Neither
2007-08-07 03:52:03
·
answer #1
·
answered by kristynshane 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Why not Kucinich? Dennis Kucinich may not have the most campaign dollars going into this which is why you probably haven't looked him up but seriously folks, if the votes are going to be divided up, why not throw Kucinich in the mix? ...A man who isn't afraid to say what he feels and will make a good conscience decision over a political one. He's the first to bring up the need to improve health care, he's pro-green and supports any initiative to improve fuel efficiency, help the environment and so on. He wants us out of the war zone and instead, to work with the nations of the world including the nations entrenched in war to find the most peaceful resolution for everyone involved. This is someone who keeps it real and reminds us a politician can be completely human. He also called for the impeachment of Cheney which I think was pretty bold and just.
But I agree, as long as it's not a republican, though I believe there is one candidate, Ron Paul of Texas, that would be the only right choice, he too doesn't side with the current administration and shares actually many of the same views as Kucinich. The point being, Ron Paul is clearly not a far right, neo-conservative, he's a genuine Republican in the center.
If it doesn't come down to Ron Paul, then I definitely think it's too soon for America to have another Republican Administration.
For the Dems, if Kucinich doesn't get the attention and support he deserves (America deserves) and it in fact does come down to Obama and Clinton then here's what I think.
If Obama beats Clinton and takes her on as his running mate, that could be a surprising winning combination.
If Bush and Cheney hadn't messed things up so bad, I'm sure we would just seen another Republican in the office, they are very heavily funded and have an overwhelming majority lead as the largest party so it takes a super democrat who has no choice but to win Rep votes in order to have any chance.
Not exactly a fair system we have is it. Then throw in the electoral vote, we've seen how flawed that is too.
Who knows who will win; I just hope we survive it. But please, for once, stop letting the media steer you into making a decision. Please look at all the candidates. Watch Kucinich and Ron Paul on youtube and check out their sites, you'll see what I mean.
2007-08-07 11:11:45
·
answer #2
·
answered by blphnx 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Clinton + Ron Paul
2007-08-07 10:51:58
·
answer #3
·
answered by snapple232 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Obama
2007-08-07 11:16:38
·
answer #4
·
answered by j Jay 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Fred Thompson
2007-08-07 10:52:31
·
answer #5
·
answered by smars442002 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
Tough choice. They are both what this country needs. I think I'd like Hillary as pres. and Barack as VP simply due to Hillary's more vast experience.
2007-08-07 10:53:30
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
I prefer neither. Tom Tancredo for the republicans.
2007-08-07 10:52:07
·
answer #7
·
answered by Abu#2 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
these 2 dems are the most power hungry sharks in the business - and supported by every special interest known to man - republican i would vote for ron paul because he is the most honest out of all the candidates
2007-08-07 11:00:05
·
answer #8
·
answered by rooster 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Neither
Hillary=socialism
2007-08-07 10:54:39
·
answer #9
·
answered by Sweet Tea & Lemons 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
I like neither. Out of the Republicans, I would choose Tom Tancredo.
2007-08-07 11:02:38
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Obama and a non declared Pub- Chuck Hagel
2007-08-07 10:52:39
·
answer #11
·
answered by thequeenreigns 7
·
0⤊
0⤋