in essence im asking, who if you had to pick one would you pick for president. and don't say neither because we all know they are both very bad already. but if you had to pick one who would it be? me personally i would pick Clinton because Obama's view on foreign policy is horrible. he would start a war with his ideas. such as invading Pakistan without the permission of the president.
2007-12-12 05:55:26 · 26 answers · asked by Razgriz01 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Tough choices and both bad. Probably Hillary. She is at least predictable about following the polls. Her big business connections make it unlikely she will advance socialism the way some think, and I view her talk about this as cheap talk pandering to the poor.
2007-12-12 06:28:36 · answer #1 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Obama
Clinton takes credit for being in a White House that damaged the American psyche (Cigar-gate), demonstrated the vicious attack-dog tactic and had multiple people close the the Clintons die in inexplicable fashion.
Hillary is looking to assign responsibility for healthcare to a Federal Gov't that can't balance a checkbook and will follow the Canadian/English system where their citizens come here to get care in time to handle their physical problems.
I'll take the quasi-blank slate Obama represents over the re-do of the Clinton years that are seen as being good due to a dot-com bubble that burst like the sub-prime bubble.
2007-12-12 06:03:07 · answer #2 · answered by Ed A 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋
"Obama's view on foreign policy is horrible. he would start a war with his ideas. such as invading Pakistan without the permission of the president."
Awesome. Yes, the last thing we need is a guy in the White House with a reckless foreign policy approach who might start a war or two. That's the problem with the Dumborats, always warmongering.
2007-12-12 06:00:17 · answer #3 · answered by Underground Man 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Your right about Obama's foreign policy. But Clinton's domestic ideas such as health care would raise taxes for everybody that pays taxes and would end up being a big scam that lingers on forever kind of like social security. Only the deadbeats of society would truly have free health care. I would have to choose Obama.
2007-12-12 06:02:35 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
I would pick Hillary, yes I know shocker, but you limit my choices:
1) Hawkish - She is, but for all the wrong reasons. She would want a war time label for legacy sake. So long as was we continue to be attacked, she would hate to be seen as ineffective. Obama on the other hand would ask the UN to take over our National Security, because he thinks leadership is strength in numbers.
2) Lack of Leadership - We just need to get her to cackle a couple of times! Her ability to turn off 51% of the nation to her ideas would only strengthen the hand of Republicans in the Senate, and allow someone to slow her down drastically. Not that Obama has any leadershiop qualities I would want to talk about, but some might want to give him the benefit of the dought and let him try introducing more socialist programs into our culture.
2007-12-12 06:04:42 · answer #5 · answered by ROIHUNTER 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
If it had to be one of those two, I'd pick Obama; hands down. He is less of a Socialist, he definitely has the best for the US at heart (maybe due to him being 1st generation American), not simply his own interests in power, and he a far less divisive.
I do not agree with him on everything, but he is still a decent candidate.
2007-12-12 05:59:55 · answer #6 · answered by MrOrph 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I would pick Obama, because Clinton is a crazy power hungry *****. Everyone hated her when her husband was President and now, all of a sudden, everyone is just so in love with her. She is too fickle and will say whatever people want to hear at the moment. I am very disappointed in all the choices we have as President at the moment.
2007-12-12 05:59:43 · answer #7 · answered by Green Eyed Girl 5 · 5⤊ 2⤋
I don't believe either could cause as much damage as W. did and is continuing to do. Either one would be better. I'd pick Obama though just to piss off the southern red necks.
2007-12-12 06:08:11 · answer #8 · answered by Pop D 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It really depends on who is VP, but Obama will do the least damage because He would get assassinated by the Klan before he could F@CK up to much!!!!!!
Hillary would ruin the nation beyond repair and lead into a revolution when she dismantled the Bill of rights, starting with the 2nd Amendment and moving on from there!!
2007-12-12 06:05:28 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Obama's main handicap is his lack of experience.
Hillary has enough experience and is conniving enough to accomplish some of her goals...
I think the US would be better off with a failed or ineffectual Obama than a successful Hillary.
2007-12-12 06:02:06 · answer #10 · answered by floatingbloatedcorpse 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋