Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 8:04 pm Posts: 5300 Location: upstate NY Gender: Male
I realize its a little early to be thinking about this, but its somewhat diffiicult to not think about getting a new President when W is in the White House. Who would you all like to see win the Presidential Election in 2008.
My (realistic) choice would be Russ Feingold, Democratic Senator from Wisconsin. (My non-realistic choice would be Howard Zinn.) Feingold was the only Senator to vote against the Patriot Act when it was first up for a vote, and voted agasint it again with 9 other Senators this year. He's a real stand-up guy, returning his pay raises to the Treasury every year because he doesnt think its fair that Senators can vote themselves pay raises. He voted against going into Iraq, and was the first person in Washington to suggest setting a timeline to get out of there by the end of this year. He's anti-death penalty, pro-choice, and has a good record involving the environment. He's the guy that proposed the censure of the President.
Unfortunately, he is also a twice-divorced Jew, not very electable.
I don't like Hilary, because she seems to me to be way too much of a self-promoting politician.
Republicans I could deal with include McCain, and in some ways, Arlen Specter.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:14 am Posts: 37778 Location: OmaGOD!!! Gender: Male
The Argonaut wrote:
I realize its a little early to be thinking about this, but its somewhat diffiicult to not think about getting a new President when W is in the White House. Who would you all like to see win the Presidential Election in 2008.
My (realistic) choice would be Russ Feingold, Democratic Senator from Wisconsin. (My non-realistic choice would be Howard Zinn.) Feingold was the only Senator to vote against the Patriot Act when it was first up for a vote, and voted agasint it again with 9 other Senators this year. He's a real stand-up guy, returning his pay raises to the Treasury every year because he doesnt think its fair that Senators can vote themselves pay raises. He voted against going into Iraq, and was the first person in Washington to suggest setting a timeline to get out of there by the end of this year. He's anti-death penalty, pro-choice, and has a good record involving the environment. He's the guy that proposed the censure of the President. Unfortunately, he is also a twice-divorced Jew, not very electable.
I don't like Hilary, because she seems to me to be way too much of a self-promoting politician.
Republicans I could deal with include McCain, and in some ways, Arlen Specter.
Who do you all like/dislike?
Feingold would also be my number one choice. If people got to know what he's about, they'd love him as much as the people of Wisconsin do. Kerry got less than 50% of the vote in 2004 in Wisconsin, Feingold pulled 59%. The moderates in Wisconsin know that he's not a left-wing wacko, if he can get his TRUE message out to the rest of the country, he'd have a chance.
The list of reasons why I'll never vote for Hillary grows with each passing month it seems.
I'm growing more disenchanted with McCain, and Specter isn't going to run. He's in his late 70's and has survived cancer at least twice. McCain is almost too old at this point himself.
Bammer wrote:
Ahnold.
Not sure if you were being serious, but that's uncahnstitutionul.
_________________ Unfortunately, at the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius, the Flower Children jerked off and went back to sleep.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:35 am Posts: 1311 Location: Lexington
tommymctom wrote:
I still want to see a Kerry/McCain split-ticket. Nobody could take those two down.
I sure as could. McCain's got my vote. I could also stomach Feingold.
I will under no circumstances vote for a ticket including any of the follwoing: Bill Frist
Hillary Clinton
John Kerry
Tom Daschele
Joe Biden
Newt Gingrich
George Allen
Dennis Kucinich
or my current boss who will remain nameless.
_________________
punkdavid wrote:
Make sure to bring a bottle of vitriol. And wear a condom so you don't insinuate her.
I realize its a little early to be thinking about this, but its somewhat diffiicult to not think about getting a new President when W is in the White House. Who would you all like to see win the Presidential Election in 2008.
My (realistic) choice would be Russ Feingold, Democratic Senator from Wisconsin. (My non-realistic choice would be Howard Zinn.) Feingold was the only Senator to vote against the Patriot Act when it was first up for a vote, and voted agasint it again with 9 other Senators this year. He's a real stand-up guy, returning his pay raises to the Treasury every year because he doesnt think its fair that Senators can vote themselves pay raises. He voted against going into Iraq, and was the first person in Washington to suggest setting a timeline to get out of there by the end of this year. He's anti-death penalty, pro-choice, and has a good record involving the environment. He's the guy that proposed the censure of the President. Unfortunately, he is also a twice-divorced Jew, not very electable.
I don't like Hilary, because she seems to me to be way too much of a self-promoting politician.
Republicans I could deal with include McCain, and in some ways, Arlen Specter.
Who do you all like/dislike?
Feingold would also be my number one choice. If people got to know what he's about, they'd love him as much as the people of Wisconsin do. Kerry got less than 50% of the vote in 2004 in Wisconsin, Feingold pulled 59%. The moderates in Wisconsin know that he's not a left-wing wacko, if he can get his TRUE message out to the rest of the country, he'd have a chance.
The list of reasons why I'll never vote for Hillary grows with each passing month it seems.
I'm growing more disenchanted with McCain, and Specter isn't going to run. He's in his late 70's and has survived cancer at least twice. McCain is almost too old at this point himself.
Bammer wrote:
Ahnold.
Not sure if you were being serious, but that's uncahnstitutionul.
As much as I like Feingold, i think the tide would have to turn so far left in this country, and i just dont feel like that is possible.
Hillary, absolutely not, for no other reason then she would be an easy target for teh right.
Biden is running, but he is one of those lifer carbon copy senators and I think he would really have to step outside of Washington and WOW us to get the vote.
I would like to see someone come in pushing the environment, but with Iraq, and now Iran + the border issue, we can kiss any concern for the environment good bye.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:47 am Posts: 46000 Location: Reasonville
deathbyflannel wrote:
tommymctom wrote:
I still want to see a Kerry/McCain split-ticket. Nobody could take those two down.
I sure as could. McCain's got my vote. I could also stomach Feingold.
I will under no circumstances vote for a ticket including any of the follwoing: Bill Frist Hillary Clinton John Kerry Tom Daschele Joe Biden Newt Gingrich George Allen Dennis Kucinich or my current boss who will remain nameless.
so you'd vote for nader?!
_________________ No matter how dark the storm gets overhead They say someone's watching from the calm at the edge What about us when we're down here in it? We gotta watch our backs
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:35 am Posts: 1311 Location: Lexington
corduroy_blazer wrote:
deathbyflannel wrote:
tommymctom wrote:
I still want to see a Kerry/McCain split-ticket. Nobody could take those two down.
I sure as could. McCain's got my vote. I could also stomach Feingold.
I will under no circumstances vote for a ticket including any of the follwoing: Bill Frist Hillary Clinton John Kerry Tom Daschele Joe Biden Newt Gingrich George Allen Dennis Kucinich or my current boss who will remain nameless.
so you'd vote for nader?!
If my only options include the aforementioned individuals, possibly. Though thats only if I feel he has a chance of making an impact, if im throwing my vote away im throwing it Libertarian.
_________________
punkdavid wrote:
Make sure to bring a bottle of vitriol. And wear a condom so you don't insinuate her.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 1:14 am Posts: 37778 Location: OmaGOD!!! Gender: Male
deathbyflannel wrote:
corduroy_blazer wrote:
deathbyflannel wrote:
tommymctom wrote:
I still want to see a Kerry/McCain split-ticket. Nobody could take those two down.
I sure as could. McCain's got my vote. I could also stomach Feingold.
I will under no circumstances vote for a ticket including any of the follwoing: Bill Frist Hillary Clinton John Kerry Tom Daschele Joe Biden Newt Gingrich George Allen Dennis Kucinich or my current boss who will remain nameless.
so you'd vote for nader?!
If my only options include the aforementioned individuals, possibly. Though thats only if I feel he has a chance of making an impact, if im throwing my vote away im throwing it Libertarian.
Yeah, I pretty much agree with this sentiment. I don't know all what I'd do, but I'm reasonably sure that if Hillary is the Dem nominee, I will vote Libertarian. Arizona is a state that could conceivably go Libertarian if the GOP fucks up enough and then nominates some complete dickweed. So I wouldn't feel like I was totally throwing my vote away.
_________________ Unfortunately, at the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius, the Flower Children jerked off and went back to sleep.
Unfortunately, I see nothing promising on either sides. It appears that a Hillary vs. McCain matchup is in the making, and can't stand either of them. And just because they are fucking what is the wind blowin' today politicians.
On the right, there's nothing. Gulian has zero national appeal and would never win. Nobody else has any sort of name recognition.
I don't see the left sitting to pretty either. You have Hillary, who'd never win for various reasons, and then what? Kerry again? Gore? The left will have a hard time putting up someone that can shake the stigma of being a hard liberal in order to appeal to those voters that you all dread. The religious middle class.
Either way, I see the 2008 president as being wishy washy either way. Sort of another Clinton, except perhaps a little more to the right if the Republican wins. And that's something we don't need.
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 1:54 am Posts: 7189 Location: CA
LittleWing wrote:
Either way, I see the 2008 president as being wishy washy either way. Sort of another Clinton, except perhaps a little more to the right if the Republican wins. And that's something we don't need.
I feel that saxaphone playing and scandals involving the definition of "is" are exactly what this country needs.
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 12:35 am Posts: 1311 Location: Lexington
LittleWing wrote:
Unfortunately, I see nothing promising on either sides. It appears that a Hillary vs. McCain matchup is in the making, and can't stand either of them. And just because they are fucking what is the wind blowin' today politicians.
Either way, I see the 2008 president as being wishy washy either way. Sort of another Clinton, except perhaps a little more to the right if the Republican wins. And that's something we don't need.
Just to play devils advocate, why shouldn't politicians mold their positions to represent the views of the voters? Is that not their purpose?
Secondly, you dont want the country leaning more the right? Really? LW?
_________________
punkdavid wrote:
Make sure to bring a bottle of vitriol. And wear a condom so you don't insinuate her.
Either way, I see the 2008 president as being wishy washy either way. Sort of another Clinton, except perhaps a little more to the right if the Republican wins. And that's something we don't need.
I feel that saxaphone playing and scandals involving the definition of "is" are exactly what this country needs.
I feel our country needs some backbone in the whitehouse, and not in the Bush sort of way.
Quote:
Just to play devils advocate, why shouldn't politicians mold their positions to represent the views of the voters? Is that not their purpose? - deathbyflannel
Absolutely fucking not. That is weakness. I believe that the people we elect should genuinely believe in what they represent. I believe they should be honest and genuine. To me, that is what makes a good leader. I believe that leaders should be more authoratitive than democratic. And what I mean is, we should elect them on what they believe. We should pick who represents us. Then, once they are there, they stand up for what they believe. I don't think there are too many times when a politician should say, "well guys, what do you want me to do on this issue?" If the politician doesn't represent you, well, that's why you just vote them out in the next election. I don't think I could vote for someone who was going to represent ideals that they didn't believe in.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum