To be or not to be(the American President)

[hasselbrad]

Originally Posted by Leonie

How beautifully misogynistically expressed, Foeni. "The Clinton woman"... Bloody hell. What's next, you don't mind "the black guy"?

With all due respect, there was a Clinton man so I can see where he might need to make the distinction.

For what it's worth, I don't like the Clinton woman either. Not because she has a vagina, but mostly because she's a socialist.

[Ranman]

What the Clinton woman ever do to you Foeni?

And Brad I think it is because she has a vagina you fag

[Renegade]

I feel like a retard for not knowing shit about politics. But there was an Obama rally on campus and it sounds like he knows what he's doing. I'm not voting for Hilary because apparently, she started crying after people labeled her emotionless. Don't know if that's true but that doesn't sit right with me.

[hasselbrad]

Originally Posted by Ranman

What the Clinton woman ever do to you Foeni?

And Brad I think it is because she has a vagina you fag

Honestly, I'm not sure she does. I think that's why Bill was allowed to fuck anything that did.

[Leonie]

Originally Posted by hasselbrad

With all due respect, there was a Clinton man so I can see where he might need to make the distinction.

That's why her parents gave her a first name...

[hasselbrad]

Originally Posted by Leonie

That's why her parents gave her a first name...

Didn't she try to claim she was named after Sir Edmund Hillary, even though she was born five years before he reached the summit if Everest?

[duckula]

Originally Posted by Renegade

But there was an Obama rally on campus and it sounds like he knows what he's doing.

He doesn't. Good orator, would be suprised if he could run a piss up in a brewery.

[Leonie]

Originally Posted by duckula

He doesn't. Good orator, would be suprised if he could run a piss up in a brewery.

Of the type "Aristotle would have loved him, Plato would have hated him"?

[duckula]

Indeed. Not sure where I come down on the argument but if rhetoric is all you have, you don't have much.

[Leonie]

I am very undecided about who I'd back if I were American. I don't like Clinton's spin doctor practices - I think such skills, as handy as they may be, aren't what you want in a president who will be cleaning up Bush's mess. There's enough covering up going on as is, I wouldn't like the next American president to rewrite history.

Obama seems charismatic enough, but I'm not sure how good he would be at the non-verbal parts of the job. That said, I'm fairly certain Bush is a fruitcake, but with the help of a team of people with half a brain, he's kept the country running, more or less. I'm not saying Bush did a great job, but had he run the country on his own, I think we'd be in even more trouble. Perhaps, with experienced people advising him, Obama could do a reasonably good job.

Let's just say I don't envy those who have to vote on this one.

I agree with you on some of your points,such as Clinton,but I think Obama is going to be a perfect choice to be the president!Full of energy and is the man who can really change the present status of the country and clear Bush's mess!If I'm a American, I think I should vote for him!

[duckula]

I'd vote McCain. Not a big fan of his politics but with a Democrat congress (a lock at this point) he can't crazy up the country. Not that he is even that right wing, he believes in amnesty for illegals (only logical position at this point) and other more centrist policies.
I suppose the most basic metric is who do you trust to have the power to command the greatest military force the world has seen. Obama is a neophyte, Clinton was part of a administration that mishandled most military matters and seems to have very little understanding of the utility of force. McCain is atleast a safe pair of hands on this front.

[Leonie]

I'm not too familiar with McCain's policies, I should really look into that. From a quick glance at the Internet, I take it he is on the more democratic side of the republican spectrum, but less so than Guliani?

[duckula]

Guliani was a bit tough to figure. I was never sure where he fell on national issues other than 'I was Mayor of NY on 9/11'. McCain is center-right, so more on the democrat side of the republicans.

[Leonie]

Yeah, Guliani seemed too Democrat to be a Republican, and vice versa. That said, perhaps someone in between the two is just what the US needs. What I remember about Guliani is that he was pro-abortion and pro-something else that freaked out a bunch of Republicans, probably gay marriage. Those two seem good ways to sway voters who find those issues important, but given that the US is currently at war and facing some real economic trouble (which is a real achievement in itself, really), those two would have to take a back seat as far as I'm concerned.

I like that McCain comes from an army family - he might have a slightly better idea of what fighting a war is like. In the Netherlands, I would probably vote center-right, too. That said, our system is completely different to the American one, since we have a whole range of political parties, instead of two main ones.

I like Obama's idealism, though. I think we could use some good old hope. Sadly, idealism gets us nowhere if it doesn't come with a good dose of realism.

[hasselbrad]

Honestly, who the next president of the United States is matters very little. The K Street lobbyists still run the country. Of those left standing, McCain scares me the least. I'm not a fan of the whole amnesty deal, but like Ducks said, it may be the only reasonable way to deal with things at this point. I don't like anyone who talks about this "path to citizenship". One already exists. What these politicians are looking for is a shortcut to citizenship.
Obama would be next in line. I don't think anyone really knows enough about him to say whether or not he'd be a good president. He's a good speaker, but so was Clinton, and we're paying for that mistake right now.
I'm not sure which of Huckabee or Clinton scare me the most. Neither a right wing looney or a left wing socialist are particularly high on my list. It's kind of like choosing your own method of execution...hanging or guillotine? Either way, you'll probably lose contol of your bowels.
Whoever does get the Democratic nomination can go ahead and make plans for the oval office because I think Ron Paul is going to siphon off a substantial amount of the electorate (primarily Republicans) like Ross Perot did in 1992. He just doesn't talk as funny.

[duckula]

Originally Posted by Leonie

Sadly, idealism gets us nowhere if it doesn't come with a good dose of realism.

All too true. My real problem with Obama is not that he is idealistic, but that I'm not sure what he is idealistic about. He makes these great sounding speeches with long words (good) but after listening to him talk about change (sometimes good) I still have no idea what he wants to change (bad).

He is using the idea of a vision of the future without having one. It's 'I have a dream' without the rest of the speech. I cannot for the life of me remember a single policy initiative of his (and I do watch his speeches). If you want to see idealism done right, look at Bobby Kennedy.

[hasselbrad]

What I've seen of Obama is that he seems to think he can turn Washington D.C. on it's head. Shake things up. Problem is...

• K Street lobbyists wield the greatest influence
• Existing party divisions run deeper than ever
• Change for the sake of change isn't always a good thing

The last president who tried to "shake things up" had an Oliver Stone movie named after him. My greatest fear with Obama is that some racist crackpot (or group of crackpots) will attempt to assassinate him simply because of the color of his skin. Seriously...I have this little faith in my fellow man, and I have relatives, who it pains me to say, would probably celebrate this.

[Ranman]

Well it seems that the Democrats anti-christ has decided to get in the race. For those of you who may not know who " Ralph Nader " is, He is the reason we had 8 years of Bush, not 8 years of Gore. But the joke will be on Nader this time. The people who flocked to him back in 2000 are now in Obama's camp. So Ralph if you should some how read this I hope you spend your fortune on this election and after you lose, you are broke and have to eat out of mcdonald's garbage bins for giving us 8 years of bush.

[Digital_Ice]

so Nader is trying to get on the ballott... after most of the primarys have already gone? as a write in candidate? and how did that work out for him last time.

and ran... he wont go broke, he just wont pay up. doesnt he still owe god knows how much from the failed 2004 attempt?