Now that Hillary Clinton's out...
I'm tempted to vote for Yoda, but, in all seriousness, I'd vote for Barrack Obama if I was old enough... Come 2012 I'll finally be able to vote. All I can do is contribute some discussion about it, and participate in some polls on CNN and such...
I agree. If Barack Obama chooses Hillary, he's going to have a tough time losing. If he doesn't, he'll be hard-pressed to win.
Anyways, I voted for Barack Obama. I,truthfully, don't want McSame McCain in the White House. Perhaps Obama will bring a new attitude to the White House, other than lust for power (however, I've yet to see that happen).
I hope McCain wins. Unfortunately, I suspect Obama will win.
Honestly, both candidates scare me to death. McCain wants to destroy Net Neutrality, and Obama wants to federalize the oil companies. However, I suspect that Obama will win because he'll get the uninformed vote (not that people that vote for Obama are uninformed, but people that are uninformed will probably vote for Obama.) Ask 5 Obama supporters on the street why they support him, and you'll get at least one answer saying either, "Because he's black" or "Because he's charismatic." Neither of these are really valid reasons to vote for someone, but that doesn't seem to stop people.
Being totally undemocratic-party for a change, I'm all for solidarity and will be voting for Obama, even though I would have preferred Hillary, low as she really ranks on my preferences for presidents.
Knowing the Democrats, Obama will pick the wrong person, and the Democrat supporters of Hillary will refuse to vote for him, and the Democratic party will shoot themselves in the foot...AGAIN. Well...at least they're keeping to their strengths.
Whoever I'd vote for (probably neither if I was American), I think Obama will win, and I do prefer him to McCain.
Being totally undemocratic-party for a change, I'm all for solidarity and will be voting for Obama, even though I would have preferred Hillary, low as she really ranks on my preferences for presidents.
Knowing the Democrats, Obama will pick the wrong person, and the Democrat supporters of Hillary will refuse to vote for him, and the Democratic party will shoot themselves in the foot...AGAIN. Well...at least they're keeping to their strengths.
I agree. However, I think that this race is about "The Lesser of Two Evils." Both of the Nominee's have some views that scare me, though I think that similar events will happen if either is elected. They'll just be disguised under different names.
Of course, that's my pessimistic side, and I'd like to be optimistic for a change: I hope that Obama chooses Hillary. I wanted her in the first place, if only for the reason that she seems like a very... cunning person. She seems to know how to handle herself, and that is an asset in the White House. Of course, she had to go and ruin it by doing a bunch of terrible things *Cough* Sniper-fire in Serbia. *Cough*
Honestly, both candidates scare me to death. McCain wants to destroy Net Neutrality, and Obama wants to federalize the oil companies. However, I suspect that Obama will win because he'll get the uninformed vote (not that people that vote for Obama are uninformed, but people that are uninformed will probably vote for Obama.) Ask 5 Obama supporters on the street why they support him, and you'll get at least one answer saying either, "Because he's black" or "Because he's charismatic." Neither of these are really valid reasons to vote for someone, but that doesn't seem to stop people.Yea ok. Could the 5 Obama supporters also be revolting from their uninformed decision to put the last guy in office, twice? Most uninformed voters I know are not supporting Obama and when asked the reason they say, “Because he is a Muslim.”
I’ll be voting for Obama, at the beginning of the process I was a Clinton supporter mainly because I thought the country and me personally prospered under her husbands leadership. I liked McSame before the campaign and his transformation into a Bush clone. I’ve had enough of that over the last 8 years.
^^^^
Agreed. Most people that I've spoken with that don't like Obama either can't come up with a good reason for disliking him or have bought into some strawman about him that they picked up from some talking head. Both of which, I suppose, could do a pretty good job of not sounding like "I don't like him because he's black" if the person making the statement tries hard enough ;)
I think federalizing (nationalizing) the oil companies is a colossally bad idea.
I also think continuing the war in Iraq, and POSSIBLY beginning one with Iran, is a colossally bad idea. So, which way do I turn? I'm rooting for Obama, although I honestly wonder how he plans to put his ideas into place during his term as President if elected.
As for McSame...he scares me. Doesn't he realize that the War on Terror will never end? Even if we wipe out every single terrorist in Iraq, there will still be terrorists in Iran, North Korea, Syria, Russia, Britain, Spain, and even here in the United States. Perhaps he knows the scope of the War on Terror all too well, and will not be satisfied until the whole world is at war again, "fighting terror" on one hand while inspiring it on the other.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed and my chin up.
^ Agreed.
Some change is better than no change at all. That's one of many reasons why I'm not voting for Mccain. Or is it, McSame? Simply put, Obama and Clinton aren't all that great, but they will bring change that will be for the better. The crowds they speak to are too gullible. The democrats, if they win, will improve the country's economy somewhat, but it won't be as great as the people in these cheering crowds assume. We're still going to be stuck with a lot of big problems.
:tsk: You didn't include everyone who's still in the race in your poll. :disaprove
When has any Non-Party affiliated candidate ever won an election?
Oh, that's right. Never. And Hell hasn't frozen over yet.
I think federalizing (nationalizing) the oil companies is a colossally bad idea. If it helps with your decision, Obama has not suggested that we nationalize the oil companies.
Frankly, Obama is not qualified to be president based on any of his accomplishments, though he obviously meets the minimum requirements to run for it. Unfortunately for Republicans, McCain is a bad choice as well. Right now, with four months to go, there is still sufficient time for either candidacy to implode or be torpedoed. It will be somewhat interesting to see who their running mates will end up being.
It was Maxine Waters (D, CA)that was calling for nationalizing (or at least said she'd favor that approach) "big oil".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUaY3LhJ-IQ)
She's such a blithering idiot.
Frankly, Obama is not qualified to be president based on any of his accomplishments, though he obviously meets the minimum requirements to run for it. What makes Obama under qualified? The D next to his name? Was President Bush more or less qualified than Obama 8 years ago? Don't worry I will answer that one. Less, a lot less.
On what do you base your assessment of Obama's apparent (to you, anyway) qualifications? His being a Democrat? Not being Bush? Being a mixed race candiddate? Just curious.
When has any Non-Party affiliated candidate ever won an election?
Oh, that's right. Never. And Hell hasn't frozen over yet.
If that was directed at me, you need to do some research. Ron Paul is affiliated with the Republican party.
While he is affiliated with the Rep party, he'd clearly have to run as an independent candidate for the Nov election.
On what do you base your assessment of Obama's apparent (to you, anyway) qualifications? His being a Democrat? Not being Bush? Being a mixed race candiddate? Just curious.
George Bush only public service experience before entering the White House was being the Governor of Texas. The Governor of Texas has no real power. The Lieutenant Governor of Texas holds the true power in state government. The governor is more of a cheerleader, yelling on to get the bills his party is endorsing passed. The governor does have the power to pardon or stop executions, but since Bush did neither during his time in office, abiding by the decisions of the board of pardons, I do not consider that experience. I will admit he was a very good cheerleader, he got the Democrats and the Republicans to work together and got the bills the special interest (insurance companies) wanted passed (too bad he did not use that skill once he got to Washington). Bush spent 6 years as Texas Governor, but really it was 5 since the last year he was running for president.
Obama was elected to the Illinois Senate in 1996 and then elected to the U.S. Senate in 2004 and took office January of 2005. Again, I would subtract one year for the Presidential election. Therefore, Obama has 10-year experience in government to Bush’s 5-years experience. Obama has experience both at the federal and state level. Bush only had state level experience.
Geez, Mdknight, do you think I'm a complete idiot? I KNOW Paul is in the Party, but the fact remains that it doesn't matter any more so than the fact that Teddy Roosevelt was in the party - The Republicans aren't going to give Paul his own special ticket, not unless someone recently gave them a cranial drill intrusion.
And if Obama wants to run for the legislature, you might have a point. Since I wasn't comparing him to Bush (we both agree that we wasted our votes on him, 2x--though the alternatives we're still worse IMNSHO), Bush's experience (or lack thereof) isn't particularly relevant here. Oddly enough, the big three contenders till this past were all senators. :)
Was President Bush more or less qualified than Obama 8 years ago? Don't worry I will answer that one. Less, a lot less.
On what do you base your assessment of Obama's apparent (to you, anyway) qualifications? His being a Democrat? Not being Bush? Being a mixed race candiddate? Just curious.
Since I wasn't comparing him to Bush (we both agree that we wasted our votes on him, 2x--though the alternatives we're still worse IMNSHO), Bush's experience (or lack thereof) isn't particularly relevant here.
You asked for my assessment of Obama's apparent qualification and I was comparing him to Bush. I just don't understand why experience is an issue now when they were not an issue in 2000 when Bush was running. Back then people wanted someone from outside the beltway.
Back then people wanted someone from outside the beltway.Hey, maybe it was just like Texas then. You know, a front guy to do a bunch of cheerleading while others (i.e. Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rove, etc) were actually responsible for the policy.
Hmmm. Way to make sure we never elect another former Texas governor, mimartin.
Hmmm. Way to make sure we never elect another former Texas governor, mimartin.I remember studing it in Government Class in high school. The Governor of Texas became my dream job. It includes all the accolades with none of the responsibility.
Geez, Mdknight, do you think I'm a complete idiot? I KNOW Paul is in the Party, but the fact remains that it doesn't matter any more so than the fact that Teddy Roosevelt was in the party - The Republicans aren't going to give Paul his own special ticket, not unless someone recently gave them a cranial drill intrusion.
Just checking! :lol: I know it looks grim for his campaign, but I refuse to count my chickens before they hatch, even though that is the trend in politics in this country.
You asked for my assessment of Obama's apparent qualification and I was comparing him to Bush. I just don't understand why experience is an issue now when they were not an issue in 2000 when Bush was running. Back then people wanted someone from outside the beltway.
When you get right down to it, none of the last 3 candidates (Hilary included here) had any executive experience, so perhaps that issue becomes moot under the circumstances. Interesting that the Gov of Texas is only a figurehead. About the confusion re Bush, the comment "he's not Bush" probably could have been used as a throwawy line vis-a-vis any other dem candidate. Just figured that you think that even a retarded monkey could do a better job than Bush and figured you believed Obama was at least that smart. :D Frankly, saying that Obama (or anyone, ftm) is better than Bush is like saying someone should win a beauty contest b/c they're better looking than the cow that miraculously won (in your opinion) the last time. Being better qualified does not equal being qualified. Just thought that kind of yardstick was irrelevant.
If I could vote, I'd be voting for McCain!
Arcesious--it's OK to vote in the poll for who you want to win, even if you aren't old enough to vote yet. :)
I added the "I honestly don't know" option for those of you who really don't know, but who are going to vote (or would vote if able).
If I could vote, I'd be voting for McCain!
Seeing as you're from the Netherlands, how well versed are you on American Politics? Even if you are very well versed, your opinion is jaded due to it being from a foreign perspective and it should be treated as such.
I added the "I honestly don't know" option for those of you who really don't know, but who are going to vote (or would vote if able).
In my opinion, then, this makes the third decision unchoosable. (Which isn't a word.)
The question asks: Who will win?
The answers are then McCain, Obama, or 'I don't know.'
'I don't care' doesn't answer the question, and it is actually a bit disheartening that a US citizen would pick an option of this nature.
_EW_
'I don't care' doesn't answer the question, and it is actually a bit disheartening that a US citizen would pick an option of this nature.You're not allowed to be disappointed until someone asks to add the "Who are these people?" option.
When has any Non-Party affiliated candidate ever won an election?
1789. :xp:
1789.
Please note however that George Washigtion was said to be a sympathizer of the Federalist Party.
So, it's the exception that proves the rule.
You're not allowed to be disappointed until someone asks to add the "Who are these people?" option.
You say it to be glib, but there are those people close by. They just refrain from posting. :disaprove
_EW_
I voted for Yoda, although it's not really that I don't care. I don't fully buy Obama's message for "change", and I don't know how much change would really benefit the US. It's an easy thing to say, but I'm a skeptic. He does say it well, though. I'll give him that. However, as a Republican, I don't like McCain at all. It's a very strange feeling that I'm having right now -- I'm actually sad that Hillary is out of the race.
Dame Kelly Holmes is on for 2:1.
You say it to be glib, but there are those people close by. They just refrain from posting. :disaprove:I think that was cynicism you were detecting rather than glibness.
It's a very strange feeling that I'm having right now -- I'm actually sad that Hillary is out of the race.
Really? I popped open a Guinness Extra Stout to celebrate the occasion! :lol: :guiness:
Really? I popped open a Guinness Extra Stout to celebrate the occasion! :lol: :guiness:
I thought I would too - believe me - but I guess I'm just not on the Obama bandwagon that so many are on right now. And in reality, McCain is so moderate that Clinton might be in the same ballpark as far as conservatism goes. Obama is off the deep-end.
McCain is so moderate that Clinton might be in the same ballpark as far as conservatism goes. The correct term is was. McSame was so moderate...
Obama is off the deep-end.On what issue or issues are you making this judgment?
I think that was cynicism you were detecting rather than glibness.
Ahh, of course.
I thought I would too - believe me - but I guess I'm just not on the Obama bandwagon that so many are on right now. And in reality, McCain is so moderate that Clinton might be in the same ballpark as far as conservatism goes. Obama is off the deep-end.
Because of what reasons have you gotten off the bandwagon? And is this affecting your opinion as to who will win?
_EW_
On what issue or issues are you making this judgment?"Off the deep end" was a strong choice of words. I only meant that in just about every conservative/liberal issue that is important to me personally, Obama takes the liberal view where I am conservative. I'd rather not get into those issues on this forum, however.
The correct term is was. McSame was so moderate... I wonder if that's just an attempt to earn more conservative votes, and not really indicative of how he will act once elected.
Because of what reasons have you gotten off the bandwagon? And is this affecting your opinion as to who will win? I was never on the bandwagon. And no, it doesn't affect my opinion as to who I think will win. Where's Peter the Hegemon when you need him? ;)
I was never on the bandwagon. And no, it doesn't affect my opinion as to who I think will win. Where's Peter the Hegemon when you need him? ;)
I know, right? :D :D :D
Peter to the rescue.
_EW_
I wonder if that's just an attempt to earn more conservative votes, and not really indicative of how he will act once elected.Ignoring the fact that this would do nothing but establish that the Republicans have once more put forth a candidate that will say one thing and then do the exact opposite (i.e. a liar), let us consider that in order to test this hypothesis all we can do is cross our fingers as we vote and hope that this is the case. Needless to say, I'm not interested in gambling with my vote anymore than what is considered "normal".
Unfortunately, I think Obama is going to win the general election. Since John McCain is a very weak Republican, I just don't see him rallying the party. I personally don't think Obama is going to attempt a debate with McCain. I personally believe that the Republicans are going to stay at home this time around. I expect Obama to be in office for one term. I actually expect anyone of the canadates to only have one term. I think the United States is going through a phase, which will allow some real leaders to step forward. After our country takes some time to flex, we will see a real run for the White House in 2012. I think the Republicans are retreating, so they can fight for another day. McCain is just not a strong cannidate. Plus, he is a Liberal running on the Republican ticket. Grrr... I think I am going to wait this voting cycle out myself. I want to see a hard hitter Republican arrive for an awsome 2012 battle. Obama is going to make some serious mistakes in office, and it will cost him the second term. I personally hate the man, but I do know he will win.
Obama's term will be similar in tone to George Bush senior. People will celebrate his arrival to the White House, but he will deliver nothing positive to the office. I personally believe he is a logo and slogon without substance, and people will finally see this to be true. If he turns into a radical - racial- president, we can allways impeach the man.
Unfortunately, I think Obama is going to win the general election. Since John McCain is a very weak Republican, I just don't see him rallying the party. I personally don't think Obama is going to attempt a debate with McCain. I personally believe that the Republicans are going to stay at home this time around. I expect Obama to be in office for one term. I actually expect anyone of the canadates to only have one term. I think the United States is going through a phase, which will allow some real leaders to step forward. After our country takes some time to flex, we will see a real run for the White House in 2012. I think the Republicans are retreating, so they can fight for another day. McCain is just not a strong cannidate. Plus, he is a Liberal running on the Republican ticket. Grrr... I think I am going to wait this voting cycle out myself. I want to see a hard hitter Republican arrive for an awsome 2012 battle. Obama is going to make some serious mistakes in office, and it will cost him the second term. I personally hate the man, but I do know he will win.
Obama's term will be similar in tone to George Bush senior. People will celebrate his arrival to the White House, but he will deliver nothing positive to the office. I personally believe he is a logo and slogon without substance, and people will finally see this to be true. If he turns into a radical - racial- president, we can allways impeach the man.
I like how such a long post is filled with absolutely nothing but meaningless fluff. Kudos to you sir.
I like how such a long post is filled with absolutely nothing but meaningless fluff. Kudos to you sir.
Oh? I'm sorry El Sitherino. I thought this thread was "Who do you think will win the 2008 election?" I just answered in a quick summary why I feel as such. Did I do something wrong?
Just looking for clarity.
Not the guy who wants to veto beer...
link (
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/06/10/mccain-i-will-veto-every-single-beer/)
Guess who it is!!
McBush!
What a surprise...he is quickly becoming my favorite comedian.
But seriously...how can a guy who doesn't even understand what vernacular to use to properly address a crowd be elected president...? Yes, Bush is an exception...but I like to think that was before he had a stroke that gave him permanent brain damage...oh wait...nm...Side note...yet another similarity between McCain and Bush...a poor grasp of the english language :lol:!!
I'll try to give him the benefit of the doubt that it's political slang that is commonly (or not so commonly) used and it accidentally slipped out, but you should always be aware of who you are talking to and what you are saying, especially if you want to be the pres.
Regardless, McBush as president well never happen, and you can quote me.
Obama '08 Baby!!