Wow! Tough choice.
Clinton is a ruthless politician that puts expediency in front of core convictions, and will say whatever the audience wants to hear at the time.
Or Obama who is basically a good guy, is too inexperienced and will be in over his head.
I'd have to go with Obama and hope he gets some shrewd advisors.
2007-11-10 15:25:12
·
answer #1
·
answered by Uncle Pennybags 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Obama if that were the only 2 choices. Yes he's inexperienced, yes he might have some bad idea's or wrong positions, but he has a cabinet...like every president to keep him up on things, tell him what is going on and hopefully have some talent at suggesting something would work. It would suck that things might not get done because he wasn't up to speed on it, but it has to be a far cry better than Hilary.
Hilary has a record of not being able to accomplish anything.
She has claimed credit for things she hasn't done, she's avoided taking sides on issues to pander to more voters. There's been china gate type contributions to her campaign which she has been dishonest about not knowing....you can't co-sponsor things with people then have the luxury of not knowing them
She's used her ties with move on.org and media matters to shred anyone that takes the position against her.
She's flopped on the war after her energetic speech's that it was warranted and for 6 reasons besides WMD's.
She's a lawyer for God's sake, when did America ever like or start trusting lawyers ?
I could go on and on...but I have no interest in getting Carpal Tunnel explaining all the deciet, lies and pandering Hilary has done for all to see. And if that's what she's doing in the open, what is she doing in secret ..one must wonder.
2007-11-10 23:31:07
·
answer #2
·
answered by Nightwind 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
What a nightmare choice. Clinton is totally devoid of ethics and will do or say anything to get elected. Just like most politicians I suppose, but she is orders of magnitude worse than most. How many questionable activities does she have to involve herself in before her supports see the light?
Obama is living his 15 minutes of fame. Almost totally unknown before his big speech and now he has all the qualifications to run the country? Even tho I don't believe he has the attributes to be the President, I'd vote for him over Clinton if I were forced to vote for either.
2007-11-11 00:10:32
·
answer #3
·
answered by poolplayer 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I believe in Barack Obama's messages of change, I believe he is running primarily because he wants to help, not because he wants the feeling of wielding power. I think Obama will try and do what's right for our country. I support Barack Obama 100%. Unfortunately.. Clinton's better at playing the sleazy political games. So I am afraid she will end up being the nominee instead.
2007-11-11 01:52:17
·
answer #4
·
answered by Kylie 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hillary Clinton.
2007-11-10 23:27:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by fatsausage 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Like a lot of people, just surviving Bush seems like a miracle. Anybody else will be an improvement.
Given those two choices, I'd vote for Barack Obama because of his hopeful outlook and unifying message.
2007-11-10 23:39:36
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Only brain dead vote for BIG LIER coorporation lover vote billary ,if u illegal alien u can vote both,she talk by scripts,they r ultimate dishonest.
since clinton pervert in office we sell out to china ,obama just joke too all because oprah.
2007-11-10 23:40:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by Beaner is Breeder 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
Obama for President....
2007-11-10 23:28:31
·
answer #8
·
answered by Jambalaya 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Neither, This Country is Going down a dark path, and that path is corruption. Each candidate may not have what it takes to be president, but more importantly, they would be better off doing something better for their country.
2007-11-10 23:30:36
·
answer #9
·
answered by Poopface 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Obama... I don't like either choice, but at least then people will stop the American Monarchy talk.
2007-11-10 23:27:25
·
answer #10
·
answered by scorch_22 6
·
1⤊
0⤋