Who would you vote for in the 2008 election?

[zerorelations]

Who would you vote for in the 2008 election?

 

[not2needy]

Two front runners, both liberals, COOL!

 

[Grounded]

Barack Obama for me!

 

[Everylyric]

Two front runners, both liberals, COOL!

It'd be hard for republicans to win after Bush.

 

[Rokerijdude11]

Who needs your outdated party system..........?

Vote for America Vote Independent

 

[Dave]

Two front runners, both liberals, COOL!

Really? I'm looking at the poll and seeing the Obama is the only one that even has more than one vote so far. I'd hardly consider a 2 to 1 vote being a frontrunner when there's only been 7 votes. I don't really know what the poll numbers looked like when you made that comment, but considering there are only 7 votes right now, I think its safe to say you don't know the first thing about statistical analysis.

 

[vyo476]

Really? I'm looking at the poll and seeing the Obama is the only one that even has more than one vote so far. I'd hardly consider a 2 to 1 vote being a frontrunner when there's only been 7 votes. I don't really know what the poll numbers looked like when you made that comment, but considering there are only 7 votes right now, I think its safe to say you don't know the first thing about statistical analysis.

I voted after the comment was made which evened things out a bit. Prior to my casting my vote none of the Republican candidates had received any votes.

 

[PLC1]

Mitt Romney went into the governorship of a highly Democratic state, and balanced the budget there without raising taxes. Right now, I'd vote for him over any of the other candidates simply based on that.

Last time, I voted Libertarian, knowing that that party's candidate couldn't possibly win. It was kind of like voting for "none of the above", while at the same time saying that we need to cut back the size and power of the federal government. I may be forced to do the same again, depending on who gets the nomination.

If enough voters would join me, we might make some real changes to the federal government.

 

[leathermenace]

All I see in this list is a 3 way split to the Democratic vote, and that is exactly how we wound up with a man who can't pronounce the word nuclear running our country.

 

[Rokerijdude11]

Mitt Romney went into the governorship of a highly Democratic state, and balanced the budget there without raising taxes. Right now, I'd vote for him over any of the other candidates simply based on that.

Last time, I voted Libertarian, knowing that that party's candidate couldn't possibly win. It was kind of like voting for "none of the above", while at the same time saying that we need to cut back the size and power of the federal government. I may be forced to do the same again, depending on who gets the nomination.

If enough voters would join me, we might make some real changes to the federal government.

I was Right there with you brother Badnarik had my vote as well

 

[vyo476]

Mitt Romney went into the governorship of a highly Democratic state, and balanced the budget there without raising taxes. Right now, I'd vote for him over any of the other candidates simply based on that.

And, as I've stated in other threads...that's all he did. Yay money...boo transportation and crime. I'm from Massachusetts and having experienced his governorship there both from the liberal standpoint (because of my mother's disease I'm a strong supporter of health care initiatives and our quality of living dropped drastically under Romney) and the conservative standpoint (I live about twenty miles outside of Boston and have many friends who live in the city, who talk about how incredibly awful the transportation mess is and how the city's police department is generally stretched too thinly with too small a budget to adequately deal with the city's many issues) and from both perspectives Mitt Romney was a poor leader.

Ask most people from MA and they'll tell you the same thing: Do not vote for Mitt Romney. Our state hasn't managed to put forward a decent governor in a while and Romney's just another in a growing list of unfortunate politicians with an agenda that doesn't completely match the numerous and diverse issues of government.

 

[not2needy]

Really? I'm looking at the poll and seeing the Obama is the only one that even has more than one vote so far. I'd hardly consider a 2 to 1 vote being a frontrunner when there's only been 7 votes. I don't really know what the poll numbers looked like when you made that comment, but considering there are only 7 votes right now, I think its safe to say you don't know the first thing about statistical analysis.

Well, it is different now, when i voter, there were two front runners, both democrat.

 

[Dave]

Well, it is different now, when i voter, there were two front runners, both democrat.

My point is that to call someone a frontrunner with less than 7 votes in is not statistically sound. Even if its a 1-0 vote, its meaningless at that point.

 

[not2needy]

My point is that to call someone a frontrunner with less than 7 votes in is not statistically sound. Even if its a 1-0 vote, its meaningless at that point.

I guess there is no getting away from argumentative jerks who must have the last word. I didn't even look at the number of votes when i made the first statement, FORGIVE ME FOR LIVING!! YOUR HONOR!!

 

[productetc]

Where's Kucinich? He may be small but he thinks and speaks big. I wish **cough cough** he'd get equalled coverage. If anything he should at least replace Richardson on the poll.