With the many candidates running for President of the United States of America in 2008, what qualifications are you looking for when electing the next Commander in Chief of the United States of America?
2007-05-01 07:50:31 · 20 answers · asked by Mr. Knowledgeable VI 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
A candidate like George W. Bush. One who speaks the TRUTH, Never LIES, and is passionate about serving the American People.
2007-05-02 06:53:26 · answer #1 · answered by Jody C 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Excuse me, there is no such position as Commander in Chief of the United States of America. There is a President of the United States, who is also the commander in chief of the armed forces.
But to answer your question, I will be voting for whichever candidate is the biggest taxer and spender running. That is what made our country great, and we have been going downhill ever since the government became afraid to tax and spend appropriately.
And any of the people currently running would be a giant improvement.
2007-05-01 07:54:43 · answer #2 · answered by rollo_tomassi423 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Someone who will think, and maybe even talk about, or hold meetings, before inilaterally attacking another country for oil. One in which there was no evidence he had WMD's, (See Hans Blix's report to the UN, and they were not "Reconstituting nukes" or dealing with any terrorist. Saddam executed terrorist!
I want to see someone who has an above average IQ and knows how to resolve issues, not create them. Who is liked by world leaders, not hated!
Your inference that a woman is too weak is BS! Nice way to get that in there without saying it!
We use the military as a last resort, not the first one! And we think about what we are doing before we do it. Bush didn't even listen to his father! He also didn't use enough troops, denying them to field commanders, nor did he have an exit plan!
I woould like a non-LIAR!
"I don't believe in mission creep," he continued. "Had we gone into Baghdad -- we could have done it, you guys could have done it, you could have been there in 48 hours -- and then what?
"Which sergeant, which private, whose life would be at stake in perhaps a fruitless hunt in an urban guerilla war to find the most-secure dictator in the world?
"Whose life would be on my hands as the commander-in-chief because I, unilaterally, went beyond the international law, went beyond the stated mission, and said we're going to show our macho?" he asked. "We're going into Baghdad. We're going to be an occupying power -- America in an Arab land -- with no allies at our side. It would have been disastrous."
Bush said, "We don't gain the size of our victory by how many innocent kids running away -- even though they're bad guys -- that we can slaughter. ... We're American soldiers; we don't do business that way."
"Am I happy that S.O.B. is still there?" Bush asked, then answered, "No." Bush tells Gulf vets why Hussein left in Baghdad by S. H. Kelly
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjFrezxIMAQ&mode=related&search=
2007-05-01 08:06:03 · answer #3 · answered by cantcu 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I have my candidate of preference who is John Edwards. Any of the prominent Democrats appearing in the recent debate would be acceptable. But MORE than ANY OF THAT I want a transparently and PROVABLY HONEST election, MUCH UNLIKE the shamlections of 2000 AND 2004.
2007-05-01 08:40:51 · answer #4 · answered by rhino9joe 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Someone who respects the Constitution and the will of the people. One who is willing to compromise for the good of the country. I want someone who is a diplomat and who does not have a cowboy shoot first ask questions later attitude but is strong when necessary. I would like to see someone who admits they have made mistakes and make efforts to correct those mistakes. Someone who can respond quickly to disasters and who makes rational decisions based on experience and expert advice. And finally, someone not beholden to corporations or lobbyists.
2007-05-01 08:10:40 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Well I want someone principled. someone with a record of supporting issues that I agree with.
my top priority is someone thats going to actually take action with the immigration issues we face.
At this point I think a president who will focus on domestic issue more than foreign issues would be a good thing.
2007-05-01 08:24:33 · answer #6 · answered by sociald 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Experience in government, a belief that there are some things the government actually does better than private business, and a willingness to meet the other party part of the way.
2007-05-01 07:54:41 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Someone who will invoke change in politics and who is unburdened by special interests and against cronyism.
Someone who can relate to and identify with common Americans, address their needs and not only the wealthy.
Someone who can work on both sides of the political line.
Someone educated, well-spoken and has a knack for diplomacy.
Someone who inspires the American people to raise themselves up to be counted and will also require their accountability as well as accountability of elected officials.
2007-05-01 08:03:38 · answer #8 · answered by genmalia 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
like the single Romney had. What he incredibly meant to assert or stand for, replaced every time he spoke. some one became constantly waiting to assert that wasn't what he meant to assert. What good is a resume under those situations?
2017-01-09 06:25:37 · answer #9 · answered by dirks 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
National Security
Secure Our Southern Border
Tax Cuts, becoming permanent
***Run Fred Run!***
2007-05-01 08:00:55 · answer #10 · answered by Nunya Bidniss 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋