USA Politics

Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Oh, sure, I'm not saying he's perfect; I'm just saying that if someone states that "the US doesn't really want change, because they didn't vote for a black man", I think thats unfair.  You can't vote for change just to have 'change'-- it has to be correct, to have a good reason for it. 
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

And like I've said before; it can only go up from where we're at.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Oh, yeah!  You are correct.  NO matter what happens, the US is in for a much better president than what we have.  I think its great, and I'm a pretty happy guy right now.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

It'll be interesting to see if the trend of the last 25-30 years can be reversed, and if the Republicans are going to return to real conservatism.  I mean, George H. W. Bush was a real conservative, but Reagan was pretty bad at it, and George W. Bush was terrible.

Real conservative = small government, open markets with enough regulation to keep them fair, balanced budget.

Neo conservative = big government, open and unfair markets, high spending and low taxes for long debt, overly concerned with social issues.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Real Conservative= Concerned with size of dick, but at least there's something to be concerned about.

Neo Conservative= Concerned with size of dick, but that's a fantasy, because they don't have dicks.

:P
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Ha.  Ha.  Ha.

I wonder who John McCain is going to choose for his VP.  Given his age, it's a going concern. Not as much as it was in 1944, when party insiders were almost positive that FDR wasn't going live through his fourth term, and so chose a very presidential Vice President instead of someone to quietly man the Senate helm and do as he was told.  That president, as we know, was Harry S Truman.  There is a possibility that Senator McCain would not live out his term (or terms), and so a strong candidate for VP might be a must.  You don't want to get stuck with someone like Andrew Johnson or John Tyler.  (I'm looking at you, Fred Thompson.)  In this case we want a very strong VP, I'd hope...Mitt Romney or Bobby Jindal both come to mind.  Actually, I think a McCain/Romney ticket would be extremely strong.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

wasted155 said:
Oh, yeah!  You are correct.  NO matter what happens, the US is in for a much better president than what we have.  I think its great, and I'm a pretty happy guy right now.
Click to expand...

that's true. I remember it sounded horrible the choise between Gore -Bush (even if Gore was proved to be VERY COOL guy in the end -and he is worthy our admiration) not to speak for the choise between Bush -Kerry

and what about Mrs Clinton ?? I think it would be very clever to be placed as a possible VP -strategically a clever move
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

I have thought about that, but I'm not sure.  First off, Obama has voiced the charge towards change, and has indicated that he didn't think that Hilary was as good for that, so I don't know if on that note, she would be a good fit for him.  Also, I have begun to really wonder about having an African-American and a woman on the same ticket.  There are a lot of people that had a hard time voting for either of them, but both mite not be a great idea.  IMO
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

wasted155 said:
I have thought about that, but I'm not sure.  First off, Obama has voiced the charge towards change, and has indicated that he didn't think that Hilary was as good for that, so I don't know if on that note, she would be a good fit for him.  Also, I have begun to really wonder about having an African-American and a woman on the same ticket.  There are a lot of people that had a hard time voting for either of them, but both mite not be a great idea.  IMO
Click to expand...

not bad your approach -who do you think it would be a good bet so?
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

While I agree that John Edwards would be a great Vice President, I fully expect him to be either Attorney-General or Secretary of Labor.  He's said again and again that he doesn't want to be VP.  Again...Jim Webb.  Senator Webb is very close to John McCain on the "American War Hero" front, and would help bolster Obama's national security credentials.  Just like McCain needs to choose a VP to bolster his economic credentials. 

For those who aren't aware, Jim Webb was Secretary of the Navy under Reagan and possesses the Navy Cross, the Silver Star, 2 Bronze Stars, and 2 Purple Hearts from his time served as a Marine in Vietnam.  He's against most forms of gun control (Senator Webb has been known to carry a gun in his office in DC) and thinks that a phased redeployment from Iraq would free the US up to respond to terror incidents globally.  He's one of a handful of members of Congress who have had a son in Iraq - one of the others, of course, is John McCain.

Plus, he's a friend of the Colbert Report.

Decorated Marine, renowned author, movie writer and producer, and centralist.  He really feels like the sort of person who could help bring some more independents and some Republicans in.  I don't know if he'd affect a lot of people, but he'd also help put Virginia in play, and that could be huge in November.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Webb is one of the best VP candidates out there, but I think he'd also make a great Sec. of Defense.

Let's face it: Obama will have to pick someone who is whiter than white for VP. Richardson would also be a great VP, but a black/Mexican ticket would send all the racist vote straight to McCain. Webb, being both white and on the right side of the Dem. Party, would be perfect. Richardson would be the ideal Sec. of State anyway.

Otherwise, Obama should look to former governors for a VP, to cut down on the "lack of executive experience" angle that the Repubs will hammer him with.

The other danger of picking Webb for VP is that it would potentially mean one less Dem. Senator, and the Dems need every warm body they can get in the Senate. They have a chance of getting a filibuster-proof majority this year, so taking any senator away would be risky. ... Except Lieberman, who votes with the Repubs too often to be comfortable. Give him a minor cabinet position, so he can't screw up Senate votes.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Dood, the Governor of Virginia is a Democrat.  If Webb gets pulled to be on the ticket, then Timmy Kaine just appoints a new Democrat Senator.

Also, Tim Kaine is a great choice for VP.

I don't think they can pull off the 60 votes needed for cloture.  It's possible, but I think it's going to be 56-57.  Maybe 58.
Let's look at it, though.

The Republicans are in serious danger in Alaska, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Hampshire & North Carolina.  Colorado, New Mexico & Virginia have open seats.  If the Dems win all 8 and don't lose in Louisiana, then they have a chance to have a Democratic majority of 57, with 31 Republicans and 2 Independents.  The Independent Senator from Vermont, Bernie Sanders, is more left wing than John Kerry hanging on the left wing of a 747, while the other as mentioned previously, is Joe Lieberman.  It would effectively be a 58 - 31 majority with one outstanding.

In order to hit the magic 60, then, the Democrats need to win some of the middling races - Oregon and Maine, for instance, could be very competitive.  Idaho would have been competitive if Larry Craig (R-Men's Rooms) hadn't resigned.  Texas may also have a surprising result this year.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

All I've heard (and this may be false, I really hope it is) is that McCain wants to bomb Iran (this was in swedish newspapers so I don't know about credibility). If he becomes president, and he does this, God help America. I like America, I like Americans, but when it comes to foreign policy Americans need to realize that imperialistic methods never worked for empires in the past so why should it do so now? Leave Iraq as soon as possible I say, and get out of the mess in the Middle East before you really get hurt. And because Obama at least says he will do his best to get out of Iraq (and because he has said some encouraging things about same sex legislation) I would infinitely prefer him as president, to McCain.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Sorry Nat, but the US have a responsibility to clean the mess in Iraq up before they get out. If they move out now, as it is, Iraq will become a much bigger menace to the region and the world than it was under Saddam.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Natalie said:
And because Obama at least says he will do his best to get out of Iraq...
Click to expand...
I don't mean to destroy your illusions but why is a candidate better just because he promises what he's expected to promise? Read my lips. No more taxes. Have we all forgotten that? As a voter, I would be interested what Obama can do in order to help the region, other than just have the troops leave.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Perun said:
Sorry Nat, but the US have a responsibility to clean the mess in Iraq up before they get out. If they move out now, as it is, Iraq will become a much bigger menace to the region and the world than it was under Saddam.
Click to expand...

If the Iraqi government is incapable of holding power and it is toppled by one of the, what, six militant groups?  I don't know if it will be a bigger menace to the world than Saddam.  To the region?  Possibly.  However, with the most recent agreement between the Iraqi gov't and the Iranian gov't...we could see a situation where the Iranians lend support to the Iraqis.  Not what Bushco. wants, but it would give the Iraqi government a local ally.  You'd think the Saudis and the Jordanians and other ARAB countries could be convinced to help out...but no.

I think it's time to leave.  The mess in Iraq can't be cleaned up.  It's a simmering pot of sectarian and political violence, and the US forces are barely keeping a lid on it.  If they leave - when they leave, now or in 100 years - the pot will explode.  And that isn't from me - that's from Gen. Colin Powell.

Acacia said:
I don't mean to destroy your illusions but why is a candidate better just because he promises what he's expected to promise? Read my lips. No more taxes. Have we all forgotten that? As a voter, I would be interested what Obama can do in order to help the region, other than just have the troops leave.
Click to expand...

I challenge the connection between a pledge for no taxes and a pledge for troop withdrawal.  While you might be concerned what Obama will do to assist the Middle East, I would remind you that Obama was a vocal critic of the war in the beginning.  Unlike candidates such as Hillary Clinton and John Edwards who voted to authorize the war, Obama spoke out from day 1.  I would say that his "expectation" has been obvious, yes, but I wouldn't call it pandering.  George H. W. Bush was handed a terribly mismanaged economy and was forced to raise taxes to pay for it.  A credit given often to Bill Clinton, I must note.

However, Obama has pledged to work on actually eliminating Al Qaeda, including upping troop presence in Afghanistan and going after Taliban/Al Qaeda forces there.  Technically, both candidates have discussed INCREASING dischord in the region by reducing the US's dependence on foreign oil.  Though I am sure China/India's demand would make up for it.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Acacia does make a good point. Pipe dream promises are the hallmark of any successful campaign. The rosy picture of how the future will be under the new regime often does not come to fruition and it is always more difficult to keep the promises than it is to make them. Particularly when you don't have much experience getting stuff done. Bottom line is; getting out of Iraq is not going to be easy or quick no matter whom the president is and, as you say LC, no matter when it gets left behind, it's going to be a nightmare. Oil is running out and dependence on oil is being addressed. Nations in the region like the U.A.E. are smart and are preparing for this inevitability and will have a stable tourism economy when this happens; most of the others are up shit creek and when the oil is gone, no one is going to care about them. That's when the real problems begin.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Deano said:
Acacia does make a good point. Pipe dream promises are the hallmark of any successful campaign. The rosy picture of how the future will be under the new regime often does not some to fruition and it is always more difficult to keep the promises than it is to make them. Particularly when you don't have much experience getting stuff done. Bottom line is; getting out of Iraq is not going to be easy or quick no matter whom the president is and, as you say LC, no matter when it gets left behind, it's going to be a nightmare. Oil is running out and dependence on oil is being addressed. Nations in the region like the U.A.E. are smart and are preparing for this inevitability and will have a stable tourism economy when this happens; most of the others are up shit creek and when the oil is gone, no one is going to care about them. That's when the real problems begin.
Click to expand...

Neither candidate in this case has extensive executive experience.  While one candidate has superior senatorial experience, that doesn't translate into foreign policy experience (necessarily) or command experience.  It just so happens that that particular candidate is a retired Navy Captain and has a fair amount of command experience on his own.

Again, I think John McCain's plan is to get out of Iraq by the 2012 elections (or at least to be beginning withdrawal), but he wants to do it in a less leisurely manner than Barack Obama does.  But if the withdrawal is in 2009 or 2012 or 2020...regardless...the shit will then hit the fan.  I don't think it is possible to create a stable government in Iraq without allowing the incumbent civil war to complete...it'll keep simmering till the lid is lifted.
 
Re: USA Elections: Candidates Comparison

Iran will move in as soon as we move out. I can almost guarantee it. But anyway, back on topic......
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top