The Current Crop of Candidates
 

After the fiasco of the last two elections, I have been holding out hope that the next election will be an 'issues' debate between two experienced and intelligent candidates with broad support within both parties. Instead of a 'lesser of two evils approach, to be presented with a difficult choice between two candidates, either of which I believed to be a suitable candidate.

I just seem to get the impression that the most substantive candidates seem to be the 2nd tier in both parties.

I think Hillary is smart, but I think she has a polarizing effect.
I really like Richardson on paper, and so far he has not disappointed me, but as with all 2nd tier candidates, the question becomes would he change if he moved up to the 1st tier.
Obama talks a great game, but so did GWB to his party faithful. I just would like to see a longer Obama resume.
McCain has been a disappointment ever since he derailed the 'straight talk express' and became another politician selling himself for the prize.
Romney and Guliani seem to be trying to reinvent themselves every minute.
Fred Thompson is wisely keeping his mouth shut, which automatically makes him a viable candidate. I heard that appearance aside, he was a "gentleman's C" kind of legislator, putting in a fair but unremarkable effort and carrying a light to modest workload.

Obama really does appear to be the 'take me as I am candidate'. My issue with him is the great unknown. He spoke out against the war, but he wasn't in Congress at the time and he was speaking as a private citizen, not as someone who had to make a real decision on incomplete (and now known to be faulty) information.

I'm hoping that the 2nd tier can hang around in reserve for a while.

If I could pick my own nominating debates, it would be Richardson against Hillary for the Democrats and between Ron Paul (or Tom Tancredo) against Mike Huckabee for the Republican nomination.

I'm almost sorry Cheney isn't running. I'd like to see conservatives like Paul or Tancredo rip into him for pretty much everything he's done.

I personally would rather see Edwards or Obama than Hilary. The part that really scares me about her is the Universal Health Plan. Both Obama and Edwards says that we need to raise taxes for universal health care but Hilary says we don't. There are no secret operations so I really doubt Hilary is seeing something that the other two don't. That means one of four things:

• She is lying and will raise taxes
• Her plan will fall apart due to lack of funding
• She will take money from other places (social security for example)
• Her plan will not have the coverage as Edward's or Obama's

I have not looked into all three plans that closely but unless I missed something, one of those four are going to happen and that type of incompetence is really starting to annoy me. We can see a problem beforehand but no one is willing to do anything about it.

Her attitude on the war in Iraq is also another thing. She keeps calling it "Bush's war" when she does nothing to stop it and when she even voted for it in the first place without researching it thoroughly.

This is a serious question. Why do people like Hilary? Besides experience, I haven't seen anything except deception and vote whoring.

I agree with this on both sides.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Good one, Rich. I can picture them trying to address issues, while pandering to everyone, on everything.

Further proof that hope springs eternal! I'm right there with you Rich, although a bit more skeptical.

I would agree with that much. To bad, as much I don't like it, I don't think there is much that can stop Hitlery from becoming President. Obama is running a good show, in fact a model for what a campaign should look like, without all the partisan BS. To bad he is black, because this country is still radically polarized and to racist to vote for him. I like mostly second tier candidates as well.

I would be curious to see how many people would not vote for Obama just because he is black and how many people would vote for him just because he is black.

I'd vote for him [Obama] but i think it would be useless due to the millions of Red Staters that would rather have a white devil in office than a black saint. Unless of course Dubya has actually left such a bad taste in their mouths as well, that they'll vote as far away from his type as possible. :fingerscrossed:

Seems like we all pretty much second your opinions Rich.


I would say the same things about the same canadates as you did. It's amazing the clarity regular american people come up with. What's wrong with politics these days?

The fact we chose someone we would like to go have a beer with is quite disturbing. No wait. Al Gore won the popular vote. I keep forgetting.

People better get out and vote to keep people like McCain,Rommney and Guliani out. Some of the lesser democrates don't even have a chance but the Rebublican spin machine is an evil tool.

Hitlery with Obama as the VP would be un-stoppable.... Right that down.

:lol2:

Realistically, I wouldn't mind an Obama-Edwards duo since they seem to be at least on the same page.

But Merc, was that a joke or not? Can you explain?

Merc, in response to this comment:

It is my opinion that the popularity of these two people would be a force that could not be stopped in an election. Hitlery is already hugely popular, and Obama is running second, although not a close second, among many democratic voters.

So you think that those two can beat any two Republican candidates?

I'll agree that for overall popularity those two would make the strongest offense for the Democrats since most of the supporters I have seen seem to either be Hilary supporters, Obama supporters, or anti-Republicans and that team fits all three. Besides, Edwards is pretty close to Obama on issues so the Edwards supporters would most likely go with him.

While I agree that I think those two together would win the presidential election, assuming not much changes, because of the one-sidedness of the Republican party. Besides Ron Paul and a minute difference here or there, Giuliani’s social issues, they all seem to be on the exact same page and from what I have seen, their fan base isn't as split or determined as the Democrats.

I think it's far more important that the nation win the War than that any Democrat win any office whatsoever. They haven't been selling anything I want since 1992.

Does anyone know what is up with McCain? He seemed to be one of the top Republicans out there too.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/11/us...mccain.html?hp
I am assuming it could just be pointless gossip but if McCain drops out it will be either Romney or Giuliani on top.

People no longer believe his "straight talk," since he tied his fortunes to Bush's. He is also old and insane, but that wouldn't normally bother voters.

Fred Thompson is good at acting conservative, he'll be in the mix.

McCain built his reputation on seeming to be a maverick who wasn't apron-stringed to the party line. It seems like losing twice to Bush in elections, and who knows how many times behind the scenes, convinced him that Bush and his type were ascendant, just in time for them to topple, taking him with them.

McCain is done. His money is drying up.

I am a Ron Paul supporter, as you know if you read/viewed my thread.
Everything Hillary says is a lie. Even if it happens to be accurate.
She only says what she thinks people want to hear, so it is dishonest. If it happens to be accurate it is only a coincidence.
The same is true of Rudy.

Unfortunately, those two have a chance to be running against each other...

*cold chill down spine*

Just wondering, I don't know much about politics, candidates or anything really. But I'm 19, haven't registered to vote, don't really plan to anytime soon. Is there an age or a specific event that will trigger my partisan to overcome my indifference?
I'd vote for Obama if I was registered because he's from Illinois (w00t) and the things I've heard about him seem pretty good. But I'm not well informed at all.

Yes, the realization that Mom & Dad don't control your entire world anymore, any if you don't want strangers to take over that role you have to do it yourself.

It ain't easy either, it's a lot of damn work trying to figure it out, and you'll probably never be 100% sure you've got it right.... unless you're a red state sheep.[cheap shot intended as humor and not an indictment of people who are actually voting their conscience]

Fresh, I have a list of basically every current candidate's views so just ask and I can get it for you.

I can post all of it here if everyone wants it too.

What is stopping you from going out and registering now? Going to the candidate's websites and reading about what their stances on the issues are?

I think that would be great - we can monitor how things change over time till the elections and beyond...

Register to vote. It's part of being a responsible adult. Voting is the moment, just for a fleeting instant, that you truly share in the power of government and the sovereignty of your nation.

I will make a new thread.

I dunno, indifference? I don't even know any of my friends who are registered.

Then you have no right to complain when it comes to what happens around you.

I thought you were already registered because you go to UI? I know that is what happened with me at UMN.

Be a leader.

Don't take it for granted.

Therein lies the problem with most young people who bitch, complain, protest, and have the loudest mouths on issues in our country today.

What...that they are actually indifferent?

Nope. Insignificant.

How are they insignificant?

(I don't understand the connection between fresh's comment and your reply to his comment.)

Not significant: as a : lacking meaning or import : INCONSEQUENTIAL b : not worth considering : UNIMPORTANT c : lacking weight, position, or influence.

I see now. There was no connection.

Why of course you can't see anything with blinders on.

oooh, snap!

:rolleyes:

Is that the sound of your mind closing?

Nope, I'm not coming over to your side.

What's the deal with you, anyway? I asked very nicely for you to explain your comment, and you not only avoided answering but turned completely sarcastic. Aren't you interested in contributing to Cellar discussions in a productive way? If not, what are you still doing here?

Oh, like this:

"I see now. There was no connection."

or

"oooh, snap!"

I have plenty of productive discussions here, I'm not coming over to your side.;)

Right. Those were my replies following your sarcastic comments.

When I asked my honest question about what the connection was between fresh's comment and your reply to it, you replied sarcastically to me with a definition of 'insignificant:'

Since you didn't answer my question, I concluded that you didn't intend a connection.

If I'm wrong, and there is indeed a connection, then explain it to me.

But if you just continue to be sarcastic, then I'll continue to think that you don't want to participate in a productive discussion. And frankly, I haven't seen a whole lot evidence of productive participation in discussions on your part--mostly insults and sarcasm.

I just reserve that for you.

No, you don't.

You are right. You and a few small select others. You're in the club.

I'd say Merc is right, but not for the reasons he thinks.
It's because of their apathy.
It's their choice.... you know, that thing Americans are so proud of having.

But in this case xoB, its a very dangerous one. Their apathy allows others to make decisions for them and yet they still have the right to complain. Yet when the time comes to vote or have input they don't . . . and so on.

I know, I know, but I think when they get out of school, start working, get married, buy property and #1 on the hit parade PAY TAXES, things will change quickly for most of them.

I remember way back in the dark ages, the 60s, when political activism seemed to be much higher among college age kids. But you know what, the majority, although reasonably aware, were still more interested in getting drunk/high, laid and good enough grades to stay out of the draft. For the girls, substitute pregnant for drafted.

I have faith they'll come around and grow up to be opinionated old farts like us.

People who don't vote are insignificant.
That is a fact.

Well, thanks to Bruce and blue.
Sorry for being "insignificant."
And by Rk's logic, babies are insignificant.
And I honestly can't even follow what Merc meant to say, not trying to degrade his comment at all it is just way over my head. My insignificant head.

Well, babies are not immediately politically significant.

From age 18 according to this nation's law, you can share in the collective political significance.

Most people, however, take but little interest in local or national politics until they are over thirty. If I'm any example, politics becomes rather more interesting after forty. Politics seems a game favored in the most part by the over-forty set.

This is where one usually finds the greatest number and greatest degree of those actualizing their greatest political significance.

Voting feels good, though -- you get a nice, civic-minded glow out of actualizing yourself within the electorate, and to do voting doesn't take a lot out of your life unless you get so interested in some issue that you train yourself into wonkhood.

I should point out that from what I see day to day and year to year, the "red staters" are wiser than the "blue staters" could ever believe. They like, start by reading National Review.

The Left is failing to adapt to this development, and in the clamor they make you can discern their bewilderment.

Meanwhile one can seek what wisdom may be panned from the gravel in observations like this one, paraphrased from Heinlein because it'll take more time than I have this session to chase it down on the net or in my dead-tree format:

"Democracy is based on the assumption that many men are smarter than one man.

How's that again?

Autocracy is based on the assumption that one man is smarter than many men.

Wait a second..."

Thank you! You actually realize the youth are people too. Merc and Rk are just too condemning of us, I mean come on, don't label us insignificant because seriously, when you guys toked up in your youth of the 60s, didn't the political people want to be rid of people like you too? The system is looping itself....

Keep in mind though fresh, since the average political mindset of college students is siginificantly more liberal than UG's personal views, it's in his best interest for the youth to remain indifferent. People like rk and Bruce are more likely to be bitter because you probably agree with many of their ideas, but are allowing people like Bush to stay in power by not voting.

Bitter? No baby, sweet... like sweet, sweeeet, lovin'.

You make yourself insignificant by your failure to participate fully in the political process that poeple would die for, and have died for to give you that right. Instead you bitch and moan and end up squandering your opportunity to participate in the Republic. Your choice. I have no problem with your choice, but I believe that you make yourself insignificant by that choice.

That pretty much nails it... and you for got to add that hopefully you pay taxes because of your prosperity in gaining income. Your views on much will change as you move through the various stages of life.