2008 Presidential Candidates

[Stunt]

Are you guys watching all the candidates or are there a couple who have caught your eye? Who are you watching and why do you find them appealing in these early stages?

Obama - A fresh face not tied to too much of the partisan crap in DC; seen him on many occasions try to work with both sides to come to a consensus. Seems a little green and don't think he can fend off the more experienced campaigners; but i will give him the benifit of the doubt. He's a little liberal for my liking but he talks of small government principles, and he seriously condemns the pork spending and lobbying. (which i think is a core problem in DC)

Richardson - An underdog of sorts, can appeal to southern voters which will be needed for a democrat win. Has a long history of being a pragmatic focusing on the end result and not the divisive issues that flood the policitcal campaigns. His record as governor of new mexico seems impressive; I've always favoured leaders on the state level as they have experience operating a whole jurisdiction instead of wheeling and dealing partisan bills.

Paul - He's probably the most similar to my views; al though some of his ideas are a little out there (being a strict libertarian). I like his anti-war and non-social agenda; something I really hate about the Republican party (speaking out against evolution and roe v. wade just to get votes is pathetic). He is an outsider and has always voted on principle, he doesn't pander to popular opinon nor does he pull the Republican line. He is a true pragmatic, not to mention intelligent and embodies what most americans stand for.

Giuliani - Another high profile candidate, other than his pro-war and terrorism views, he and I are on the similar wavelengths. I like how he has the balls to stand up to the religious right and state that he is pro-choice. He didn't cover up his donations to planned perenthood and has been honest with American voters. I'm hoping that the Democrats and Republicans can clean up the Iraq mess before another candidate takes over, as i don't think Rudy would do a good job cleaning things up. Again, he's another Republican outsider and after the last 8 years we need someone with half a brain to stand up and make some major changes.

 

[THUGSROOK]

Ron Paul

most are just more of the same bought and paid for neo-con nwo terrorists.

 

[blackangst1]

Rudy and Mitt. Although not one candidate has all my important issue's covered, these two are the closest.

I sure wish the Dems could put someone worthwhile into the mix so I can vote for my own party

 

[mwtgg]

See sig.

 

[Lemon law]

Turns out there was an article on yahoo news saying Rudy is doing so much consulting for clients before Federal agencies that he is going to have some serious conflict of interest problems soon.

The candidate I would like to see run is Chuck Hagel.

But way too early to worry about 08 yet. Many of the front runners will kill themselves off.

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Rudy and Mitt. Although not one candidate has all my important issue's covered, these two are the closest.

I sure wish the Dems could put someone worthwhile into the mix so I can vote for my own party

What?
:shocked:

 

[dualsmp]

Ron Paul.

 

[ProfJohn]

I think Obama mania is going to die a painful death before to long. He has been making a lot of mistakes and people are going to see those mistakes as a sign of inexperience.

Hillary could have similar problems in that she has not campaigned a lot for herself. When she is forced to talk without a script she can make mistakes.

I am still waiting for Newt or Thompson. We need a good conservative in the race so we don?t have to ?settle? for a semi-conservative as we did with Bush and look at what that got us.
I think Newt would be great for the ?race? because he talks ideology and very few others do that.

 

[mwtgg]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I think Obama mania is going to die a painful death before to long. He has been making a lot of mistakes and people are going to see those mistakes as a sign of inexperience.

Hillary could have similar problems in that she has not campaigned a lot for herself. When she is forced to talk without a script she can make mistakes.

I am still waiting for Newt or Thompson. We need a good conservative in the race so we don?t have to ?settle? for a semi-conservative as we did with Bush and look at what that got us.
I think Newt would be great for the ?race? because he talks ideology and very few others do that.

I'd take a constructionist over a conservative any day of the week.

 

[dyn2nvu]

http://2008central.net/?p=632

They asked Anthony to suggest a one-time consulting fee in exchange for turning the profile over to the Obama camp. After calculating the time he put into the profile, Anthony requested $39,000 plus the sharing of any fees the campaign paid to MySpace up to $10,000.

The 160,000 friends associated with Anthony?s original profile will be transferred over to a replacement profile (once Anthony determines what that will be); today, Anthony?s former profile now in control of the Obama campaign, has 18,000 friends.

The campaign shelled out nearly $500,000 to A.B. Data for marketing services (mailings, lists, etc..) and $127,000 to LSG Strategies for grassroots organizing. I wonder how much A.B. Data or LSG Strategies would have charged for a project as large as Anthony?s profile had gotten (and the years of maintaining it).

 

[Genx87]

Ron Paul, from what I have heard, I like. I am also watching him because imo the MSM will censor him.

Fred Thompson interests me as well, though I heard he was diagnosed with cancer and may not be running?

 

[Pabster]

Obama. I think he's going to pull the upset on Billary yet.

Or he could just be a decoy to get the focus off her. I'm beginning to think this is plausible.

Ron Paul doesn't stand a chance, and neither does Fred Thompson. They both speak too bluntly and upset too many of the base to ever win the nomination.

And I don't see Newt entering the race, either.

 

[LLCOOLJ]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Rudy and Mitt. Although not one candidate has all my important issue's covered, these two are the closest.

I sure wish the Dems could put someone worthwhile into the mix so I can vote for my own party

Mitt won't win as the Fundamentalists won't vote for someone that belongs to another cult.

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Rudy and Mitt. Although not one candidate has all my important issue's covered, these two are the closest.

I sure wish the Dems could put someone worthwhile into the mix so I can vote for my own party

Rudy and Mitt are your closest? How so?
That's as good as saying Dennis Kucinich and Sam Brownback are your closest.

 

[K1052]

There are a couple candidates I like more but I'd have to say I keep the closest tabs on Giuliani. A couple of his positions concern me ("gun control" most notably) but I think he is realistically the Republican's best shot. He isn't an easy target for the Democrats to demonize unlike a lot of the other candidates.

 

[Starbuck1975]

I read a story yesterday that Bloomberg and Hagel have met privately, perhaps to discuss a bid for a combined ticket as 3rd Party candidates:

Possible Bloomberg Bid for President

This country needs viable third party candidates, and I can see a Bloomberg/Hagel ticket as claiming a vast majority of moderate Democrats & Republicans who are sick of their respective parties.

Bloomberg, the popular mayor of NYC who took the reins from Guiliani and has raised the city to even greater heights. Hagel, a Vietnam veteran who has broken from the GOP ranks on the situation in Iraq, and a vocal critic of the Bush Administration.

Both are entrepeneurs, and the embodiment of the American dream.

If they run, they have my vote.

 

[imported_Lothar]

Chuck Hagel, Bill Richardson, and Obama.
Chuck Hagel, you can kick off your campaign anytime soon now.

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
I read a story yesterday that Bloomberg and Hagel have met privately, perhaps to discuss a bid for a combined ticket as 3rd Party candidates:

Possible Bloomberg Bid for President

This country needs viable third party candidates, and I can see a Bloomberg/Hagel ticket as claiming a vast majority of moderate Democrats & Republicans who are sick of their respective parties.

Bloomberg, the popular mayor of NYC who took the reins from Guiliani and has raised the city to even greater heights. Hagel, a Vietnam veteran who has broken from the GOP ranks on the situation in Iraq, and a vocal critic of the Bush Administration.

Both are entrepeneurs, and the embodiment of the American dream.

If they run, they have my vote.

And mine as well.

 

[imported_Lothar]

Originally posted by: K1052
There are a couple candidates I like more but I'd have to say I keep the closest tabs on Giuliani. A couple of his positions concern me ("gun control" most notably) but I think he is realistically the Republican's best shot. He isn't an easy target for the Democrats to demonize unlike a lot of the other candidates.

So you'll prefer to vote for the person who has the best shot at beating Democrats rather than voting for who you agree with the most?

Looks like ProfJohn is not the only partisan hack we have on this forums.

 

[Dashel]

Giuliani is my guy. Fiscally conservative, not socially conservative. Strong on national defense, strong on terrorism. Good leadership qualities.

Hillary will be the Democrats nominee barring some major upset. Barack wont get it. If not her than it would probably be Gore if he make a run or maybe even Edwards (bleh)

If the Republicans nominate McCain, Romney or Fred Thompson instead of Rudy I can live with that and vote for them in all likelihood.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: mwtgg
See sig.

Platypus/upsciLLion '08?

 

[K1052]

Originally posted by: Lothar

Originally posted by: K1052
There are a couple candidates I like more but I'd have to say I keep the closest tabs on Giuliani. A couple of his positions concern me ("gun control" most notably) but I think he is realistically the Republican's best shot. He isn't an easy target for the Democrats to demonize unlike a lot of the other candidates.

So you'll prefer to vote for the person who has the best shot at beating Democrats rather than voting for who you agree with the most?

Looks like ProfJohn is not the only partisan hack we have on this forums.

I VERY rarely result to insults but I'll make an exception here.........kindly go fsck yourself.

The odds of me finding a candidate I agree with 100% are basically zero. I look at the available options and make my choice. Right now I like him the most AND I think he has the best chance to sink Clinton.

 

[imported_Lothar]

First you say there are candidates you like more, then you say you like him the most?
Which one is it?

Originally posted by: K1052
There are a couple candidates I like more but I'd have to say I keep the closest tabs on Giuliani. A couple of his positions concern me ("gun control" most notably) but I think he is realistically the Republican's best shot. He isn't an easy target for the Democrats to demonize unlike a lot of the other candidates.

Either you're suffering from dementia or you just read something that changed your mind about him in the past 2 hours?

 

[Moonbeam]

Go Obama!

 

[Mxylplyx]

What do people like about Obama, other than the fact that he is a black man that can speak intelligently? People seem to have jumped on the Obama bandwagon before they even knew anything about him. I remember when he was first elected, he was proclaimed the "rising star" of the democratic party by the media and the democrats, though nobody ever said why. Has the media just conditioned people to support this man? I dont currently have a problem with him, I just know nothing about him. I think it goes to show you how much power various organizations, media and political, have over the American electorate in that they can groom someone for a political position years in advance.