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

These two candidates are the best each side has but they get little attention on YA or in the MSM. They both are straight talkers not poll driven so why haven't they caught on more

2007-12-26 16:48:34 · 20 answers · asked by D C 4 in Politics & Government Elections

20 answers

It seems that qualifications really don't matter. And as you can see from many of the answers that seem to originate from the party faithful, political compromise and bipartisanship are dirty words. Because Biden and McCain dared to cross party lines and work with the other side, they are labeled as traitors. The more polite refer to this as failing to "rally the base."

I believe this is a symptom of the negative effect that the extremes from both parties are having on the national agenda. We're going to be stuck with a candidate that panders to his or her respective base; something any rational person can see is not in our collective best interest. But rational people really don't seem to have all that much influence when it comes to party politics.

2007-12-26 18:09:46 · answer #1 · answered by NancyBoy 1 · 0 0

You know, I've wondered the same thing - not necessarily that Biden/McCain are 'the best' but why has it been Hillary v Barack (for Dems) from the beginning? When I was able to dig up actual policy ideas from the candidates, Chris Dodd comes off as mature, thoughtful, democratic and even a bit liberal. Biden and Richardson both appear to be intelligent, straight talkers with specific ideas and leadership abilities. Yet it's been Hillary v Obama from the beginning, with a bit of Edwards thrown in as an afterthought.
Not to be too cynical about it, but it's just easier to write about a race between two people than seven. It's also easier to write editorials about 'electability' than to research seven separate positions on a concrete issue and describe them fully within an article.
I think the media's just being lazy, figuring well, Biden hasn't raised much money, so he's probably not going to win, why bother? Unfortunately this snowballs into Biden not raising $$ in the future because he didn't get the press coverage...and the cycle continues.
Perhaps public financing of elections could get the fundraising out of the equation so there wouldn't be a number to point to and judge candidates by before any voters get to know their positions.

2007-12-27 02:08:38 · answer #2 · answered by ephy 1 · 0 0

I agree, and support both for their respective parties. It will be a sad day for all of us when they withdraw from the race. It is hard to run for President with little, or no media coverage. There's that so called "liberal media", these are two candidates who the big money interests do not want.
Look at the 2000 Rep. primaries, all those Rove "swift boatings" of McCain got so much airtime, even though all knew the stories to be false.

These are both men who could work to end this partisan bickering, and work for the betterment of The USA.

2007-12-27 01:26:45 · answer #3 · answered by Think 1st 7 · 0 0

I support McCain. McCain has been up front with all his policies. All people have their bad backgrounds. It's just a matter of whether the 'good' shines through. McCain has been promoting a large force in Iraq for the last 5 years, and it finally happened against severe Democrat attacks, and it worked militarily, there just hasn't been enough political progress.

He's been the strongest on the foreign policies, and that's why I support him. I personally believe domestic issues at the moment hinge on what happens on this 'war on terror' and to put in a 'weak' president as far as foreign policy goes would damage our standing as the Leader of the Free World.

2007-12-27 02:06:20 · answer #4 · answered by toofaraway 1 · 0 0

I can't speak for Biden, but McCain's problem is simple. From judicial appointments to prisoner interrogations to illegal immigration to campaign reform, he has consistently been out in the forefront of positions that are COMPLETELY at variance with the base of the GOP. It's the same problem he had in 2000--you can't get to the general election as a Republican if Republicans by and large don't like you. (If he wins in NH, as he did eight years ago, it'll be largely because that's an open primary where anyone can vote--regardless of party affiliation.)

2007-12-27 01:50:12 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Both Biden and McCain are damaged goods and have had previous unsuccessful runs for the POTUS. Why bother? Neither one has a snowball's chance in hell.

Biden was derailed by a serious plagiarism incident in the 1988 campaign and is very much in the corporate pockets.

Bush with Rove's bag of dirty tricks smeared McCain in 2000 with rumors of his having a black love child, a drug addicted wife and serious psychological damage from years in Viet Nam POW camp. McCain talks up the maverick reputation but when he votes he is a lapdog for Bush and the righties. Nothing to see there for Mr. Keating Five.

2007-12-27 00:57:17 · answer #6 · answered by realst1 7 · 5 1

"Best" is a matter of opinion. Which is exactly why most people do not support them.

Personally, I feel that Mitt Romney is the "best" candidate. He's an experienced executive, with a history of creating successes on the backs of huge, debt-plagued near-disasters. His values are first-rate: strong families, strong economy, strong military. The only edge John McCain has on Romney is he was a war veteran, and that does not a good alternative make.

As for Joe Biden, well, that's a question of issues, not qualifications.

2007-12-27 01:03:03 · answer #7 · answered by Paper Mage 5 · 2 2

Neither fire up the extremes in their own party . The trick to winning is to do that, without losing too many others. As you can see from a lot of the answers , they lose people by not being radical enough . (I know - "Huh? Radical?" . Well..... what do you call a pro-torture, pro -endless war, anti-constitutional , pro unlimited presidential power, agenda, if not "radical"?)

One problem with Biden is that he rarely gives a short simple answer . The pundits seem to think we're too stupid for anything but short and simple . Maybe they're right .

Here's 12 Qs &As ,on presidential power, from everybody but Giuliani, Huckabee, & Thompson . They refused to answer . http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/specials/CandidateQA/BidenQA/

2007-12-27 01:35:33 · answer #8 · answered by mikeinportc 5 · 0 0

As a military family I have no idea why McCain has little nomination... I was in the Navy and my husband is now in the Army; seems to me we need a Military-Oriented person to help all of us stuck in this unfortunate situation.

2007-12-27 01:58:14 · answer #9 · answered by Elizabeth C 1 · 0 0

While I haven't made my mind up concerning who I'll be voting for, I have decided a few that will not be receiving my vote. McCain is one of them. He represents my district and we used to like him until he became the darling of the Democrats. In fact, I would rather vote for a Democrat over McCain! McCain is on the wrong side of history on so many very important issues, chief among them immigration. He does stand strong on some important issues, but something has gone wrong with the man. Time for him to retire and go out with some dignity if he can.

2007-12-27 00:58:25 · answer #10 · answered by go2seek 4 · 2 2

fedest.com, questions and answers