Presidential Candidates

Yamagushi · Post by **Yamagushi** » Sun Jan 06, 2008 11:45 pm

noscottno wrote:I'm going with Obama.

-Experienced in Global Affairs
-Keeping nuclear power on the table
-Closing tax loopholes, and getting rid of unnecessary taxes.
-Some kind of legalization of immigrants who are already in the US.
-He has pledged to cut greenhouse gas emissions 80% below 1990 levels by creating a market-based cap-and-trade system
-Cutting down on the death penalty, but not abolishing it.

I agree with noscottno, Obama knows his shiat.

theycallmechad · Post by **theycallmechad** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 8:01 am

I have to say Mitt Romney 100%. I don't feel like I have to defend my decision on this. I think it should be quite obvious that he's the right guy. As far as which Democrat I think is the best (or not the worst, should a Democrat win), I'll have to go with "Not Hillary Clinton."

I think Huckabee is not a bad alternative to Romney, but he plays WAY too dirty for me.

Geo · Post by **Geo** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 8:58 am

How many people here are actually old enough to vote?

turk645 · Post by **turk645** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 9:42 am

I am but i wont just because technicly my vote doesnt matter, stupid electoral collage

SHOUTrvb · Post by **SHOUTrvb** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 10:29 am

Yamagushi wrote:I agree with noscottno, Obama knows his shiat.

Probably because he's so full of it. *funny drum tap* :p In all seriousness, not trying to start a flame fest, I don't think there's really a single candidate worth voting for. I'm still hoping someone new will pop up or the current ones will have a change of heart. However, the election is very close to my birthday, but it's still enough back to keep me from voting, so my opinion is only words at the moment.

GametagAeonFlux · Post by **GametagAeonFlux** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 11:13 am

iGeo wrote:How many people here are actually old enough to vote?

I am, and I really have no idea who I'm gonna vote for.

Yamagushi · Post by **Yamagushi** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 11:16 am

iGeo wrote:How many people here are actually old enough to vote?

I am.

Evan · Post by **Evan** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 12:33 pm

I'm not yet. But when I can I will probably only vote a couple times in my lifetime, when there are some really good candidates.

MrBalll · Post by **MrBalll** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 2:56 pm

I'm old enough, but like GTAF I have no idea who I will vote for.

G.I.R. · Post by **G.I.R.** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 3:01 pm

MrBalll wrote:I'm old enough, but like GTAF I have no idea who I will vote for.

John Edwards. If he drops out though, then it'll probably be between Obama and Clinton. I think you know the lesser of two evils.

shadowkhas · Post by **shadowkhas** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 5:26 pm

turk645 wrote:I am but i wont just because technicly my vote doesnt matter, stupid electoral collage

This is the problem with American voting.

theycallmechad wrote:I have to say Mitt Romney 100%. I don't feel like I have to defend my decision on this. I think it should be quite obvious that he's the right guy.

No...it's not obvious. :/

And no, I won't be old enough to vote, but should that stop me from being involved?

WaywornMmmmm · Post by **WaywornMmmmm** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 5:36 pm

shadowkhas wrote: And no, I won't be old enough to vote, but should that stop me from being involved?

I remember last presidential election, we had to do a bunch of current events on the candidates. I hope that I will at least have a good understanding of the candidates this year, and can keep that when I'm old enough to vote.

Cuda · Post by **Cuda** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 5:46 pm

I have decided who I'm voting for.

That one guy with the Red, White, and Blue Tie. Fuck the Dems, and Fuck the Reps, I'm going 3rd. Just looking into the dirty stuff they do to get a one up over the opposition is just lame that they need to do such thing. To have a person devoted within each party headquarters digging up material about the candidates. It just totally makes me not want to vote for them. To me, it's a sign that they don't believe strongly enough in what they are doing, but instead have to knock the opposition to say a few people. Do I want someone with such a lack of Self confidence leading my country? Absolutely not. I hope that they have the intestinal fortitude to run a straight up campaign without smearing each other.

HPDarkness · Post by **HPDarkness** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 6:11 pm

I would like either Kucinich, or Guiliani. I think they are both strong leaders, they can both get their jobs done. I would like to at least see Kucinich as a vice president.

Some of my relatives are voting for Obama, or Clinton. I personally don't like them.

Evan · Post by **Evan** » Mon Jan 07, 2008 6:23 pm

Cuda wrote:I have decided who I'm voting for.

That one guy with the Red, White, and Blue Tie. *** the Dems, and *** the Reps, I'm going 3rd. Just looking into the dirty stuff they do to get a one up over the opposition is just lame that they need to do such thing. To have a person devoted within each party headquarters digging up material about the candidates. It just totally makes me not want to vote for them. To me, it's a sign that they don't believe strongly enough in what they are doing, but instead have to knock the opposition to say a few people. Do I want someone with such a lack of Self confidence leading my country? Absolutely not. I hope that they have the intestinal fortitude to run a straight up campaign without smearing each other.

That's politics for you.

Kirk · Post by **Kirk** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 12:22 am

I'll be old enough by the time the election comes around.

As for who to vote for... I have no idea.

metkillerjoe · Post by **metkillerjoe** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 3:19 am

I will be 18 next October, and I live in MA.

.. damn.

Tural · Post by **Tural** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 7:13 am

theycallmechad wrote:I think Huckabee is not a bad alternative to Romney, but he plays WAY too dirty for me.

I really hate starting this, but I need to say it.

Romney has been the one continuously making negative campaign ads, distorting Huckabee's intentions and utilizing misleading numbers to try to persuade voters away from him. Huckabee was provoked several times before making any retaliatory response to such ads.

theycallmechad · Post by **theycallmechad** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 8:18 am

There's more than just that. I personally don't dislike the so-called "negative adds" because I feel that information needs shared. I think Romney, McCain, and the rest of them need to answer for the negativities in their record. I personally do not like much of what is in Romney's record (his previous stance on abortion, for one), but I think his good points outweigh the bad points. If a candidate isn't going to talk about their negative points themselves, I have no issue with other candidates bringing them up, so long as they are honest, well-documented, and not PERSONAL. At the debate Sunday, both McCain and Huckabee failed to answer when asked by the moderator whether or not the Romney adds were in any way false.

As for the dirty Huckabee playing:
Let's see, where do I begin? I take these attacks more personally than do most of you because I myself a member ofThe Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. A few weeks before Thanksgiving, the Huckabee camp somehow obtained the list of Romney supporters in Iowa. With this list, they made phone calls to the supporters acting as if they were taking a random survey from the Romney camp. They asked a few of the usual questions, and then proceeded to bash Romney for his religion by feeding them "Anti-Mormon" lies (and there's PLENTY of it out there, for some reason) to try to get them to re-think their support of a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. It worked. You didn't hear about this because Mitt Romney decided not to make this public. He was making an issue of the other candidates records in government, excluding things personal. How do I know about this? My wife's best friend is an employee of Mitt Romney. She personally took many a phone call from concerned Romney supporters.

The second thing he did that really turned me away from him was, using this same list, send each Romney supporter a lovely Christmas card. On the card was a picture of the nearby Mormon temple and a few quotes from the Book of Mormon, each taken horribly out of context. The goal? Trying to make voters once again feel weary about electing a "Mormon" for the presidency. Now why would an Evangelical preacher make attacks against Mormons, specifically a Mormon candidate? Shame on his record being a Mormon!

The final thing that I thought was just the low of the lows came on the day of the elections. With the same list mentioned above, phone calls were made to the Romney supporters (now a smaller number, thanks to the previous personal attacks) telling them where to vote. What's wrong with this, though? Well, they gave them the wrong place to vote to try to keep them from voting at all. This attack isn't new (it's been used in many Presidential races before), but it's low nonetheless.

As far as why I support Romney:

-I believe Abortion is evil. I dare anybody here to look me face-to-face, my wife being almost 9 months pregnant, and tell me that our little girl in her womb isn't a human being. I dare you to tell me my wife has the right to murder her. She has a personality, she interacts with us as we touch her, she gets upset at her hiccoughs, and has for many months. Though she has yet to be born, she is very much a part of our family. I love her and can't wait to see her face for the first time here in a couple weeks.

-I believe the borders should be closed. Our economy is in danger, and 11 million people leaching off our economy, making tax-free money and taking jobs of Americans does nothing but economical damage. I see and recognize the important role of immigration, but it needs to be done LEGALLY as my progenitors did. I'm not a racist, I'm a supporter of the law.

-As mentioned above, I bleieve our economy is in danger, and needs help. I believe Mitt Romney is the person to do that. He has had the experience in this area that the other candidates haven't had (not to say that they wouldn't do well, I just don't think they will do AS well).

-Another reason I support him, though, is because I believe he's a genuinely good guy. Though I don't know him personally, my brother is good friends with his sons (the ones you hear about on TV who are wicked preaching the Word of God on a mission like Elder King instead of going to war), and they are great people. It's clear that they had a great upbringing with great parents.

-I can keep going, but I'm honestly sick of writing. I really didn't feel I had to explain myself, but here is some of it anyway. Few people here are Republicans, so it's almost like I'm typing this to myself.

Tural · Post by **Tural** » Tue Jan 08, 2008 11:52 am

theycallmechad wrote:I dare anybody here to look me face-to-face, my wife being almost 9 months pregnant, and tell me that our little girl in her womb isn't a human being.

That's a loaded statement on every count. First of all, a proper abortion regulation would exempt situations such as that, where the fetus has developed past a certain stage. Second of all, you're bringing immense subjectivity into what should be an objective discussion.

The think with Huckabee's campaign workers I was unaware of, so thank you for stating it. However, to ignore Romney's blatant ads degrading Huckabee at every opportunity is absurd.

As for the party affiliation, I am an independent. I test out almost dead-center on political analyses, so don't jump the gun and think your statements fall of deaf ears. By all means, I would support a Republican for any economic benefit, or for national security, and I'd support a Democrat for something such as abortion. My largest issue with typical Republican candidates is religion. They all focus so much on the religion, and they continuously say their morals are based on such. That's fine, but a presidential race should have NOTHING to do with religion, and it should not come up anywhere in discussions. The religious aspect of the race is so important in America though, that so many issues are just based on religion alone. Abortion and gay rights are prime examples. You try to tell me that neither of these, in a presidential setting, are directly and blatantly related to the candidate's religious views. I want a president who doesn't need his religion to make decisions for him, and thus I will side with a Democrat who will speak objectively, leaving their religion out of their argument, on most issues like those stated. Religion is the breaking point for me in politics. The two should not be so closely tied together, and it pisses me off that I have to hear about it when making a decision. I think in this election, what we need is a Democrat for citizens, one who will establish a superior health care system than our current, and other such issues. Unify the people by satisfying them. From there, we would work with a Republican to secure the borders and rebuild the economy. You can't accomplish anything unless the people want to be a part of it. To be perfectly honest, I think it's God damn fucking retarded that the political system is so broken in the United States that we shut out any independent candidate. The partisanship is ruining the electoral process, and it has been for a while. I'd side with Obama and Giuliani on each side, as they are the most moderate of their party. Obama has mentioned looking to Republicans as potential cabinet members, which is what would be the absolute best right now, to have a divided cabinet where both sides can be viewed. Obama is the biggest candidate for ending the partisanship of the political system, and thus gets my support.