2008 Presidential Election: You Decide!

[WorthyStevens]

 

[Asteroid-Man]

Chris Rock. Remember Head of State?!

 

[Addendum]

 

[Warhammer]

For '08.

 

[Deleted User]

MORGAN FREEMAN!!!

Oh, and being from Iowa.. I can safely say Vilsack is never going to even get a total of 3 votes.

 

[Matt]

Mark Warner or Bill Richardson. Richardson is unlikely. He would make a great president, but he is the definition of unelectable.

 

[Eros]

Well, Guys who do you want to win? Personally I want Barack Obama.
Lets here who you want to win and why, or who you don't want to win XDD.

hes not even gonna run, besides his name sounds like he could be a terroist.

 

[Deleted User]

hes not even gonna run, besides his name sounds like he could be a terroist.

How do you know he's not going to run?

And not voting someone into office because of their name is just.. stupid. In every sense of the word.

 

[Ben Urich]

 

[Noir]

hes not even gonna run, besides his name sounds like he could be a terroist.

Actually he said he was thinking very hard about running.

 

[Matt]

I can't even begin to point out whats wrong with this post, so I'm just going to go through it bit by bit.

i want mccain or gulliani as vice pres. i think their smart but too in independent to get anything done.

So apparently not allowing the major parties to think for you is a sin in the world of politics?

aside from the fact that i think he just looks like a president should look (not stupid like bush, not sleazy like clinton)

Its nice to know, we live in a country where every child knows they could grow up to be president.....so long as they are a white male, with a chizzled jaw, and hair that is slightly gray around the temples.

hes the best governor massachusetts has had in a long ass time

Not hard considering who you guys elect...for godsakes, Ted Kennedy is STILL in office...AFTER THE DRUNK DRIVING MANSLAUGHTER THING!

and his recent fundraiser for his "potential" run got 6.5 million in donations.....aka 6 times what gulliani and mccains fundraisers got them.

Well by god, the fact that he can get other rich white people to write him a check shows that he is clearly our only choice for leader of the free world.

-balanced what was horrendous budget for mass
-ceo of extrenmely successful 2002 winter olympics, which were 380 million in debt when he came on board. after the games, they were 100 million in the black and thats AFTER he had to work an additional 300 million for extra security with the samer amount of money due to 9/11

I'll concede that he is good fiscally.

-has 5 kids n 10 grand kids

I'm not really sure how this effects what kind of president he would make.

-is 59

Umm, k? The requirement is 35, clearly you were pointing out that he exceeds that...I think.

-attended stanford university
-mba from harvard business school
-j.d. from harvard law school
-graduated *** laude from hardvard law school

I should hope a former CEO, governor, and Presidential candidate is smart...then again, look at Bush.

-only person to come close to over taking ted kennedys seat for senate in mass and that was with half of the marketing budget

Come close? He lost by 20 percent.

-his wife, anne, has multiple scurlosis****

Again, what the hell does this have to do with his being president?

-suports iraw war

A war that there is now a general consensus that we need to get the **** out of?

-compares himseld(and is compared to) often to ronald reagon in terms of charisma and politcal views (cept romney wont rob you of your money)

Why is every neo-con looking for the next Reagan? Reagan was at best an average president.

basically he is a very smart and nice guy whose extremely good with money and organizing.

Really? Have you met him personally, because all reports that aren't released from his campaign staff say he is a grade A, ass hole.

-served as a mormon missionary, so you know his values are true

And those values are having multiple wives. But seriously, who gives a **** if a guy is religious? How does it effect his ability to run a country?

All that being said though, Romney will likely get the Republican nomination provided a skeleton doesn't come out of his closet, and as long as the Democrats do an O.K. job with Congress, Romney's nomination will guaruntee them the White House, whoever they run.

 

[Noir]

SON OF JOR EL, KNEEL BEFORE ZOD!

 

[Matt]

Fred Willard truly is the king of kings.

 

[Ben Urich]

Fred Willard truly is the king of kings.

You're damn right he is.
Oh, and pretty sweet ownage up there.

 

[Noir]

Looks like Obama is winning XDDD.. can you say "LEGALIZED IT."

 

[Matt]

You're damn right he is.
Oh, and pretty sweet ownage up there.

Someone had to do it

But after reading it six times, I still don't get what the **** he was going for with this

-his wife, anne, has multiple scurlosis****

.....Really, what the **** does that have to do with why the man should be president?

 

[Ben Urich]

Sympathy vote?

 

[NewYorkSpider]

Robin Williams aka Tom Dobbs

 

[Matt]

Looks like Obama is winning XDDD.. can you say "LEGALIZED IT."

Obama is winning right now for 2 reasons...

1) He is topical
2) He is black

It sounds bad, but that really is the only reason he is doing so well in the polls. So far his senate career has consisted of nothing. Sure, he did good in the Illinois State Assembly, but that really has nothing to do with running a country. Obama will be this election's Howard Dean where he garners an unbelievable ammount of visible supporters, but does poorly in the Iowa Caucus, thus destroying his hopes for the presidency.

Who would've predicted Bill Clinton, a nobody Governor of Arkansaw would win? Who would've said 4 years ago, John Kerry would run in 2004? No one. If Mark Warner runs, he will take it. Why?

1) He is charasmatic
2) He is white (Its sad, but that is how our political climate is right now).
3) He is actually more qualified than any of the other contenders (although that has very little to do with why he will win, see 1 and 2)

 

[Fran]

Hopefully Obama doesn't ruin his chances by doing a
"BYAH!!!" type speech.

 

[Deleted User]

Why is every neo-con looking for the next Reagan? Reagan was at best an average president.

That's the only thing I have a problem with. Reagan was a very good president. He was no FDR, he wasn't a George Washington, but he was still a great president. He pulled the nation out of an economic downturn by instituting his idea of supply-side economics, and he was a down-to-earth president who knew his people. He also helped to bring an end to the Cold War after Ford had made the first steps towards a resolution there.

 

[Matt]

That's the only thing I have a problem with. Reagan was a very good president. He was no FDR, he wasn't a George Washington, but he was still a great president. He pulled the nation out of an economic downturn by instituting his idea of supply-side economics, and he was a down-to-earth president who knew his people. He also helped to bring an end to the Cold War after Ford had made the first steps towards a resolution there.

Reagan didn't try to end the Cold War, things like his "Star Wars Initiative" (which also shows how down to earth he was) show quite the contrary. If anything, Reagan was trying to instigate the Cold War as it was dying down so he could play the "Cold Warrior" card. He was trying to make Americans very Commies again. Reagan did not end the Cold War. The Soviets ended the Cold War by self destructing (make no mistake about it, be it Reagan or Mondale in the Oval Office, the Soviet Union would've still fallen).

As for Supply-Side economics, it, like many of Reagan's policy's (Iran Contra, arming radical Islams to fight the Soviets, namely Al-Queda) is only good in the short term and cripples us in the future.

 

[Noir]

.....Really, what the **** does that have to do with why the man should be president?

What if America started to shake violently and twitch.. then it started to lose its memory and get double vision? What about when it starts losing its balance all the time? Exactly.. We'd a man who has training in that field! Thats why its important..

 

[Deleted User]

Reagan didn't try to end the Cold War, things like his "Star Wars Initiative" (which also shows how down to earth he was) show quite the contrary. If anything, Reagan was trying to instigate the Cold War as it was dying down so he could play the "Cold Warrior" card. He was trying to make Americans very Commies again. Reagan did not end the Cold War. The Soviets ended the Cold War by self destructing (make no mistake about it, be it Reagan or Mondale in the Oval Office, the Soviet Union would've still fallen).

As for Supply-Side economics, it, like many of Reagan's policy's (Iran Contra, arming radical Islams to fight the Soviets, namely Al-Queda) is only good in the short term and cripples us in the future.

How did SDI show the opposite? SDI was a program to research into setting up an anti-missile system that could protect the USA from attack. How is that trying to instigate anything? I never said Reagan ended the Cold War, but he helped to bring about the quickened close of the Cold War.

I never remember Reagan ever giving a speech where he pleaded with the American people to hate the Soviets. If anything, he was just continuing the American policy of prevention, so as to halt the progress of the Soviet's "Iron Curtain". The guy was just trying to halt the increasing power of the Soviets, and that helped bring to Cold War to a close. Like it or not, he helped to stunt the influence of the Soviets which ultimately was a large plus for us.

And supply-side economics hurt us in the future? How has it hurt us so far? I don't see any major inflation or economic downturn since Reagan pulled us back out of a recession. If you're talking about the National Debt, the honor of it's large increase belongs to Bush, not Reagan.

Neither would have Reagan's supporting of the middle-eastern movement to stop the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan hurt us if it weren't for leaders today. Reagan didn't start the problems in the Middle East. The succeeding presidents did, and his support of the Muslim groups trying to expel an invasion would not have hurt us in the future if it weren't for our piss-poor foreign policy.

Sure, you can blame Reagan all you want. But he didn't have any hand in the political stratosphere after he left office. And that's a good, long 16-17 years. What he did was curb Soviet expansion, think about the protection of this country (SDI) and help a struggling economy get back on it's feet. You should remember him for what he did, not what happened afterwards because of some other jackasses who were in power.

 

[CConn]

Rudy Giuliani.

It's not gonna happen, though.