Republican-Ron Paul
Heres why: He opposed tax increases, opposed the Iraq war from the beginning, and votes against any bill that violates the constituton. He also voted against the patriot act. He is pro-life. Does not believe in gun control.
Democrat-John Edwards
Heres why: He is focused on eliminating poverty, fighting global warming and getting a universal health care. He was the first democratic candidate to release plans for universal health care including price estimates.
I know that most of who people want to be president is largly based upon their own beliefs (if that makes sense) but i think these two are the best choices (only my opinion dont jump on me)
Why are Obama and Hillary the focus of everyones attention? These are my top 2 choices for president what are yours? please give reasons why.
Source Wikipedia
2007-07-07 17:02:53 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Hillary and Obama have the most press because of the novelty each brings (the possibility of being the 1st). Plus Hillary is in the unique position of being a former First Lady. But I can't vote for her because she didn't have the courage to oppose the war in Iraq. Preserving the appearance of being strong and not a "weak woman" was more important to her than doing what was in the best interest of the American people.
My 1st choice would be Kucinich because he has openly opposed the war from the beginning. Also, his top ten issues are positions with which I agree:
1. Universal Health Care
2. International Cooperation: US out of Iraq, UN in
3. Jobs and Withdrawal from NAFTA and WTO
4. Repeal of the "Patriot Act"
5. Guaranteed Quality Education, Pre-K Through College
6. Full Social Security Benefits at Age 65
7. Right-to-Choose, Privacy and Civil Rights
8. Balance Between Workers and Corporations
9. Environmental Renewal and Clean Energy
10. Restored Rural Communities and Family Farms
Plus he's a vegan which really shows his commitment to peace.
But realistically, I know he doesn't have a chance. So my 2nd choice would be Edwards.
If I had to vote Republican (which I never would) I agree with Ron Paul. He is the only candidate I've heard that has been willing to acknowledge US (CIA) meddling in foreign affairs as a contributor of actions against the US. But of course, I cannot support his anti-choice postition.
2007-07-07 17:41:15 · answer #1 · answered by Vette999 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
I agree with you on Ron Paul, but disagree with your Edwards choice (I don't hate him though). Mike Gravel would probably interest you as well, since his stands are similar.
Hillary, Obama have great publicity. Hillary has a lot of skeletons, but people know the Clinton's, and the Media reports on those two the most (and adoringly). I don't know why after looking at statements and quotes from their past, but most people don't look that deep. Most people love acceptance and herd mentality (who doesn't?), so they often choose the candidate that is on every magazine, tv, and newspaper. They think that everyone is talking about them only. They want to have authoritarian figures tell them what they want to hear, whether it's possible or not.
The other Republicans seem to be a slightly different shade of Bush, or simply feel phony. Although I voted for GWB the first time, I feel it was a mistake, as he did so many things contrary to the message he campaigned with. I will not vote for another person that I feel will change their tune as soon as they get into office, and definitely not one that sings the same tune that Bush is currently singing. Granted, 9/11 happened, but they squandered the opportunity to unite Americans, and just used it to only their advantage. We all disagree more vehemently than before it seems, and rarely do I see logic, introspection, and calmness prevail.
2007-07-08 00:23:13 · answer #2 · answered by ThomasS 5 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Your picks are laughable. Except for being weak on the desire to protect Americans against terrorist threats, these two are diametrically opposed to one another.
My pick among the dems is Richardson because even though he shares the worst ideas among all the dem contenders, at least he knows what it is to be a chief executive. The rest are merely Senators and congressmen (legislative experience only) which make them patently unqualified to hold the post of President (the top post in the executive branch).
My pick among the Republicans is Rudy Giuliani who is right on every issue, but opposition to the Fair Tax and had 8 successful years (to put it mildly) of chief executive experience of New York City.
2007-07-08 10:05:20 · answer #3 · answered by Dan 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Is this really a question? And more critically, are you really serious? I just find it hard to believe your top two people are so diametrically opposed to teach other. I mean your first choice is guy who is opposed to big government (probably his only good issue). The other guy makes it no secret that he intends to make government bigger. That seems completely inconsistant.
Oh and if you think healthcare is expensive now, wait till it's "free."
2007-07-08 05:43:10 · answer #4 · answered by Avatar_defender_of_the_light 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Ron Paul is heavily favored participants in Yahoo Answers because of his excellent views on critical issues.
VOTE for your choice as US President on my 360 degrees blog and know who will likely win.
2007-07-08 04:21:03 · answer #5 · answered by FRAGINAL, JTM 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Im going to agree with you on ron paul and jon edwards. either is fine with me. I would prefer ron though
2007-07-08 00:49:43 · answer #6 · answered by txnsrfrdude 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
most definetly Ron Paul - for peace, for freedom,
ronpaul2008.com
2007-07-08 04:43:53 · answer #7 · answered by mom4peace 3 · 2⤊ 2⤋
paul is the perfict democrat
2007-07-08 11:11:27 · answer #8 · answered by and socialism 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋