That'd be the worst possible scenario. But I think I would vote for Nader, unless of course someone better runs as independent!!
2007-07-17 09:39:26 · 20 answers · asked by Beauty&Brains 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Oh God. Every election it gets worse and worse or I become more informed, not sure which.
majority of America thinks that Hillary is fake and riding on Clinton's questionable coat tails.
Giuliani has that nasty New York personality that makes people think they are going to get ripped off.
Nader has that mad scientist feel that scares the public.
Hey, this isn't how I think, but unfortunately the collective attitudes end up dictating this stuff.
write in Ron Paul at the polls.
2007-07-18 09:22:23 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
Does any one here know anything about Nader, other than the smear job that has been done on him by the mainstreem press?
http://www.nader.org.
I think that if Ron Paul losses the republican nomination that he would, and should, run as a libertarian.
2007-07-18 10:53:49 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well the best scenario would be that all 3 wouldn't make it to the ballots. But since all 3 are either CFR members or part of Bilderberg, those special interests (NWO) would help pave the way for whomever they deem best suited for the job.
Though I'm voting RON PAUL because he's the only one who can defeat these SCUM and take back what 80yrs of a slow destruction to this great country. But if Dr. Paul don't make it to the ballots, I'm making sure that I have plenty of food, water and ammo.
2007-07-17 22:19:42 · answer #3 · answered by Ted S 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I'd vote Nader. He's not ideal, but he's still better than stupid Hillary. And he's WAY better than that gutless, fear-mongering turd, Giuliani! Giuliani is nothing more than an opportunistic scumbag.
If I had to choose from the current crop of candidates I'd probably choose either Mike Gravel, Ron Paul, or maybe Dennis Kucinich. I like a lot, but by no means all, of what they have to say. I don't, by any means, agree with all of them on every issue, but they seem more honest than the rest, and seem to truly have America's best interest (instead of their own or their party's) in mind.
2007-07-17 16:45:37 · answer #4 · answered by The Man In The Box 6 · 6⤊ 3⤋
Im with ya, I am kinda having a hard time thinking of voting Dem or Repub unless Paul is in there. I haven't been happy for a long time with the 2 parties.
2007-07-17 21:37:37 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
Hillary and Hubby Willie are Members of Bilderberg. Hill is also on the List of The Ever Dangerous and Corrupt CFR. both Bilderberg & CFR "Heap Big BAD Medicine" . . Mr. Fear Monger Ghouliani is a Total SCUMBAG. http://www.politicalcortex.com/story/2006/8/26/195425/883
2007-07-17 17:07:55 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 2⤋
Hillary? Geesh haven't we had enough of her?
Giuliani? Hasn't he caused enough problems?
Nader? CFR Member and just as bad as the rest of them.
I'd move to Spain before voting for any of these jokers.
2007-07-17 17:22:27 · answer #7 · answered by Tanya T 2 · 5⤊ 3⤋
I voted for Nader in 2004 & 2000.....probably in 2008 as well....We need to get rid of the "Professional Politicians" that are screwing this country up, and get someone in there that will give Washington D.C. a good kick in the A $ $.
2007-07-17 16:45:14 · answer #8 · answered by jim 6 · 8⤊ 4⤋
Gotta go with a ron paul look alike - assuming he is out of the race as you describe - I would vote libertarian - any libertarian is better then all three you mentioned above - heck - i am even better then they are - maybe i should just write myself in
2007-07-17 20:23:26 · answer #9 · answered by jimkearney746 5 · 6⤊ 1⤋
Giuliani no question.
Im voting the "anything but another Clinton" ticket.
2007-07-18 12:13:44 · answer #10 · answered by Moderates Unite! 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋