English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I mean, each of them has flaws. Now, I know no-one's perfect but the next President will have to work day and night to improve the US's reputation and standards, nationally and internationally. The US needs a uniter, not a divider.

Hillary Clinton is intelligent but not a uniter; Barack Obama is charismatic and fresh but voters may worry he's more style than substance; John Edwards is passionate but seen as a coward, especially after the 2004 election.
And that's just the Democrats!

Don't even get me started on Rudy Guiliani, Mike Huckabee, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, John McCain or any of the Republican candidates...

So, the question is: are there any other potential candidates (or candidates already running) who have the capacity to make the United States a great country once again?

Thanks for your opinions. :)

2007-12-05 19:21:25 · 11 answers · asked by Quynh N 2 in Politics & Government Politics

Alex B: I say don't get me started on the Republicans, because while I'm sure they have done some excellent things, their party is marred by too many scandals.
And unfortunately, I believe that the reputation of George W. Bush has rendered the GOP's reputation shattered, and they don't have the chance to win in 2008 that they did prior to 2004.

2007-12-05 19:39:26 · update #1

11 answers

No.

2007-12-05 19:25:09 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 3

yours is a very logical and appropriate question. I wish I had the insight to give you a totally accurate answer to your question. It is extremely hard to judge a person's capability by listening to them in a debate or on a TV interview. All politicians give the answers that they think their voters want to hear and then when elected they forget about everything they said while running in their campaign. I do not believe more than 10 words out of 100 that Hillary has to say. She is too political and slick for my taste. I do not care for Edwards at all but I won't bore you with the reasons why. Obama seems to be a fair young man but I fear that he does not have adequate experience to be president. I like Romney but I am not sure about him. I will require at least 6 more months before I can make up my mind. It will depend largely on which two will run for office.

2007-12-05 19:43:19 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I think Mitt Romney will be the Republican candidate, because he's a pretty middle-of-the-road conservative and he really *looks* presidential.

It's also my guess that Barack Obama will be the Democratic candidate. A lot of people are beginning to lose trust in Hillary, and he's really the only other strong candidate. And to be honest, he's the only Democratic candidate I'd even consider voting for, though as I'm a conservative myself I don't know how much my opinion counts for in that regard.

Actually, if it does come down to those two, I'm going to have a tough time deciding who to pick. I wouldn't mind either of them as president.

2007-12-05 19:27:02 · answer #3 · answered by Terras 5 · 1 1

Yes, the Republican side has a lot of talent and experience among their candidates.

You are looking on the wrong side of the aisle for your heroes and will always be disappointed accordingly.

Edit: The Clinton years were the most scandal riddled in our nation's history and the court cases are still being heard.

Polls are showing Rep candidates will win nationwide. Where are you getting your info?

2007-12-05 19:43:54 · answer #4 · answered by wider scope 7 · 2 0

Well, we go through this crap every 4 years. Nobody is ever happy with who is running for office. So, yes, this is the best we have, and yes, most of them are qualified to be President.

"Don't even get me started on...Republican candidates"

Ummmm, ok. Could you explain this? McCain by far is the most qualified person in any party to run for President. I think being a POW in Vietnam for 5 years is a pretty useful experience. He also is a fiscal and social conservative.

Giuliani has successfully decreased crime in NYC. That place used to be a slum before he got there.

Bill Richardson was UN ambassador.

So, honestly, I have no idea why you think none of them are good enough. Are you just too demanding, maybe?

EDIT: And, the Clinton Administration wasn't full of scandal?

2007-12-05 19:30:11 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

No, none of the current candidates are worthy of the white house. I am not putting any of them down, but like yourself, I don't think any of them are good enough.

The one thing that they all lack is leadership. Leadership is the one thing that America desperately needs.

We don't need a president with an impressive foreign policy or portfolio of domestic programs. Those we can get anywhere. We need a leader who can rally the country behind him or her and get the job done.

2007-12-06 01:03:59 · answer #6 · answered by mjmayer188 7 · 0 0

We really need President Bush to be able to hold a third term, But Alas....Fred Thompson or Mike Huckabee is my pick

2007-12-05 19:54:08 · answer #7 · answered by Linderfan 3 · 0 0

I would LOVE to have Mr John Edwards for MY president.

Having Senator Hillary Clinton become the first female President, with Senator Barack Obama as the first black Vice President, ( to become the first black president 8 years later ), would make me very happy too.

I can tell you this, ANYONE I am voting for is going to be for the real live people. Obviously a Democrat.

Anyone running as a "Republican", is OBVIOUSLY going to continue to do things ONLY for the ultra wealthy.

Even some of the richest people in the world have made the news lately saying that they need to pay more taxes !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They realize that too much is being sucked out of the middle class, and poor people.

2007-12-05 19:37:43 · answer #8 · answered by camper33 2 · 0 3

I put Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter at the top of my list, but I'm perplexed by the fact that they don't seem to be putting up a fight to get elected.

As for "good enough", that's something that we have to let voters decide. (I don't understand why democrats didn't put up a single candidate qualified for the office. Where are all the dem governors?)

2007-12-05 19:37:18 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Why is it that being a prisoner of war automatically qualifies you to be President? Or any other thing you did in life? The Presidency is unlike anything you will ever do in your life.

I think someone who speaks of Honor and is going to look out for the American PEOPLE (not businesses) would be a good choice.

Someone who will say Honor and mean it... Live up to it.

I see Ron Paul as the lesser of all these evils.

2007-12-05 19:42:44 · answer #10 · answered by eric_the_red_101 4 · 0 2

Obvious fishing trip detected. Analysing potential right answers. Ahh here it is


RON PAUL 2008

Now do I get a lollipop?

You people are just becoming more and more predictable.

2007-12-05 19:36:54 · answer #11 · answered by Sageandscholar 7 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers