So in your opinion who is the real candidate for change???

Question

The GOP candidates who still support this war and who flip flop on issues of abortion just to appeal to their base?
Madman McCain who walks around Baghdad with a Kevlar vest and 200 body guards and says that it is improving and that he feels safe?, ROTFLMAO
or,
the Democrats who is lead by Hillary Clinton
Hillary Clinton who changes with the wind on Iraq. And, who has been supported financially by Rupert Murdoch and was on the board of WalMart.
Barak Obama whose views are good but there's not much experience there.
Edwards who has admitted to voting for the war but realizes now that he shouldn't have done that. BTW, he's the only candidate that apologized for voting for the war. Hillary hasn't. At least he is honest in admitting his mistake. What politicians admits mistakes today?
Kucinich who actually is one of the few candidates who has a plan to get us out and who who has a plan to get this country back on the right track toward fixing it's infrastructure & healthcare?

BTW, if you say Fred Thompson or Rou Paul, then you really are far too right of mainstream.

Ah Ha 7.... what are we surrendering? We already won. Now we are in occupation. Ask yourself why? It's not about terrorism. It's about oil. The soldiers know it, and Bush knows it and now you know it.

Pancake, we've had extreme right wing in the last 6 years and during the entire decade of the 1980s. We don't need anymore extreme right wing. We need a change. Thompson means more of the same and even worse.

I Do Know The Muffin Man... I have enough information on each candidate to fill a book. The problem is I don't have enough room to write that information on Yahoo answers. I assume that you people will do your own research. Then again, you only prove that you listen to Fox.

Answer 1

You just might be totally right but thanks to the American system of elections Kucinich doesn't have a chance in a general election and Democrats need to win
Like in 2000 Nader was probably the best candidate if you were looking for left wing,hardcore liberal value's.
Kucinich would be eaten alive in a general election and the system is what it is.Clinton may not be the perfect candidate but at least we know she will not let the election be taken as easily as Kerry in 04.The Clinton machine is strong in fighting of dirty conservative attacks.
She might not be ideal but I still am convinced that's she's like a hundred times better and will have a more liberal agenda than any Republican running.Just compare what her husband did to what Bush has done in the white house.Bill also didn't lean left enough for my taste but he won the elections and for me that's important,we don't want another Republican.We need to win and Kucinich ,though he might be the best man from our perspective, is a guarantee to loose

Answer 2

A lot of Democrats I dont support, but we need one more than a repub. right now. I also think it is time for change in the kind of person we elect, because while race and sex should not be why you would vote for someone, they make a difference in perspective. Do you realize that EVERY SINGLE PRESIDENT EVER ELECTED has been a white, christian, male? I think its time to change that. I also think it that it is time to get a woman in office. While I think that, I also dont really think that Hillary Clinton is the best candidate, so I would have to say I support Obama, but hope that next election there is a good, strong, moral, (democratic) female candidate, because thats what we really need.

Answer 3

Ron Paul isn't extreme right.

He's one of the few republican candidates willing to point out the shortcomings of this administration, and to explain how decades of misguided middle east policy led to the inevitable attacks on 9/11.

He's a real traditional conservative - small government, staying the f**k out of other countries business, not policing the world, etc. - he would make a decent president, despite being republican.

Personally, I would like to see Biden or Clark win - I'm a registered independent, and I will vote for the candidate that I think would run this country the best - they will have a hellacious job in front of them, undoing the clusterf**k that Dubya has turned this country (and iraq) into.

Answer 4

Ah, spoken as a real tea partier, comprehensive with folksy undesirable grammar. The tea celebration would characterize a metamorphosis, even though it fairly is a metamorphosis that the U. S. does not choose. united states of america became into based on the ideals of freedom. The tea celebration does not characterize freedom. Freedom means freedom for all - however the tea celebration stands for limiting rights for everyone who basically isn't White and Christian. Our founding fathers reported an cautioned public is a loose public. The tea celebration does not characterize advice. many of the so-stated as ideals tea celebration contributors have are according to incorrect information or purely out precise lies. "Obama the non-American Muslim communist nazi"? "dying panels"? those are meant to be the properly concept out arguments of a properly knowledgeable public?

Answer 5

At first I wasn't crazy about Obama running for President yet because of the inexperience thing, and he needed to give it some time. But, then as I thought about it and listened to him I started to change my mind. The inexperience thing can really work to the people's advantage. Obama, is not as tainted as the other candidates. Perhaps because of his inexperience he is more idealistic, and believes he can do the things he believes must be done for the American People. I do not think the other candidates even believe in the the things they are saying they will do as president. All the "experience," they have tells them they will not be able to do what they promise, and they don't even believe in themselves. It takes actually believing you can do it for it to happen. To believe in something takes not being jaded, and the inexperience of Obama also means he is not jaded yet.

Answer 6

It's great how you only have enough knowledge about the Republican candidates to make fun of McCain.

Tommy Thompson would be a tremendous president. And by the looks of it, he's more of the "candidate for change" than any of the other candidates on either party are.

Answer 7

Ron Paul or Gravel. The rest are bought and paid for, and no different than what we have seen the last 16 years. I do like Kucinich as well, but not as much.

Answer 8

Democrats would be in order, Obama, Edwards, Richardson, Clinton.

Repbulicans would be in order, Giuliani, Romney, Thompson, Paul, McCain

Answer 9

Dennis Kucinich is a communist who brings NOTHING to the table.

"Get out of Iraq" may be a good single issue mantra for those who do not understand the threat we face from islamic jihadists.

If it's okay for a Democrat to admit a mistake - Edwards - then it's also okay for a Republican to change his mind on an issue.

Best candidates to further America's prosperity and fight the war against islamic jihadists:
1. Mitt Romney
2. Mike Huckabee
3. Rudy Guliani

footnote: calling John McCain a mad man shows what a callow numbskull you really are. He may not be my choice for President, but he has more courage in his pinkie than you could muster up in a dozen lifetimes.

Answer 10

Obama being inexperienced is not a big factor.
Listen to him about his views or go to, http://barackobama.com/issues

He is the candidate for change!