WHO is the presidential candidate for 2008 that is going to put CITIZENS first??

Question

id like to know....i thought it was Ron Paul. things arent so clear to me right now. anyone care to help me clarify them please?

as soon as i know who is going to put citizens and legal immigrants first, they will automatically get my vote! ill be 18 by the next elections :).

doc_holliday....oh, and this is one of those times when changing the subject is more convenient..... you forgot to address the drain illegals have made on us, which is much worse!

Answer 1

Ron Paul and Kucinich are the two main candidates that would put the people first.

Ron Paul wants to shrink government so the people have more money and doesn't except lobbyed money (big business and countries)

Follow the money, all his donations are from the people.

Answer 2

I'm impressed! Most 1st time voters vote like their parents do. Period. Too often, the candidates say whatever will get them elected. Then after they're elected, we wonder why they didn't follow through with their promises.

Ron Paul sounds good. He is anti-war and anti-"illegal" immigration. Which the majority of Americans are for. He is also for bringing back the Constitution (we have lost so many civil rights due to this war on terror).

The best advice anyone can give you is to watch the TV debates. Republican & Democratic, alike. All Republicans want to continue (& expand) the war. Democrats want to end it. With illegal immigration, the Republicans want to enforce the laws on the books, the Democrats want to give amnesty, for the most part. Republicans are against a healthcare system for all Americans (calling it socialized medicine), which it's not. The Democrats want every American to be insured. These are the major issues.

The next debate airs this Thursday night on CNN. Tune in. Become informed & then vote your conscience. And DON'T forget to register!!

Answer 3

Ron Paul. Anti-illegal, Anti-Iraq War, and most importantly PRO-Constitution.

He is the most avid supporter of our most important document linked to the foundation and goals of our country as envisioned by our founders.

Voting party is foolish, Neither party has shown that they care for the people. Regan did some good and bad, so did both Bushes (especially Baby Bush), so you would think that Democrats were better. WRONG, Dems are trying to give away our country, Clinton did well financially but was a horrible example of American morals, His wife is a waffler who will cater to whoever will get her what she wants.

Democrats and Republicans are both getting rich off of Americans, cater to Big Business, Go to college together and join the same clubs and groups.

All their animosity is designed to give Americans the false belief that elections matter and we have a choice in the way the country is run. They are the same people with different names.

Ron Paul has some ideas and beliefs that I do not agree with. His consistent voting record and belief in the Constitution makes me feel that at least we will know what to expect.

No President will ever meet all of someones values and beliefs, but at least RP is clearly on Americas side. Some of his values are not mine, but in general he would be the overall best choice for anyone concerned with Americas future sovereignty and respect of personal rights.

Answer 4

Tancredo sounds doable but, he's running for VP only. He's a hard line conservative and even I don't agree with all of his policies. However, basically every other candidate seems supportive of illegals...except Romney and Paul...
*************************************************

Check this website out...it will help you pick a candidate. To see your results, scroll all the way to the bottom of the page AFTER clicking the "Show Results" button.

http://www.selectsmart.com/president/2008.html


****************************************************************

Mike Huckabee is NOT for this country.

Trade issues: Governor Huckabee's record on trade is limited, but affirmative. In 2003, he pushed for free trade with Mexico, calling for a "strong market of the Americas" and supporting NAFTA (AP 10/03/03).


Immigration issues: We shouldn't have amnesty where we just say, "Fine, everybody's good, we're going to let it go." We should have a process where people can pay the penalties, step up and accept responsibility for not being here legally. But here's the point. The objective is not to be punitive. The objective is to make things right. Right for us. Right for them. And what I have objected to in the past is when we are punishing the children for the laws that maybe their parents have broken. I do have a problem with that.

Mostly supports amnesty/permanent legalization for illegal aliens. No known opinion on temporary legalization for illegal aliens as guestworkers


versus Tancredo's position

Immigration issues: I am absolutely opposed to amnesty. In addition to rewarding those who broke our laws, amnesties simply do not solve the problem of illegal immigration. The only realistic solution to the problem of illegal immigration is a strategy of attrition, which seeks to reduce the flow of the illegal alien population over time by cutting off the incentives for coming to and staying in America - most importantly by eliminating the jobs magnet. America must also reexamine its legal immigration policies. Grade from the Americans for Better Immigration: A+.

******************************************

Having analyzed Ron Paul's position, he sounds great. He would have my vote in 2008. If Tancredo or Dobbs could be his VP, this country would get rid of the IA infestation in a matter of months!


Source:

http://selectsmart.com/president/2008/comparethem.html

Answer 5

Ron Paul is a strict contitutionalist and is definitely for the people.

Tom Tancredo is a hardliner on illegal immigration and was before it became popular. He is also good for the people

Hillary would be a disaster. She waffles on every issue and will not give a straight answer to any question. You only have to look at her voting record to see where she stands on illegal immigration. She hired a former president of the United Racists (La Raza Unida) to help run her campaign so read between the lines. Her $5000.00 per baby proposal, who do you think is going to benefit the most from that? If you think we have an anchor baby problem now wait until Hillary starts paying them to come here and drop anchor.

As usual. we will probably not get a good choice as to who to vote for but we will get an excellent choice as to who to vote against.

Answer 6

Like you and DAR (and probably a lot of other people) I'm leaning toward Ron Paul but haven't firmly decided. My main concern lately is that, since the Court usurped representative government in Plyler vs Doe - essentially tying the hands of any lower jurisdiction to deny equal services, moneys, freeebies, and even citizenship to children of illegals whether born here or not - we may need more than just a strong, people-oriented president.

I'm for an amendment empowering the people with the veto of any item in any bill that leaves capitol hill on the way to the president's desk.

Select at least a hundred people at random from EACH lower house district, sequester them just long enough to study each item assigned to their "jury", test them only on their basic understanding of the issues (Wow! Issues in politics!) and let those achieving a minimum acceptable score veto or admit each assigned item.

I think fifty-one percent of each "jury" from each lower house district should count as one veto. Seventy percent of all juries vetoing would remove the item from consideration.

Bye-bye riders!

Eighty-percent suggesting an alternative wording would replace the Hill's item. Ninety percent could pass it regardless of the president and congress.


Just a thought.


...

Oh. And the supreme court needs about 500 more justices, paid a lot less than now and given some sort of yearly conscionable-judicial-actions test in order to stay on.


...

Answer 7

Ron Paul

Paul has stated that he wants very strong borders and he was appalled that our government had taken border guards off of our borders to send them to Iraq.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/haman3.html

This is his six point plan:
Physically secure our borders and coastlines. We must do whatever it takes to control entry into our country before we undertake complicated immigration reform proposals.
Enforce visa rules. Immigration officials must track visa holders and deport anyone who overstays their visa or otherwise violates U.S. law. This is especially important when we recall that a number of 9/11 terrorists had expired visas.
No amnesty. Estimates suggest that 10 to 20 million people are in our country illegally. That’s a lot of people to reward
for breaking our laws.
No welfare for illegal aliens. Americans have welcomed immigrants who seek opportunity, work hard, and play by the rules. But taxpayers should not pay for illegal immigrants who use hospitals, clinics, schools, roads, and social services.
End birthright citizenship. As long as illegal immigrants know their children born here will be citizens, the incentive to enter the U.S. illegally will remain strong.
Pass true immigration reform. The current system is incoherent and unfair. But current reform proposals would allow up to 60 million more immigrants into our country, according to the Heritage Foundation. This is insanity. Legal immigrants from all countries should face the same rules and waiting periods.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/border-security-and-immigration-reform/


For more information, please visit www.ronpaul2008.com

Thank you for the question!

Answer 8

After examining the usual collection of clowns I must cast my vote for Ron Paul.

Answer 9

The ones the pro-illegal media will never allow to be elected or even nominated.

Answer 10

There is only one. Ron Paul.