None of them ranks with the men who founded this country, or with the great Presidents of other eras. Maybe one or two of them could be, if circumstances and dumb luck worked in their favor. That's what happened to Harry Truman. But today, our 2-party system rewards mediocrity. Sure, these guys are rich, and so they must have done something right. But many have few qualifications to be President, and the more experienced ones seem tired, hackneyed, and hog-tied by the deals they cut to get this far. They aren't even addressing the issues that I consider most important - at least, not in a credible way. Let's hope that if one of them wins, they won't be called upon to face some real challenge that requires vision, intelligence, fairness, and skill. Unless they hire me as their advisor...
2007-06-07 13:47:59
·
answer #1
·
answered by Who Else? 7
·
3⤊
2⤋
I'm not impressed with many candidates, but I've done quite a lot of research on most of them.
This is the first time I've ever registered to vote under a party because I've always voted against candidates instead of FOR them.
For me, it came down to who I thought could really and truly be a "uniter" (and not just say that they are) and who seemed most able to lead and do what is best for Americans.
Ever hear of the "Reagan Democrats"? Those who left the Dems and voted for a Republican? Now it's the "Obama Republicans" because more Independents and Republicans will vote for Obama than any other candidate. His grassroots efforts alone are commendable and telling of his support throughout different communities.
2007-06-07 13:42:55
·
answer #2
·
answered by genmalia 3
·
0⤊
4⤋
particular, i'm particular lots of others are. particular choose we ought to have some style of run-off or "ranked decision" vote casting device, so as that folk could be extra possibly to vote for different events with out annoying approximately "dropping" their vote. i've got by no capacity been an excellent fan of Nader, yet i've got continually enjoyed Matt Gonzalez -- choose the fee ticket exchange into swapped and he exchange into working for president and Nader exchange into working for vice chairman.
2016-12-18 17:29:20
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I couldn't agree more. Thank you for expressing what I have been thinking.
If I could draft any candidate of my choosing, I would call upon to step forward the brilliant and highly articulate ex-Governor of New York Mario Cuomo. Now, there's a man who knows how to solve problems without turning the country into a Gulag or a factory outlet for goods manufactured oversees.
2007-06-07 13:38:22
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
3⤋
I think most people agree. Politicians are in it for the money and the power. There are no more true political leaders anymore. It's all about personal agenda.
We need Amendment change. Instead of an oath, it needs to be a signed contract. This way we don't have to wait until their term ends to get rid of a bad or corrupt politician.
2007-06-07 13:42:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by awake 4
·
2⤊
3⤋
Can't wait for Newt to announce. Then the political landscape will get interesting. The Contract with America vs. What's in it for me.
2007-06-07 13:55:13
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
None of them? You've got Democrats, Republicans, Liberals, Conservatives, Libertarians, Moderates, Socialists. What do you want?
2007-06-07 13:51:42
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
I am, in a way, because there is something wrong in all of them for their proposed policies, especially, legalizing, trespassing ILLEGALS, NOT immigrants. I guess, I am thinking on voting for John McCain, since he knows about war, and understands what our soldier's are going through, but I am afraid he might legalize these illegal alien's, which is against every fiber of my Southern hospitality. In other words, I'm damn tired of them taking our jobs for lesser wages, sending American money home to Mexico, using the welfare system, taking, taking, and taking, from us, the Givers. There is something wrong with that, and I am overwhelmed that our political candidates are blind to it, and what America needs.
2007-06-07 13:45:17
·
answer #8
·
answered by xenypoo 7
·
4⤊
3⤋
Democrats:
-Hillary R. Clinton: Satisfying resume and interesting promises. Universal welfare is a big issue and I fully support it, however I'm not confident that the gov't should be entirely responsible for the public sector of pharmaceutical companies. Her stance on Iraq seems very nilly-willy, like as if she's campaigning more on style than actually fashioning a real political strategy
-Barack Obama: Slipping in favorable polls. He doesn't seem very educated about handling Iraq or Middle Eastern policies. He has as much experience as Bush before he ascended into the oval office. His middle name--"Hussein" might be the be all and end of his story.
-Edwards: Very intelligent man. Good speaker, although he's known for that as a lawyer anyways. Not a very intelligent person on Middle Eastern policy. Plus he's known as the "Breck Girl" of politics after that rumored $400 haircut
Republicans:
-John McCain: I don't trust him on Iraq. I don't even trust him on Iran. He seems to be the weakest on most issues including immigration and entitlement programs. He doesn't have a clear plan but he seems pragmatic. Not a future president.
-Rudy Guiliani: A neconservative without any real social conservative values. Has a terrible understanding of foreign policy and uses 9/11 as an excuse for handling the Middle East. He also probably has a bad reading comprehension.
-Mitt Romney: A politician with a hollow, superficial core who smiles for the cameras and knows how to put "American" in every single sentence. Very intelligent man, although he seems more like a product of the political machine. Not very visible or precise on his issues. His Mormom credentials seem to hurt him also.
-Brownback: A living joke.
-Huckabee: Poor understanding of the Middle East complemented by an even worse understanding of evolution.
-Ron Paul: Very concise with issues and has a consistent record. He understands history and foreign policy. Obviously an avid reader and a good critical thinker. I don't agree with his stance on social spending though
2007-06-07 13:44:40
·
answer #9
·
answered by ibid 3
·
1⤊
5⤋
I am not happy with any of the candidates either
(not that you care lol)
There really is no one out there that really strikes me as
being good enough to run the country, both sides seem
to be dancing around looking to not step on anyones feet.
2007-06-07 13:42:47
·
answer #10
·
answered by justgetitright 7
·
3⤊
3⤋