherhand, pledges to spend a whole bunch of money. The problem is, he won't admit to the American people where that money is going to have to come from.
I do find it interesting that a rookie is out-campaigning a supposed political veteran.
2007-04-24 17:23:47 · answer #5 · answered by DOOM 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Obama is the right man for the time! I am particularly interested in how he will be able to conduct foreign policy, being the only candidate who has lived in a moslem country and lived with a Moslem father (when he was 6 years old in indonesia). I am convinced he will be able to wield diplomatic power with the very countries that now give us major headaches. Obama is clearly cut out of a different mold than the other candidates!
2007-04-24 21:31:51 · answer #6 · answered by KenB 2 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Democrats
2007-04-24 18:13:01 · answer #7 · answered by SEYYED REZA 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Obama also is pro war.. when they say "re-deploy" .. they mean stay in the area and prevent Iran from taking over Iraq.
Obama also voted for the patriot act. This means he will do the wrong thing for.. whatever the reasons was that he voted for it.. ??
Anyhow the rest of his record is rather limited. Both are bad choices imho.
If your "big topic" is the war.. I would recommend Ron Paul as he has always voted against the war and the rest of his party and against the patriot act. His plan for Iraq if elected is to leave immediately and he wants to reform our foreign policy so that we do not need to police the world.
And with him being republican.. if you cant convince people to vote for a Democrat.. you can suggest Ron Paul and truly have a NO War vs NO War election.
2007-04-24 20:56:56 · answer #8 · answered by k X 2 · 2⤊ 5⤋
Clinton will do or say anything to anyone to win. She is a sociopath & dangerous. The only good thing I can say about Obama is that he is NOT Hillary clinton.
2007-04-24 18:55:01 · answer #9 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
obama baby, whoo hoo, finally a democratic candidate that seriously kicks ****, rep or dem my god, hope it comes down between him and mccain, it'd be the first time i can remember when we actually had a decent choice on both sides
2007-04-24 17:15:51 · answer #10 · answered by rockabillly motha****** 5 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Obama is not a president. He has neither the experience nor the ability to lead the nation. I still believe he was only elected because of the district he is from and the strong black caucus that got behind him. I figure even Lincoln would turn over in his grave is he were elected.
Sadly, No one needs ol Billary in office either.
2007-04-24 19:18:45 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 6⤋