English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

a. Party affiliation.
b. Platform.
c. Appearance.
d. Religion.
e. Other.

Feel free to elaborate or attempt to justify your answer.

2007-08-06 04:03:39 · 71 answers · asked by Abdul Jones 2 in Politics & Government Politics

71 answers

The President is the Chief Executive. The choice of Chief Executive should be based on the ability of the candidate to run the executive branch. Our Constitution, Article 2, describes the qualifications, powers, and responsibilities of the Executive. The qualifications are minimal:

- natural born Citizen
- thirty-five Years old
- fourteen Years a Resident within the United States
- swear the oath of office

The responsibilities are huge. The President has responsibility over the Military and the cabinet. The president may grant pardons, make treaties, appoint ambassadors, public ministers and consuls, judges of the supreme court, and all other officers of the united states. The President receives ambassadors and other public ministers.

The President must give a state of the union report to Congress, recommending to their consideration such measures judged necessary and expedient.

The President can convene the Congress on extraordinary occasions.

The President shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and shall commission all the officers of the United States.

It seems to me that the most important of those responsibilities include direction of the Cabinet, and therefore the Departments and programs that those cabinet members run, being Commander in Chief, and taking care that the laws be faithfully executed.

Sometimes in recent history, it seems that appointing judges and recommending legislation has become more important in the eyes of many people. I think this is a mistake. If you elect an activist who will recommend legislation that you like based on positions on "issues", then you elect a candidate of charisma or eloquence who can pound the podium, but may not be able to run the country. There are many examples of this in local governments, activists who cannot run their own city...or state.

2007-08-13 07:17:00 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 2 0

Their platform drives me the most, specifically what I perceive as their truthfulness regarding the end of the Iraq War. I will never support a candidate that wants to continue the war. It was a mistake, is a mistake, and needs to be ended. That's why I support either Barack Obama or John Edwards. Those two candidates seem the most likely to end the Bush foriegn policy. While Hillary Clinton may be more likely to win, I believe that her policies will not be all that different than Bush. I see a very hawkish streak in her ready to come out. She SAYS she'll end the war, but can she be believed? I don't think so. She seems more power-hungry than anything else.
As for the rest, I generally support left-leaning moderate candidates over right wing ones, so I lean toward Democrats, but Republicans like Chuck Hagel and Ron Paul have said things that I like. Their appearance means little to me, neither does their religion, although I would never support someone that has NO religion.

2007-08-07 05:02:04 · answer #2 · answered by redguard572001 2 · 1 0

I have been around since Nixon got us into Viet Nam in the 50's. My President was shot when I was 13 and his brother died the same way on my graduation evening. I made it through the 60's and Oh my God the Sky is falling! Turn of the century survivor and constant voter. I read and listen and make notes and decide before I go to the polls. Then I vote for the person most suited to the job they want. All of the things you list are not as important as having a President who understands HE WORKS FOR US! ahem...my only justification for my behaviour is that our President is so evil and I am so sorry for our troops both dead and alive. I was a WAC During the Viet Nam Conflict. Had I been ordered to, I would have gone. I have no blood on my hands, but we as a Nation do. I would require anyone running for office to be checked prior to service for DEMENTIA...Average people in Iraq did not live in caves and refugee camps until the great divider bought the Presidency. They lived in houses and cities and towns. We haven't just killed thousands of them, but their progress as well. Saddam is dead. for the same thing. My VOTE is the most important priviledge I have. To Vote, man, love going to the polls with my little booklet all marked up and excercise my hard won rights. Shame on anyone who thinks less. Obviously that's a lot of ya....Freedom is what drives my vote, Now I challenge you to justify your question and feel free to elaborate...Ya sound a tiny bit Snotty there Tex. Oh yeah and I also think that ALL of our states Should be allowed to vote and Florida should have to sit the next election out and think about what it's done.

2007-08-13 16:48:53 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

A party affiliation should not be as important as who the candidate is and what they stand for...their 'individual' platform and not their party platform.
Appearance is not important. Modest attire and good grooming are all that is necessary, the rest is 'fluff'.
If religion were the most important thing to drive the vote, then we'd have a Cardinal or a Minister or a Rabbi for president. Please, let's separate Church and State!
In reference to the aforementioned 'platform', it is truly difficult in these days of mass media, YouTube, and the dreaded sound bytes to be able to distinguish 'who' the candidate REALLY is. Here are two suggestions to be able to answer this question for yourself:
1. Look at the voting record
2. Follow the money - who is contributing to the campaign? Those contributors may affect key decisions.
For example: Bush took lots of $$ from Ken Lay and Enron. Who was allowed to set up shop at the White House immediately after the 2000 election when Bush moved in? Ken Lay and his cronies worked hand in hand w/Cheney to 'interview' candidates to help write White House Energy Policy. Enough said.

2007-08-07 05:04:48 · answer #4 · answered by rah_727 1 · 1 0

I would say platform, then party affiliation, and then intangibles like likability, intelligence, appearance, how well he expresses ideas, etc.

I don't have all republican or democratic positions, but I could never vote for any of the democrats that are running today. They seem to be embracing the fringe of their party much more than the republicans, which really turns me off from them.

The main thing I'm looking at with the republican candidates is their voting record, and I've been surprised by some of them. When you look at what they've actually done on the issues that are important to me, Romney looks like the best candidate.

2007-08-06 14:34:54 · answer #5 · answered by Tommy 2 · 1 0

Someone that when you write to them about a problem not to e-mail you back and say it is'nt thier state so it is'nt there problem(Hillary C)and some one that has the wisdom and good judgement and the right answers,not just what you think people want to hear just to get thier votes(Hillary and Mr Obama)or someone that just does'nt fly off the wall and give answers and have no ideal what thier talking about(Same two people)I say get Mr Gore or Mr Powel or Mr Carrey he does'nt need the money.He does make sence also.Stop this throwing in someone that totally does the opposite of what they promice(Nothing)or totally screw up our world like Bush and Channey has done.For once in at least sence the Reagan years put someone that has good judgement and sence in there people(Please) or like Bill did also write you back and give you a speach and blow you off while messing up the US and the job market and economy,while playing with his intern(Literally)and on his wife by the way which is running for the presidency.We don't need this again people.Please Nothing was done about it because he was leaving anyway,like Bush and Channey.It does'nt take much thinking to elect someone other then this bunch.Give Mr Gore his job back.Heck beg him to come back,at least he was honest.

2007-08-07 18:00:51 · answer #6 · answered by Mark C 1 · 0 0

The president, as all elected officials, must first realize they work for the American people. The people are not subjects of their domain. Today's president & all the members of congress think they know whats best for the people. That is dead wrong. They are called "representatives" for a good reason. But they vote for whats best for the party & Corporate America. The people are last. That is the 1st thing. Platform would be the next most important listing. Their platform must be for the collected good of all the American people.

2007-08-12 01:40:55 · answer #7 · answered by peepers98 4 · 0 0

B. D. and E. Anyone running for president needs to have a platform or a plan or an agenda. However you want to look at it. They must stand for something. I prefer a person who stands by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights as put forth by our Founding Fathers. I believe that the person running for president should believe in less government, less taxes, and more power to the people. Religion is important because if you don't believe in God, and God is not in your core. What moral beliefs would there be to stop them from doing whatever they choose. However, we must be careful with that. Anything too extreme is also bad including religion. Then there is the other. We need a person who has strong beliefs in our country being independent! We need someone who has an isolationist attitude and does not concern themselves with what the rest of the world is doing. We need to clean up our own backyard before we can become the world's savior. We should focus on our needs as a country. We have always lead the way in being different and better from other countries and that is what has made this country what it is. Great! We need to stand strong again and united again. We need to stop the UN control of our troops, pump our own oil, reform our health care industry, lower taxes, bust unions (we simply don't need them anymore. We are no longer a country with slave labor except for illegal immigrants and the union doesn't help them anyways) to become more competitive in the world market. We need less government, more business, less government intrusion and control in our lives. We need reform in our education system. We need to give the power back to parents to raise their children. What ever happened to the mentality of us being the best and the strongest? The libs in this country want us to be ashamed of winning! Look at Hollywood instead of the "The winner is.... it is now "And the Oscar goes to" We have turned into a bunch of whiny, spineless whimps who bends over backwards to not offend anyone. Yet the rest of the world has no problem offending us!! or attacking us!! NO! That is not what this country was made of! We simply need to stop bending to the will of the world! We are the United States of America! Not the United States of the World! We need good old fashioned Kennedy/Reagan style politics combined. Period.

2007-08-14 02:47:49 · answer #8 · answered by RubyUnicorn 3 · 0 0

Older generations seem to vote more for a party, while younger generations seem to vote for a particular person. This says to me that the younger generation isn't really looking at the big picture and will vote for a candidate based on the candidates stance a single issue. however the older generation would be forced to vote for a candidate that isn't necessarily their first choice but was the party's best chance for president. Me, I'm going to say I will be with the younger generation however, I am trying to focus on as many political issues as possible. We need a president that will let us enforce the laws we have and not pass laws that can not be and will not be enforced.

2007-08-07 04:47:16 · answer #9 · answered by daniel c 1 · 1 0

b. Platform is the most important. If they aren't standing on something solid, they don't deserve votes.

c. Sound superficial, but if you have a leader with a poor image, the rest of the world will not take them seriously. Take George W for example; he's a joke. Kucinich could not be President because he looks a bit like a weasle, despite his good ideas. Obama is too young, Hillary is too superficial, and the Republican candidates (save Ron Paul) will be judged against our current administration too heavily. Mike Gravel is a badass; that's why I'm voting for him.

2007-08-13 23:04:10 · answer #10 · answered by linkwaker007 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers