If the presidential election were tomorrow, who would you vote for?

Who would you vote for?


  • Total voters
    45

gtanner79

Member
Joined
Oct 8, 2007
Messages
16
Election?

I actually think that anyone who runs for president represents a continuation of "power lust" so to speak. Call me jaded, but it seems like people in office have but one goal: re-election. Now, I honestly can't say that a future candidate would display the level of "power lust" that Bush seems to have, but I'm sure they all have some of it. After all, why are they running for office? Are we really to believe that they genuinely have the best interests of a majority of the country in heart?

There are a few things I would do if I were running the country to ensure that people who ran for office did so out of a want to serve the public - not for glory.

1. Massive campaign finance reform - why should these people get enormous amounts of money? I say control all the money - divide it up equally amongst the qualified candidates (first big stumbling block I admit) and let them actually "campaign" with ideas - not just dollars.
2. No more lobbies.
3. Term limits for everyone - senators, the House, and especially S.C. Justices.
4. Politicians at federal and state level would not be able to "campaign" at all until a specified amount of time before the next election. That way they'd spend most of their time in office actually being a politician and not campaigning. In Al Gore's latest book he laments the senators and representatives of today - so rarely are they actually "at work" - they're always out campaigning.

Just ideas - nothing solid - but if I ruled the country - you can believe those would be on the table.

Of course - I'll never rule the country - I'm not party affiliated and don't have enough money.
 
Werbung:

Bunz

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
3,215
Location
Alaska
I obviously don't agree with many of his policies, but I like the man himself. Right now, out of all the Dems, I like Gravel the best. I really get a kick out of him.
Boy you can have him. I love how he claims to be the former Senator from Alaska, which is true, but he hasnt held office in 30+ years. He was cooky then from what I have been told(I wasnt alive) but he has gotten worse. If he wants to claim have anything to do with Alaska he should support some things that are good for Alaska. His notion of a national referendum would be horrible for my state. Also I believe he is against ANWR(I am pretty sure, not %100 positive) So when he doesnt win, hopefully he will stay in Virginia, about as far away from AK as possible. As for me, I will be voting for Kucinich in the primaries and let the chips fall where they may. I will re-evaluate after that.
 

vyo476

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
2,401
Location
Massachusetts
I obviously don't agree with many of his policies, but I like the man himself. Right now, out of all the Dems, I like Gravel the best. I really get a kick out of him.
Boy you can have him. I love how he claims to be the former Senator from Alaska, which is true, but he hasnt held office in 30+ years. He was cooky then from what I have been told(I wasnt alive) but he has gotten worse. If he wants to claim have anything to do with Alaska he should support some things that are good for Alaska. His notion of a national referendum would be horrible for my state. Also I believe he is against ANWR(I am pretty sure, not %100 positive) So when he doesnt win, hopefully he will stay in Virginia, about as far away from AK as possible. As for me, I will be voting for Kucinich in the primaries and let the chips fall where they may. I will re-evaluate after that.

Dennis Kucinich is a ****ing menace.

Gravel's mellowed a lot from the days when he was talking about a "citizen's wage" and progressive income taxes without exemptions or deductions. Today he's a supporter of FairTax and a national health-care voucher system that would allow people to pick their own doctors. He's a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment and he isn't one of the nuts who thinks that we need to impeach President Bush immediately.

Your friend, Mr. Kucinich, on the other hand...

...is a supporter of HR676, a universal health care bill that would limit all US citizens to receiving their state-sponsored health care from a listo of state-approved providers.

...has had his name attached to just about every wild "Let's Impeach Bush!" piece of legislation to get laughed out of Congress.

...has a decidedly anti-business voting record (he's earned himself a 15% rating from the US COC) and a decidedly mixed voting record in regards to trade (39% from CATO). None of that really matters though. The economy is not one of his top priorities.

He's a jerk who turned our Congress into a circus. I dislike him. I dislike him greatly.
 

ArmChair General

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
687
Location
www.spamwebsite.com
I obviously don't agree with many of his policies, but I like the man himself. Right now, out of all the Dems, I like Gravel the best. I really get a kick out of him.

Dennis Kucinich is a ****ing menace.

Gravel's mellowed a lot from the days when he was talking about a "citizen's wage" and progressive income taxes without exemptions or deductions. Today he's a supporter of FairTax and a national health-care voucher system that would allow people to pick their own doctors. He's a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment and he isn't one of the nuts who thinks that we need to impeach President Bush immediately.

Your friend, Mr. Kucinich, on the other hand...

...is a supporter of HR676, a universal health care bill that would limit all US citizens to receiving their state-sponsored health care from a listo of state-approved providers.

...has had his name attached to just about every wild "Let's Impeach Bush!" piece of legislation to get laughed out of Congress.

...has a decidedly anti-business voting record (he's earned himself a 15% rating from the US COC) and a decidedly mixed voting record in regards to trade (39% from CATO). None of that really matters though. The economy is not one of his top priorities.

He's a jerk who turned our Congress into a circus. I dislike him. I dislike him greatly.

all of those are good positive things. whats wrong with you?
 

Bunz

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
3,215
Location
Alaska
Fair enough YVO, again, Gravel claims Alaska, but has turned his back on us. The single notion that you would have the ability for a national referendum is a really bad thing for Alaska. Alaska already has its problems with outside influence. We have some jackass Californian wanting to pass bills about our aerial wolf hunting program. The "Bridges to nowhere" are dead now, and this is largely due to the media picking up a certain hot button issue. But it is total BS. Do you know what the bridges to nowhere actually incur? What it basically would allow is a total infringement on state rights to control thier resources. This is already bad enough in this state. Alaskans are smart enough to make our own decisions and DC needs to play thier role and but out of the rest.
I like Kucinich because he actually believes what he is saying. He has taken the time to campaign in all 50 states. None of the rest of those idiots have bothered. The primary system is so broken it is shameless. It is all about raising millions of dollars, that I am only going to really bother spending in Iowa and NH. Lets have all the primaries on the same day nation wide.
 

Mr. Shaman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
7,829
Miss_Cleo.jpg

there isnt going to be an 08 election ,or if there is the president will not take office until 2010

:rolleyes:
 

Mr. Shaman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
7,829
In the end, I voted for Biden. I think he's probably the Democrat with the most universal appeal - he can more easily attract the people who are looking at Iraq as the biggest, but not only, issue of the election. He just really needs to find a decent speech writer because he's stepped in it oratorically almost as many times as GW has at this point.
Please!! The only problem Joe Biden has, is his honesty...and, saying what he thinks (caustic for most-politicians).

I'm a long-time fan of Joe Biden....and, anyone else who'd heard his interviews, on Imus In The Morning, would say the same. Don Imus was exactly right when he'd suggested (to Biden) that Biden offered too-many details (when stating his opinions); that Imus felt (a bulk of) Americans were too-damned-stupid to appreciate Biden's intelligence.

Joe Biden doesn't need a decent speech writer. He needs an educated/politically-savy U.S. population.

I'm thinkin'....Biden knows he's a prime-candidate for a Cabinet-position.....and, putting-on a better-performance (for public-consumption) would be counter-productive.

I say.....let Joe Biden be Joe Biden. He'll be proven right, in the end, anyhow.
 

Mr. Shaman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
7,829
The "Bridges to nowhere" are dead now, and this is largely due to the media picking up a certain hot button issue. But it is total BS. Do you know what the bridges to nowhere actually incur? What it basically would allow is a total infringement on state rights to control thier resources. This is already bad enough in this state. Alaskans are smart enough to make our own decisions and DC needs to play thier role and but out of the rest.
So.....you agree that Alaska didn't need federal-subsidies, for that bridge, right? ('Cause that was the real-Issue.)
 

heyjude

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
226
Location
Pacific Northwest, on the beach
I don't like any of the canidates. Some I dislike less than others. In my sixty-five years I've had to vote for two choices every time. The ass, or the assh**e. Why should this time be any different?
 

vyo476

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
2,401
Location
Massachusetts
I don't like any of the canidates. Some I dislike less than others. In my sixty-five years I've had to vote for two choices every time. The ass, or the assh**e. Why should this time be any different?

You have more than two choices. The only problem is that only a bare minimum of people see any validity in those other choices, which is why you see all of them getting extremely low returns.

This happens every four years. The election rolls around and everyone says, "I don't like either of these guys. Why do our elections have to be about the lesser of two evils?" but when someone says, "Vote for a third-party candidate!" the answer is always, "But they don't have any chance of winning and I don't want to throw away my vote."

Personally, I think that so long as one is actually voting for someone they believe would fill the office well, they aren't "throwing away (their) vote."
 
Werbung:

heyjude

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
226
Location
Pacific Northwest, on the beach
Part of the problem, is that the other parties want to start at the presidency. They need to elect people in cities and counties, build a base, go to the states, and when they have a 'real' party, run someone for president. No one wants to do the hard work.
 
Top