Who's your candidate?

[The Barefoot Contess]

Here I have some questions for those is the US or with an interest in the next presidential elections:

1. Who would your favorite democrat candidate be?
2. Regardless of your personal taste, who would you pick if you could choose the democratic candidate (you can consider here who would have more chances, who would better serve causes you think are important, whatever...)?
3. Who would your favorite republican candidate be?
4. Regardless of your personal taste, who would you pick if you could choose the republican candidate (you can consider here who would have more chances, who would better serve causes you think are important, whatever...)?
5. If your favorites (questions 1 and 3) both got elected as presidential candidates, who would you vote for, and, who do you think would win?
6. If your more political, less passionate picks (questions 2 and 4) got elected as presidential candidates, who would you vote for, and who do think would win?

Feel free to comment on the reasons for your choices.

My picks:

1. Denis Kucinich
2. Hilary Clinton (and I don't like her, but I know she has a strong chance)
3. Ron Paul
4. Ron Paul
5. Kucinich / Paul
6. Clinton / Clinton

Check out this webpage is you want to see the candidate's positions (http://www.2decide.com/table.htm) and this one if you want to take a test and see which candidate is closer to your beliefs (http://www.dehp.net/candidate/index.php).

[the mage]

Touchy point to ask ppl how they vote......
How about a question of merits of candidates discussed not actual votes??

I'll stay quiet on that part as I'm a Canukistanian...

[The Barefoot Contess]

Maybe touchy, but I am not pointing a gun at anyone. Whoever wants to share their views can do it, and whoever doesn't, doesn't have to. And c'on, since when do we stick to the questions posted and do not fly off at a tangent? :rolleyes:

[Azrael]

Ron Paul.
Voted AGAINST the PATRIOT Act, The Iraq War resolution, and the amendment to ban gay marriage.
A lot of people don't like him because he's pro-life.
I myself try to avoid single issue bullshit.
Time to restore the Constitution.
Fight the power.

[darkeyes]

Karl Marx an Freddie Engels ticket...

Wots that..me aint merican an cant vote?? Huh?? They aint merican an cant stand?? Eh?? They dead??? Jeezzzzz... no sod tells me owt!!!:bigrin:

[The Barefoot Contess]

Karl Marx an Freddie Engels ticket...



Socialists of the world, unite! :grouphug: :)

[darkeyes]

Socialists of the world, unite! :grouphug: :)

Rite on Contess babes... u an me cud b rite gud m8s!!!:tong:

[ambi53mm]

1. Who would your favorite democrat candidate be?
2. Regardless of your personal taste, who would you pick if you could choose the democratic candidate (you can consider here who would have more chances, who would better serve causes you think are important, whatever...)?
3. Who would your favorite republican candidate be?
4. Regardless of your personal taste, who would you pick if you could choose the republican candidate (you can consider here who would have more chances, who would better serve causes you think are important, whatever...)?
5. If your favorites (questions 1 and 3) both got elected as presidential candidates, who would you vote for, and, who do you think would win?
6. If your more political, less passionate picks (questions 2 and 4) got elected as presidential candidates, who would you vote for, and who do think would win?



(1) Clinton
(2) Clinton
(3) Giuliani
(4) Giuliani
(5) Clinton,Clinton
(6) Clinton,Clinton

Ambi:)

[shameless agitator]

Edwards, but he's done a crash and burn
Obama. I think he's our best chance.
Giuliani as he's the least of the evils
Romney since he has a snowball's chance in hell.
Edwards
Obama.


My fear is it will wind up being Clinton v Giulliani, cause I'm not sure Clinton can win that race.

[ghytifrdnr]

I'm sure that most of the political/pundit class already have it decided to be a race between Clinton/Guiliani, with Clinton winning.

I read somewhere that the only Republican candidate who could possibly defeat Clinton would be Paul, but the establishment seems determined that he won't have the chance. But with the fantastic grassroots support Paul has, there could be an upset.

My favored ticket would be Paul/Kucinich, and I'd vote for Paul.

:2cents: :2cents:

[DiamondDog]

Ugh I really hope that snake Hillary doesn't win or even get on the ballot.

[Azrael]

Ugh I really hope that snake Hillary doesn't win or even get on the ballot.

I have no problem with a woman being president. I think that would be cool. Just not THIS ONE.

[shameless agitator]

Those last 2 posts illustrate perfectly why I'm afraid she would lose to Giulliani. We really need a viable socialist party.

[DiamondDog]

Those last 2 posts illustrate perfectly why I'm afraid she would lose to Giulliani. We really need a viable socialist party.

That's not going to happen, it would be a joke anyway. There is already a socialist party here and it's a joke!

Remember Ross Perot and Ralph Nader? 3rd Party Candidates are seen as a joke here and a socialist party would fail here in this country.

Also I don't care that Hillary is a woman but I don't think that she'd make a good president at all, and she's just like her husband who was a conservative in a democrat's clothing and very sneaky and into lying.

[citystyleguy]

1. Who would your favorite democrat candidate be? As a life long Democrat, John Edwards.

2. Regardless of your personal taste, who would you pick if you could choose the democratic candidate (you can consider here who would have more chances, who would better serve causes you think are important, whatever...)? No change here, John Edwards.


3. Who would your favorite republican candidate be? Never been given a reason to in all the elections I have voted in, and still haven't now! However, the only two Republican presidential candidates that I felt could deliver to the voter, would be Eisenhower and Goldwater, but unfortunately they are both dead!

4. Regardless of your personal taste, who would you pick if you could choose the republican candidate (you can consider here who would have more chances, who would better serve causes you think are important, whatever...)? Eisenhower!


5. If your favorites (questions 1 and 3) both got elected as presidential candidates, who would you vote for, and, who do you think would win? John Edwards; and Eisenhower.

6. If your more political, less passionate picks (questions 2 and 4) got elected as presidential candidates, who would you vote for, and who do think would win? See #5

[darkeyes]

That's not going to happen, it would be a joke anyway. There is already a socialist party here and it's a joke!

Remember Ross Perot and Ralph Nader? 3rd Party Candidates are seen as a joke here and a socialist party would fail here in this country.

Also I don't care that Hillary is a woman but I don't think that she'd make a good president at all, and she's just like her husband who was a conservative in a democrat's clothing and very sneaky and into lying.

Only a joke DD cos mosta u lot r so far up ya own booties politically yas afraid 2 stray outa the norm political alternatives... the US is essentially a bankrupt political system wich needs alternatives.. Dem or Repub it don reely matta..sumhow they hav it all stitched up an a democracy based on a 2 party system is hardly much betta an healthier than 1 wich is a single party one. Americans havta break free of ther straitjacket and begin 2 organise alternatives..sure me a socialist an hav a vested interest in cein socialism happen all ova the place..but do not believe in a state wer ther r hardly ne options from wich 2 choose, it is eitha wise or healthy. Politically americans seem 2 wanna b conservative an b safe, an not havta think 2 much bout wot is rong with ther democracy.

Me reads jus these forums alone ther r more political opinions an many wich r passionately held an well argued... knows this from elsewer in me life an from stuff me reads an c's happnin from afar sure, but its ther... within the Dem party for instance ther r peeps who reely r republicans in belief an philosophy an ther gut instinct an sympathy is ther.. equally there xist many peeps who r socialists in the true sensa the word. The republian arty has memebas an activists accross the political spectrum from progressive liberal 2 extreme and racist right. 2 me this shows sumthin..neva quite sure wot..but best me can make out is many political activists an even more so candidates r opportunist wen it cums 2 politics..2 few hav a passion or belief in ther own gut instinct an ther cause an so they chose wicheva party they think mite win in ne given area in hope of doin summat 2 eitha try an move along ther cause or further ther own ends... Plenty manage 2 succeed in the latter..the former? Anotha matta altogetha.. the principled gets swallowed up an eaten by the system.

It happens ere 2 DD..a lot..am not excusin it or bein holier than thou...but 2 nuthin like the same degree. At least activists tend 2 (tho ther r arseholes ther 2) b passionate an believe in the cause of the party of wich they r a memba an fite ther corner... jus a pity the arseholes they put ther faith in r opportunist unprincipled wankers jus a lil 2 often. Peeps join parties ere for many reasons but more so than in the US cos they believe in the general riteness of the party's philosophical an political stance. In the US this is much 2 broad 2 truly encourage eitha propa debate or allow for prinicple 2 b of ne gr8 value. It means true alternatives get subsumed an eliminated by party aparatchiks much more so than in otha countries. The two big parties wich run ya place from time 2 time do it 2 appeal 2 the broadest spectrum they can..happens ere an everywer else.. but by no stretch of imagination 2 the same degree. Thats wy we hav more political parties wiv a greater philosophical an political range than the US.. the electoral system don help,the winna takes all system helps crush the life outa true alternatives. In otha countries electoral system r fairer, mayb not ne more efficient, an often don do wotya wish, but at least peeps from minor parties, such as the socialist party hav sum chanca gettin elected a few peeps who hav a diff agenda fro the accepted norm an r not beholden 2 the big parties. Its by no means a panacea..but it dus create the conditions for alternatives 2 b allowed 2 begin 2 b discussed an helps peeps who hav beliefs diff from the bigger more established parties 2 have ther points aired an in time, who knows mayb even becum law. It dus create the conditions for the big parties 2 b truly challenged an ultimatley for lil parties 2 at east hav a chance 2 move forward... an who knows...by gettin peeps elected..stop bein that joke ya talk bout...

The electoral system of the US eliminates true debate an true democracy... it has grown up ova 2 hundred years an jus don allow ne 1 else 2 get a look in...thats wy in part the socialist party in america is that joke... wy all otha parties r a joke..its a sytem wich has stitched it up for 2 parties an forces peeps accross the political spectrum 2 get lost in the morass of ther organisations.. it means far 2 much that is gud gets lost in the morass of unprincipled manipulation by the party hierarchies..an so US "democracy" is morally bankrupt, an the US peeps as citizens of that "democracy" quite deliberately r disenfranchised by design... sure they get a vote.. but wtf they vote on wen it cums 2 election time??? Same old.... an it stinks...


An o yea fore me forgets.. politicians lie??? God..shockin... ya dus surprise me ther...

[12voltman59]

My favorite candidate is Joe Biden--he has a very no nonsense--get to the point way of talking and his ideas have more substance than most----realistically though--he polls so far down---he is not even on the radar screen. I do hope that perhaps he can pull a surprise and finish either on top or in the top three in the Iowa caucus then go on to to well in New Hampshire in order to stay in the race--hopefully he will stay in long enough for the Ohio Primary and I can vote for him then.

I am quesy about Hillary making it--if she does--two families, the Bushes and Clintons, will have controlled the presidency of this nation for nearly a quarter century---to me that is profoundly antithetical to the nature of the American system---we fought a revolution so that we would not have such a thing as that take place.

[wolfcamp]

I am not overly confident that the dems will win. The country is still pretty evenly divided between conservatives and everyone else.

My voting issues are primarily domestic, with healthcare being number one. Education is a major issue for me, especially higher ed. The global environment is my third highest priority. I put education ahead of the environment because I think education and research is the key to solving the environment problems. And along with the environment goes the search for new alternative energy sources.

What about the war and national security you ask? I'm getting so sick of hearing about Iraq I could spit. I say take care of our people at home. Yes, national security is a big issue, and we need to spend time and money on it, but let me put it this way, am I more likely to be killed by a terrorist attack, or to die from a common health problem because I can't afford to get a medical checkup? I think that's a no brainer. I have a higher chance of dying from the effects of second hand smoke than from dying in a terrorist attack.


I say get the f**k out of Iraq and get our health care crisis taken care of. Maybe health care isn't an issue for some of you because you have health benefits at work. You better hope to God that you keep your job, because I've got news for you, our health system sucks if you are on your own.

Who ever will do what I want will get my vote. I don't think it will be a Republican.



I'm sure that most of the political/pundit class already have it decided to be a race between Clinton/Guiliani, with Clinton winning.

I read somewhere that the only Republican candidate who could possibly defeat Clinton would be Paul, but the establishment seems determined that he won't have the chance. But with the fantastic grassroots support Paul has, there could be an upset.

My favored ticket would be Paul/Kucinich, and I'd vote for Paul.

:2cents: :2cents:

[wolfcamp]

Ugh I really hope that snake Hillary doesn't win or even get on the ballot.

Why? Just curious. Is it because she's a woman?

Personally, I think that ANYONE, man, woman or dog, would do a better job than the current president. Gawd, what a mess!!

[brunette]

hillary would cream giuliani. i think because of the current administration's actions and the movement toward a greener agenda, a democrat will win.

mccain doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell. he is the only candidate with actual first-hand military knowledge, but he has been too kind to bush. he stood by bush from day one, even after bush destroyed his character and credibility in the 2000 primaries. such mudslinging was disgraceful, and since then, bush has repeatedly bashed mccain, but he stood by the man with the 30% approval rating, and he will definitely be rewarded for his loyalty.

obama is weak. he is inexperienced, and his promises don't amount to enough change for most of the dem's preference.

ron paul might be a bit more liberal, but he's still a republican.

john edwards might be the best choice, but he's a male WASP, and we've been burned by a male WASP, so there's very little chance that he'll win.

the only platform that giuliani has is 9/11, and i promise you, after more than a year of hearing about it, even his 3rd wife won't vote for him. plus, the fire and police departments of new york have come out against him. plus plus, hillary, from arkansas, beat him for the senate seat in new york. tragic. :rolleyes:

and hillary, oh hillary. i was very young in arkansas when she was our first lady. we all knew that they were not faithful to each other, and no one cared here. they didn't even really make it a point to hide it. then he gets to the white house, and gets a little sloppy...hahaha.

i don't think hillary will make a bad president. i think she's going to have a hard time getting anything done, though. she likes to make it seem like she is more liberal than she is, but a liberal politician in the south is still conservative. she (like most of the other candidates) has refused over and over to give a solid answer on important issues such as gay marriage and abortion. bill instituted "don't ask, don't tell" in the military, and bush repealed it, what is she going to do now that we are hemorrhaging important personnel because of private sexual conduct that has nothing to do with their job? none of the dems have answered the really important questions one way or another.

personally, i'll vote for whichever candidate promises the current administration in handcuffs, and not the sexy kind, the ass-raping kind. where's al gore when you need him?

[brunette]

my personal favorite is kucinich, but he has a lot of work to do to catch up.

[DiamondDog]

Why? Just curious. Is it because she's a woman?

Personally, I think that ANYONE, man, woman or dog, would do a better job than the current president. Gawd, what a mess!!

No, read my previous replies.
It has nothing to do with her being a woman, it's because it's Hillary!
She's so bitchy, cold and conniving.
She can't even fake charisma like her husband could!

She and her husband say that they're democrats but they're really republicans and her husband didn't actually do anything that good as president, solve any real problems at all, and the gullible American public bought it all!

I don't support the war in Iraq but nobody seems to talk about Bill Clinton and the war in Yugoslavia or in Somalia. Or how he totally ignored the first terrorist attacks on the WTC when all of the information about it was there and we were fully aware of who did it and how.

Anyway, the president is just a figurehead. The real power lies in others in the government.

[Not2str8]

My hands-down favorite is Dennis Kucinich. His views most closely reflect my own. Of the candidates who actually stand a chance of winning, John Edwards would be my pick. His platform, if you will, is the closest one to FDR-style economic policies...the policies which practically created the middle class in this country, ushering in the greatest era of prosperity the U.S. has ever experienced, lasting until Reagan singlehandedly killed it. (Thanks Ronnie, enjoying your own special little corner of Hell ?)
On the Republican side.....you're kidding, right ?