I would like an honest answer with this?

Question

Liberals who do you think is the most qualified of the Republicans to run for president. Also before many of you on the left say Ron Paul just remember he is a republican for many economic reasons like getting rid of the Department of Education. Conservatives who on the Democratic side do you believe would make a good president. Also do you think we could have a more honest election if the Democrats got to choose the republican candidates and the republicans got to choose the democratic candidates.

Answer 1

Paul is really a conservative libertarian, as Barry Goldwater is now considered. And i have to say i group myself the same...i'm conservative on some things, and liberal on others. I dont agree with everything in Pauls platform, but he's much more tolerable to me than cross-dressing Guliani, or crazy Mormon Romney. Go look up what that religion actually believes...its depressing he's even allowed to run.

And you do realize that when Reagan ran for the first time, part of his platform was to get rid of the education department, but he couldnt get it through the House in 82. This was part of the Republican platform for the entire 1980s, but HW Bush dropped it when he ran, and it hasnt been around since, ie going away from traditional republican...

That being said, there is no so-called Republican candidate who is a Republican, which is why you've been seeing the news clips of all of the going 'We've going to get back to real republican values!" Ron Paul is the closest thing, and i am certainly more inclined to vote for someone who has managed to read the Constitution, instead of butcher it.

Case in point: Article VI paragraph 3 - "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States"

Do you think anyone has read that? The politicians of both parties are pandering to religious groups, and we're sliding closer to a Theocracy. But its an inherent catch-22...how do you represent the people without taking religion into consideration, but if you didnt you wouldnt get elected. It personally sickens me, but until the people of this country wake up theres nothing we can do.

and I cant answer you last question about having an honest election, that statement is an oxymoron. NO election is honest. I still remember Bush railing against Clinton for trying to Nation-build during his terms, and part of Bushs platform in 2000 was we wouldnt do that anymore...Gee, seems like thats exactly whats gone on for the last 7 years...

Answer 2

There are a couple of Republican candidates I think are the most qualified. Ron Paul, precisely because he would get rid of unnecessary, money sucking departments and return us to a smaller government. I also like Romney, because he has gubernatorial experience and I think he is willing to move the US forward. I think Giuliani would do a good job because he seems to be about coming up with solutions rather than focusing on the problem. And I would vote for any of these if Clinton wins the nomination.

If each got to choose the others candidates, we'd end up with buffoons. But if the candidate with the second highest votes became the VP (like it used to be), I think that then the opposite party should choose the candidates.

Answer 3

You won't think this answer is 'fair' or unbiased but I'll tell you what I really think.

There is a difference between Democratic and Republican candidates. With the Republicans, you are not voting for a man, you're voting for a program, the Republican agenda. It doesn't matter which of them get into office, the agenda will be the same. The best evidence is to look at GW Bush. He was a perfect Republican candidate because he had no ideas or agenda of his own.

This is why all the major Republican candidates (Ron Paul being the exception) have the same opinions, the same positions on all the same issues. Each says 'I'm the -real- conservative. I'm the -real- advocate of the Republican agenda.'

The Democrats are different. They don't have a Party Agenda. Perhaps they should! But the Dems these days don't have -enough- ideas. They need a candidate with some vision, and the only ones who really have any ideas for change are Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel, and neither of them have a chance to get nominated (just like Ron Paul, only on the other side).

I don't like any of the Republican candidates because I don't like the Republican agenda. I greatl admire Paul's independence and honesty but I don't agree with any of his opinions.

As for Republicans picking Democratic candidates and vice versa, that's kind of a silly idea. Each party would pick the WORST candidate in the other party.

In fact the Republicans have been caught doing this. In local congressional elections, they've been caught secret funneling money into the campaign of a candidate they thought would be easy to beat in the general election. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that they were financing Hillary in this election, since they probably think she will be the easiest for them to run against.

Answer 4

Ron Paul. He is really a libertarian or what is called a "classical liberal" and would be liberal in the area of personal liberties which would be agreeable to most Democrats. I don't know what you mean by "a more honest election" but I feel that each party should choose their own candidate. It may appear to you that extremists control the parties but look at history. Often politicians say one thing and then do another because they don't want the other party to have any issues to run against them on. Look at Bill Clinton. He was an economic conservative much like you would think a Republican would be, and George Bush is the last of the big time spenders.

Answer 5

Clinton is a lawyer, no military exp.
Guliani is/was a lawyer, no military exp.
Obama is a lawyer, no military exp.
Romney is a lawyer, no military exp.

Just what we need...lawyers with no military experience, handling the worlds most powerful military.

My choice is going to be McCain. 23 yrs. Navy, 5 1/2 yrs POW. Comes from a military family.
He opposses and wants to overturn roe v wade
He brought forth before congress a comprehensive immigration reform bill (of which they rejected)
His stance against terrorism is strong.
He's definately the one al-qaida doesn't want in office.
He may have had some issues w/getting his platform started, but we can't overlook him either.
Go to JohnMcCain.com
Also, go to foxnews.com and you can see his interview w/ hannity & colmes at the New Hampshire Primary. He handled colmes rather well.

Answer 6

I think it's very important to review both sides of the election. As a Liberal, making a "republican" decision was hard; here is how i did it:

Based on ten issues that are very important to me, the republican candidate who fulfilled the most of my personal tenets was Giuliani.

Answer 7

I have to give you two answers.

First--of the candidates, probably Romney is the most qualified.

Second--given the current situation in which the extrimist "neoconservatives" continue to remain in control ofthe GOP--we as a nation cannot afford to have ANY Republican as president. That's simply not an opition until the decent Republicans retake control of the GOP--not if we want to continue to be a free country.

As for Ron Paul--he is not qualified--not because of his calls for "abolising the Department of Education, etc." which even he admits is more a talking point than a serious proposal. The problem is tha the adopts the political ideology of the Lobertarian Party--which is itself simply a variation on the intolerance and anti-Americanism of the neoconservatives--and is NOT, philosophically, actual libertarianism.

Answer 8

Mike Huckabee has really caught my eye. He seems like a great Republican candidate. If I were a Republican, I think that's who I'd vote for.

Answer 9

i honestly dont think there is a prime canidate on either side right now.

I dont know if anyone aroudn here is religious, but in the bible it says that before God comes back everything will go down hill, and our leaders will lead us the wrong way. I think this election and not only that but just things that are going on in the US prove that statement to be true.

Im prepared more for God himself to walk through my front door, more than i am to vote on this up comming election.

Answer 10

I have yet to be convinced that any candidate on either side that appears to be electable is a good choice.