In all reality I like Dennis Kucinich. But he has about the same chance as a stump.....

so, I like Edwards myself.

However, the only 2 republicans I like are both in the race, and if the Dems REALLY don't inpire me I might be tempted to go Guiliani, (or even McCain ) And thats coing from a liberal Dem here....

Shame, because like I said I do like him. As for McCain and the war he will at least make sure it's run better, you do know that of course. So I wouldn't exactly say he'll be another Bush.

However, McCain is my option ONLY if the Dem candidate really dosn't do it for me.

 

I should say, I vote pretty much on issues and avoid their personality/image unless glaring. Like, besides being the 9/11 Mayor Rudi was not the most popular guy for his career. ALSO, he had NO effect on NYC's crime fall. It happened in all cities across the nation.

 

That's why I just go on issues and how I interpret them. 

 

Me too!

Although...I THINK college students are exempt from a draft, but I'm not taking the chance.

Or run to Canada...whichever.

 

Hell yes!

 

Yup, it is funny in Political Science learning about the Liberal Republicans, and Conservative Democrats. Prescott Bush, grandaddy of Wubya, was a leader of the Moderate Reps. and socially was one of the most liberal senators. Go figure.

 

As you put it, the 2 parties have just become too polarized.

2006 was proof, as Republicans are becoming extinct in New England, and Democrats in the South. Regardless of their political positions.

 

PA is an international forum with people from Indonesia to Croatia who don't give  a damn about US elections with just reason

 

If you want to talk election, there is the FREnch ones next week!

At least respect the rest of the world

 

Because that's all I know. I've brought politics up alot, but have I ever said anything like the US the center of the world? I like talking about politics and would LOVE to talk about the French elections. However, I am not an expert on international politics, I can't go into the depth I can about US elections, with the French elections.

OK, I'll stop before I say something and get myself thrown off here.

 

But really, I can't discuss politics in countries I don't know that well. So sorry for my ignorance.

 

And the few running who should be considered will be completely ignored in favor of the media-anointed frontrunners.

 

 

 

We need to start a grassroots campaign for Kucinich or Gravel!

It starts here....

 

Hi jj apologies from me to have been a little bit harsh

 

Just the idea of  MCCAIN'' Bomb bomb bomb Iran''  getting president wants to make me move to Bali

 And I REALLY don't know why I vote. I always hate whatever candidates get the nod, I really hate the way politics/society works etc. etc. I am the stereotypical "all politicians suck, voting is useless anyway" kid. I think I follow politics almost like it's a sport....

 

 

The most important issue is to keep the discussion civil which fortunately is the tone here up to now.

And we've been talking about the 2 parties. What about Nader?  I don't know for sure, but I bet he'll throw his hat into the ring.

Just can't get that guy to quit

 

Glad we agree Stoney.

Do they let you vote in the primaries if you turn eighteen between the primary election and the actual one?

Sadly that's true. I wish third parties had more coverage so that more people would know about them because most often, the best candidates are the ones running in the third parties who don't have to compromise their ideals to appeal to mainstream America.

I thought it was the voters who were registered under the party, but I don't know well either.

 

Yes, the people registered with that party, is who votes in the primaries.

 

 

 

Then can you register for a party to vote in the primaries if you'll be 18 for the actual election?

That I'm not sure about...I waited till I was 18. I THINK you can do that though.

 

Of course, but as you said  better than the person who got 50.1 % winning it all (or even just a plurality). And the electoral college... I hate it.

 

How about Mike Gravel?

http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/1387 - http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/1387

I joked about him being the 78 year old guy from Alaska who's been out of the job for 30 years....but I looked up his positions and like him.

Go GRAVEL!

I'd vote for him or Kucinich no doubt, if only they could somehow make it. Would take a miracle though.

 

As for McCain, let's hear it for video editing!

 

I think Rudy could run the show though, so he's my vote

 Personally, I sure hope he dosn't get the nod. I think he's a longshot, but I just really hope not.

 

And I'm impressed by Romney...looks like he may be the current frontrunner, or at least up there with McCain and Giuliani.

 

On the note of Romney, he's just a cocksucking motherf**ker, who did absolutely nothing as governor of Massachusetts. And used his "sex appeal" in his ads for governor.... And my opinions of other Republicans... Ok....

 

The Democrats don't do much for me anyways. I hate Hillary and Obama is not experienced enough to be President. Edwards is just a big Southern w**ker.

 

Basically, it comes up to my choice of Green Party or not voting. Pretty much shows how much the Left is represented in America. Other than Bernie Sanders, the representation is minimal.

 

 

I really am surprised with Obama still. I mean, he looks and sounds good, but TWO years in the Senate???

Dosn't quite sit well with me.

 

And everyone here has been negelcting a candidate....Chris Dodd!

 

 

Gravel's got NOOO chance in hell. Which is a shame because like always, I think he's probably the best.

And the Democrats are, as you said, NOT socialist. Especially since Clinton....

they are becoming Republican Lite!

 

Its funny that someone would call some of the Democrats even remotely socialists.

 

True Socialists would not be promoting the War in Iraq, would not flip-flop or promote Capitalist programs that some of these so called "lefties" do.

 

On another hand, there are some Democrats that should actually be Republicans, due to their stances. As I've said before, the differences between most of the Republicans and Democrats are so small that I really can not tell the difference.

 

The true lack of a third party in the United States really does not help our nation at all.

He was pretty damn Libertarian....

 

The way I see it, the only 2 options that will do anything is: just leave now, or a FULL scale war. I don't like the first one but I DEFINETLEY don't like the second....

I liked the idea of staying for one year and training/rebuilding Iraq...then a phased withdraw. Problem is, that would require alot more troops, and Iraq has become a civil war now....

 

I'm just thinking of Italian politics where Chicolina (sic) the porn model rose to power, but slightly more seriously because woman don't tend to have a track record of being war-mongering idiots like the present incumbent, and some of his predecessors.

 

Look at what is happening in politics in Africa, Germany and other places. Strong women talking sense. We had Thatcher is England, but we will have to wait for an autopsy to determine whether she was carbon based or from the pits of hell before we classify her gender.

 

Would be interesting to see what a strong woman did in this role, not suggesting Hillary as I know little about her, just a woman in general.

 

 

I've heard people ask, you think we should have a woman/black/gay/etc.. President?

I don't give a sh*t. What DOES matter to me is their track record. I have no problem with a woman President, again what does it matter?? However, I don't want Hillary.

 

I would vote for Nancy Pelosi though!

But she has less of a chance than Hillary  Conservatives in my Poiltical Sciecne class literally shudder when they hear that name.

or Barbara Boxer

Please, evryone knows that the dems are capitalist, like the republicans. I am a socialist, or to be more precice a libritarian communist. To call the democrats half-a*sed attempt to get a minority vote socialist is insulting to me and flattering to them. Real socialists would keep their promises to level the playing field, and do away with the consept of money as a whole. 

 

Oh and by the way when you say that "The people are just too stupid to make the right choices!" you sound more like a faciast than anything, democracy is based on the idea that people are right. So when you say that balancing media is wrong it sounds like your saying "but only if the dems do it"

then again you are talking to someone who thinks that free market is bull, its not free at all, free market simply transferes the power from politicians to CEO's. the corperations are the ones that really controll the country right now, the president is more of a figure head, a puppet if you will, diffrent componies back different canidates, who pass laws in that componies favour, making the corperation stronger, so that they can get more politicians into offices where they can pass favourable laws, so that the CEO's can get rich while starving workers overseas die of hunger.

but thats just my opinion.

...........

 

exactly

see, but your still looking at things through the lens of capitalism. I am a Communist. Say what you will I still belive that one day the worlds poor hungry masses will rise up against capitallism and found a communist system. (not like the soviet union) I think that in a world where the concern is not about money we could focous our energys on productive endevors such as finding a way to save this planet before we kill ourselves. oh and as for the workers, they lived fine before they went to the factories and could still live without them.  They starve just as much with subsistance farming as with factory wages, and no I dont suggest paying them ceo wages, I suggest paying CEOs worker wages, which would be considerably higher if they were all paid the same.

 

Universal Healthcare (but that's kinda doubtful)

 

 

Exactly, but you said JUST domestic

And I agree with education as well, I think some revamping is needed. Like....some LESS focus on those f*cking useless and god awful standardized  tests, universal cirriculum, and trying to help these people pay for college!

How's this for an idea stonie?

 

If I was a Presidential candidate, I'd advocate a radical change on the war on terror. (Let's face it, despite social needs, the war on terror will dominate politics ultimately)

I'd say let's move from going out and fighting countries, to protecting us here. Take all this money going towards the military and use it for securing here.

 

Oh, and lets not forget immigration! Here's my idea, instead of a fence..how about we NEGOTIATE.  Like, "Hey Mexico....we can't solve this problem from just our end. You wanna maybe try to crack down on people leaving." And ya know, we could talk about it.

 

Isn't that the definition of America though?

 

If we truly wanted to make our education system better....it needs a RADICAL overhaul.

Because if you're implying just using more tests and setting the bar higher...I will be very pissed off at you.  But I really will be.

 

Now we're getting into idealism.

That's very true, but from a practical, real, standpoint  how do you intend on doing that?

 

Me too! And know I see your plan...well OK, I agree.

Just talk about how you will lower taxes, then you're a shoe in!

 

Or family values in the South!

This is becoming general in nature...back to candidates.

 

This is a serious question: If Stephen Colbert ran how many votes do you think he would he get?

Just look at his following....and you know he'd get a sh*t load of votes from alienated teens/stoners/and asses that think it'd be funny to vote for Colbert.