2007-12-20 17:36:48 · 12 answers · asked by nursingstudent21 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Im a life long republican. elephants stomp donkeys :P
2007-12-20 17:47:19 · update #1
Ron paul...Anti-War, Pro Drug Reform, Pro- Life. Ron Paul never voted for the Iraq war...Hillary Clinton has
2007-12-20 17:41:15 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋
I haven't decided who my real candidate would be, but i do like Bill Richardson better than all others. He has a third way approach towards economic policy, which I credit the growth during the 90's towards Bill Clinton's third way adhearance. He also has immigration experience being the governor of a border state, and he was the secretary of energy, which I consider energy my #1 concern, with smog, rising fuel prices, foreign trade deficits, and oil wars.
My #2 priority is restoring diplomacy and foreign policy, and Richardson has an incredible feat under his belt. As for ambassador to the UN from '98-99, Richardson has dealt with many of the corrupt leaders that put our political parties at war among each other. He's dealt with Cuba, China, and best of all, he's negotiated the release of two hostages after going FACE to FACE with Hussein himself. That's impressive.
But Hillary's too dominate and Obama's too liberal for me. I know Bill won't get the nomination so I'm hoping the republicans will nominate my back up: Rudy.
2007-12-21 01:57:30 · answer #2 · answered by Anonimo 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
My #1 choice is John McCain, with Barack Obama as a close second. I'd vote for anyone to keep Clinton out of office, except for Kucinich and Paul, in that order.
2007-12-21 03:03:46 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Ron Paul- because someone needs to veto a Congress that is out of control before the people realize what has been happening and resort to violence, because Government is not the means whereby property is redistributed, because it is not the place of the government to protect us from ourselves, it is there to protect us from each other and from any foreign power.
Or Hillary, because Congress needs a PR agent, because the purpose of Government is to be the bureaucracy that determines how property is to be redistributed and the Government needs a somewhat womanly face to make it seem like stealing from a few to give to the many is the right thing to do, because the Government is there only to protect us from ourselves, and she can get us to see that we are our only enemy.
2007-12-21 02:05:37 · answer #4 · answered by Scott S 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Well, I think Hillary the FEMocrat and Obama have turned it all into a damn circus!! What are my other options? I haven't had time to focus on anyone else for all the hype of these two fecking morons
2007-12-21 02:04:51 · answer #5 · answered by BIYATCH! 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
It has become routine for our representatives in government to violate the Constitution. Ron Paul understands the Constitution and how important it is to follow it. He also has the proven integrity to do what he promises.
2007-12-21 01:50:08 · answer #6 · answered by Bryan Kingsford 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I do not want any of them that are running for office.
Not one of them are for the people. There has not been a president that has been for the people since Truman.
I would like to see a non party line run for president.
2007-12-21 01:45:52 · answer #7 · answered by Big Deal Maker 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Ron Paul. he is the only honest candidate who believes in a minimalist government
2007-12-21 02:07:34 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Ron Paul easily because he is the only sensible candidate that I trust! I am a life-long democrat by the way!!!!
2007-12-21 01:45:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 4⤋
the right president for the job, male or female.
2007-12-21 01:45:02 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋