Black guy Obama is a newbie with no track record, Hillary, the same, but she has has a white guys coattail to ride. Neither can point to success at running anything. Don't they know if they are relying on affirmative action to get elected Americans will slap them silly...I mean, sillier?
2007-08-07 15:40:04 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Nice dodge to the question, bob.
2007-08-07 15:44:43 · update #1
George Bush was Governor of Texas, david
2007-08-07 15:46:29 · update #2
If they are completely unqualified, yes megan
2007-08-07 15:48:03 · update #3
I see the fly has no answer either.
2007-08-07 15:50:41 · update #4
map and hypo also don't understand that I asked for an explanation about democratic front runners obama & hillary. Apparently, what makes someone competent for these types is being far left, not actual competency. Any other loser libs think they're able to explain the front runner status of these 2 dummies without going negative?
2007-08-07 16:03:30 · update #5
If that is the best the Democrat party has to offer, oh wait...you forgot the one term charlie who's state was smart enough not to put him in for a second term. So where does that leave that party? Between the three of them they don't have the experience to wipe President Bush's boots. Where are the credible Democrats?
2007-08-07 15:45:15 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
Leave the name-calling out and you might have a legitimate post.
I'm serious! I want you to have a serious post. ADD to the discussion, rather than joining the playground bullies and teasers. Most of us left that behavior behind in elementary school, but for some reason all the pent up lost opportunities to do the same thing come out when given a little anonymity.
Answering the post as if it was more mature (which it might be tomorrow, as you can edit the post):
The Democratic party is running those with the best chance to win, just as the Republican party is. It isn't about experience, quite often, and too many of our elections are popularity contests.
Whenever people make comments about someone's hair, how they trip coming out of a plane, how they seem "manly" or "effeminate", they focus on the most minor aspects of what we need in a President.
Are these issues? Yes. But we all know that we allow others to make these DEFINING issues, with our silence.
We also allow it to happen by allowing political bigotry to color our statements in response to other political bigots. We revert to the playground mentality, even if we would NEVER do it in normal life. Worse, we point it out only in the "other" party, for fear that someone in our party, if we point it out in them, will call us "a name".
I am registered as a Democrat. I am a capitalist. I am not a communist or a socialist.
Encourage the best in both parties when you see it. Make the country more important than your party. We need brakes and gas no matter which direction we are going.
2007-08-07 16:02:38 · answer #2 · answered by mckenziecalhoun 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
through fact the Democratic voters choose type over substance. Republicans too. New faces and flowery language with none info or concrete plans make the common apathetic voter bypass susceptible interior the knees. If the competition replaced into desperate by using journey and character, the final election could be McCain beating Biden for the Presidency. they are the two maximum finished and carried out applicants who demonstrate character above party lines. yet we at the instant are not that sensible a u . s . anymore. we adore legal experts, actors and BS artists without distant places coverage or finance credentials over people who've committed their lives to public service. regrettably, usa will deserve despite President elect she gets. i'm hoping the voters smarten up in time.
2016-10-09 11:10:21 · answer #3 · answered by record 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why don't you enlighten us as to the credentials of the GOP front runners?
You have an ex mayor of New York who's effectiveness is highly debated and engaged in a very public extramarital affair.
You have a part time actor, part time politician, part time lobbyist who's biggest plus I can see is he has a bodacious wife.
You have a former pow who's campaign is sinking faster than the titanic and who changes positions faster than a speeding bullet.
2007-08-07 15:51:01 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Your inability to write a sentence, spell, and just overall make sense in the English language indicates you might have a hard time understanding the complexities of American politics.
I could say a person with a limited education is likely to relate to Rudy Giuliani, but that would be obvious.
2007-08-07 15:48:14 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 3⤋
My Mom who's a life long Democrat isn't voteing for any of them.They lost her vote when they let that traitor Kerry run...
2007-08-07 17:48:51 · answer #6 · answered by ak6702 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
So if anyone who isn't a white male wants to run for president, it's only because of affirmative action? That's too ignorant for words.
2007-08-07 15:46:23 · answer #7 · answered by Petrushka's Ghost 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
What was George Bush successful at running, and what experience did he have?
2007-08-07 15:43:54 · answer #8 · answered by DavidNH 6 · 3⤊ 3⤋
And yet they're all so much better qualified than Bush. Just goes to show you just how bad Bush is.
2007-08-07 15:51:38 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
If you want to talk about track records, you would be wise to investigate mr. bush's business failures. If he can't even run a company, or a business, why would we expect him to know how to run a country?
2007-08-07 15:47:37 · answer #10 · answered by katydid 7 · 1⤊ 4⤋