President of the US of A, the Poll - Page 9

**South** · 08-16-2007, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by webgirl

There has to be a time in history when minoiroty will overcome...I vote Clinton! Too bad she has such an idiot husband.

Her husband is the least of her problems.

**John Scott** · 08-16-2007, 07:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by webgirl

There has to be a time in history when minoiroty will overcome...I vote Clinton! Too bad she has such an idiot husband.

I'd have to say that whereas Bill was just a nimcompoop of a sexual predator, that woman is infinitely more dangerous. Her disregard for parental rights and her extreme socialism, to me, is more dangerous than the comic stupidity of her husband.

navyfalcon · 08-16-2007, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Scott

I'd have to say that whereas Bill was just a nimcompoop of a sexual predator, that woman is infinitely more dangerous. Her disregard for parental rights and her extreme socialism, to me, is more dangerous than the comic stupidity of her husband.

To Scott
Sometimes your intelligence is beyond your age
falcon

newjustforyoudotcom · 08-26-2007, 04:05 PM

I think Hilary has a good chance just because of her last name. I'm not saying she's not qulified but her last name helps her.

**John Scott** · 08-26-2007, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by newjustforyoudotcom

I think Hilary has a good chance just because of her last name. I'm not saying she's not qulified but her last name helps her.

I think it does more harm than good.

Ferre · 08-26-2007, 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Scott

I think it does more harm than good.

Hehhe, we do seem to agree sometimes.

newjustforyoudotcom · 08-26-2007, 07:34 PM

I don't know Bill was a pretty popular president. Even with his little accident.

zibblu · 08-27-2007, 12:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Julie

My 1st choice isn't on the list.

mine either... I'm all about the "fringe" candidates ... the ones that actually tell the truth. but of those 2 I'd have to go with Obama over Clinton.

I can't even imagine voting for a Republican especially after the "performance" of George W Bush... but certainly McCain over RudyG (anyone over RudyG.)

**John Scott** · 08-27-2007, 04:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by newjustforyoudotcom

I don't know Bill was a pretty popular president. Even with his little accident.

He had the female vote. It was a "vagina vote". Hillary, on the other hand, doesn't have the same charisma with the female voters.

Grumps · 08-27-2007, 05:20 AM

What about the others? How did McCain make it to the list while some other didnt? Because he made some stupid Iraq remarks?

Ferre · 08-27-2007, 06:02 AM

Still miss Ron Paul on that list. It looks like we censor him just as FOX and CNN are doing.

temyong · 08-27-2007, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Scott

He had the female vote. It was a "vagina vote". Hillary, on the other hand, doesn't have the same charisma with the female voters.

I think lesbian will vote her.heheheeheh

zibblu · 08-27-2007, 09:27 AM

Ron Paul is great on foreign issues (non interventionist is clearly the right policy for America) and I love him on civil liberty issues (save abortion) but I think his plan as president would include demolishing almost all social programs and this is a very bad plan indeed. He would also likely decrease governmental controls when it comes to the environment. He's against the min. wage. If you really look into what being a Libertarian means you see how wrong it is for America.

Paul has been embraced by liberals because he is 3 things that are absolutely shocking coming from a Republican: #1 honest #2 anti-war #3 pro civil liberty. And I certainly applaud him for these things and would choose him over any other Republican candidate but I think he has, unfortunately, overshadowed the true progressives in the race (on the Dem. side) - Dennis Kucinich & Mike Gravel. They are also honest, anti-war, and pro civil liberty. But they also believe in universal health care (a policy that Paul would never go for and the best example of the differences between Paul and Kucinich & Gravel.)

Ferre · 08-27-2007, 09:50 AM

Dennis Kucinich has dissapointed me and litteraly millions of other people, since he was appointed to be chairman of the Domestic Policy Subcommittee which actually gives him jurisdiction over the drug czar's office, I would have expected him to end the raids on medicinal Cannabis users, specially knowing how he "talks" about this issue. However, since he is in charge there has been a boost in those raids. They didn't stop but got worse.

He doesn't walk as he talks, as they say in my part of the woods. And when he dissapoints this big when he has the power to actually make some difference on this issue I expect him to be just the same kind of weasel when he has other powers.

zibblu · 08-27-2007, 10:04 AM

Ferre - I was not aware of that. Interesting... But you should consider the amount of opposition he may have in the congress. It isn't easy to make changes in the American political system (it's set up that way on purpose, but it can be frustrating.) Especially consider that he's been up against a Republican majority with Dubya in the White House. Effecting any sort of serious marijuana reform in that environment would be next to impossible.

One thing that does concern me is when Kucinich says he's never smoked pot. That just seems highly unlikely and it's even more concerning if it's actually true!

Mike Gravel is really my guy but he has no chance of being elected. I'm just hoping that the Gravel's and the Kucinich's push the Obama's & Clinton's further to the "left" as it's called.

Obama's people recently called me asking for a donation and I told them I would not send them a donation until Obama supports true universal health care.

I don't know if you follow this issue Ferre, being in another country, but health care is a serious problem here and Kucinich is the one with the best (Most European) plan. The rest of the democrats have very weak programs right now & the Republicans? Forget about it. They have no interest in poor people having health care.

If you ask Rudy G about health care he'll start yammering on about 9/11 (just like he does when you ask him about ANYTHING.) Rudy G. may be "America's Mayor" but he's no longer New York's. He's hated here. People much prefer Mike Bloomberg.

MakeYourFirst$$$ · 08-27-2007, 03:50 PM

This argument will never end but I guess it is not supposed to.

navyfalcon · 08-27-2007, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MakeYourFirst$$$

This argument will never end but I guess it is not supposed to.

-
It will end soon, but will heat up as primaries are near, then it will have fewer candidates to cover, then after the election the news will say how we should have voted, then the new president and some serious problems to solve.
Hope the one elected is capable
falcon

**John Scott** · 08-27-2007, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zibblu

Especially consider that he's been up against a Republican majority

Not unless you consider "majority" to mean "minority".

The Dems control the House. And despite what a few Dems would like you to believe, they haven't got the balls to legalize weed.

zibblu · 08-27-2007, 11:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Scott

Not unless you consider "majority" to mean "minority".

The Dems control the House. And despite what a few Dems would like you to believe, they haven't got the balls to legalize weed.

Well of course I mean until recently. The 12 years previous to that I was referring to!

To the lack of balls statement... I must sadly agree. There's plenty of politics going on. Drugs are too much of a hot button issue and none of those guys wants to risk their "electability" in the process of trying to actually change anything for the better. But while I think the Dems are pretty poor on civil liberty issues, the Republicans are plain scary.