Joe Biden (D)- He truly has the best foreign diplomacy experience out of any candidate. He also isn't too polarizing like Hillary is.
Mike Huckabee (R)- He is a really nice and decent guy(pastor for some years) and worked with a democrat congress as a governor for 10+ years, so he can compromise. He will also help to solve the obesity problem of America, as he lost a huge amount of weight.
2007-08-13 02:50:50
·
answer #1
·
answered by Serpico7 5
·
2⤊
3⤋
Republican-Mike Huckabee. He was a republican governor of a state that has has mostly democratic governors. He worked with the democratic legislature to pass ArKids First, a health insurance program in Arkansas for not only low income families, but a second plan for families with higher incomes but no insurance that would normally fall through the cracks. He cut spending, increased test scores and lowered teen pregnancy rates. Arkansas was 49th in teen pregnancy before he was governor, and 36th when he left, and moving in the right direction.
On the democratic side-Bill Richardson, he has always been a popular governor, and national figure. He would help bring both sides together better than the top 3. Being a governor, he is more suited to running government than legislating. A member of the Senate or Congress would not be a good choice to bring this country together. A governor ran a state in a similar way the president runs the country.
There is a reason every president elected since 1976 has been a governor with the exception of GHW Bush, who was VP. And no president since 1960 was elected from congress or the senate.
2007-08-13 09:59:54
·
answer #2
·
answered by Angelus2007 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
Jackofalltrades, The last part of your answer, one person has said such a thing. "Just come home. We just marched in, and we could just come home". To hearty applause.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XX-DIpkJRDY
He's my pick for more reasons than that. On the Democrats side, I like Gravel, and Obama as a last resort. Absolute last resort for Obama. I want Ron Paul to win, because he can possibly fix our country financially, and then maybe we can have money to help with some more progressive ideas (helping the needy, etc).
Asking for more from our government, when it's leaking from the sieves right now, is not logical. Heal the wound first, then move forward. I see no one else on the Republican side trying to do that, so I might have to pick Democrat for the first time if Paul is eliminated. I don't want to see the middle class eliminated.
2007-08-13 10:42:06
·
answer #3
·
answered by ThomasS 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
Good question!
For the Democrats, I think John Edwards would have the best chance,not because he is somehow the best, but a lot of people, for no good reason I can see, just hate Hillary Clinton and would do basically nothing to help her and anything to damage her administration even if the programs offered would be beneficial to the nation. Obama is in much the same position based on, sadly, nothing more than the color of his skin. Edwards is a very moderate Democrat and I think he could forge some coalitions with many Republicans. I wish his wife weren't so ill. She's one smart cookie.
Giuliani (spelling?) is my choice for the Republicans. He's moderate as well. I have to admit I hate the idea of abortion, but it has to remain legal or only rich women who find themselves pregnant will be able to climb on a plane and get one in a country where it's legal. I'm very much in favor of stem cell research, but my friends could see that one coming; I'm diabetic. I think abortion has the best chance to stay legal and stem cell research has the best chance of getting funding under Giuliani.
I am diametrically opposed to this war. I'd vote for the candidate that would answer the question, "how do we best get our troops out of Iraq?" with the answer, "On airplanes, soon."
2007-08-13 10:00:31
·
answer #4
·
answered by jack of all trades 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
For the Democrats, a candidate that at least seems sincere about reaching across the aisle is Obama. John "Take their power from them" Edwards, and the controversial "hate me or love me" Hillary Clinton just don't cut it.
For the Republicans, I think Mitt Romney, a Republican who governed Massechussettes, is a leader with bi-partisan appeal.
2007-08-13 11:58:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by LaLyLoo 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Ron Paul Republican becuase he's smart and doesn't owe allegence to the RNC political system. He got 9.4 per cent in the straw poll but the media refused to talk about it. He is a libertarian (small Government) social liberal, fiscal conservative.
Mike Gravel Democrat Same answer except the straw poll part
2007-08-13 09:55:44
·
answer #6
·
answered by Village Player 7
·
4⤊
0⤋
I'm glad to see you said pick two canidates from both parites... We need to start looking at where they stand on the issues opposed to what party they are from...
For Republicans: Ron Paul
-He is anti-war
-Lowering taxes for the middle class and poor
-An advocate for a foriegn policy where we trade and negoiate with other countries instead of fighting useless wars where our own people die
-Voted no on an amendment against banning gay marriges
-Pro civil rights and liberties
-Voted no against the patriot act
-No amnesty for illegal immigrants
Democrats: Dennis Kucinech (sp)
-Lowering taxes for the middle class and poor
-Pro Gay marrige and adoptions
-Anti-war
-Universal Healthcare
-No child left behind
-No anmesty for illegal immigrants
These are the two canidates that I agree with on most issues.. They are the only two that I feel have integerity and have been clear about where they stand on the issues... We need a president who won't make us faulty promises and will actually deliver.. These are the only two with a proven track record to return the US into the democracy it once was... I have faith in both of them...
2007-08-13 10:33:29
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
sorry my answer could fill a book so I will give my opinion and give sources so you can do the leg work - Ron Paul for republicans believes in ending war -very low taxes -small limited federal govt - preserving constitutional freedoms -on the dems side I would say edwards being that I dont think he would divide the country more (like clinton and obama might ) . sources to educate yourself on who to vote for - where they get their money -and anything else - www.vote-smart.org and www.opensecrets.org
2007-08-13 09:56:29
·
answer #8
·
answered by rooster 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
D - Mike Gravel. One of the greatest leaders we've ever had.
R - Ron Paul. A good man with principles, even if I dont agree with him on every single thing.
Men of principles and integrity are increasingly rare in todays government. I can count them all on one hand without even using all my fingers!
http://www.Gravel2008.us
2007-08-13 17:59:26
·
answer #9
·
answered by Jesus W. 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
None of the above.
The only semi acceptable candidate is Ron Paul so far. The rest are the same old party shills that represent special interest, not the people.
2007-08-13 09:55:44
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋