NationStates Jolt Archive

I’ve attempted to put together a list of nine politicians most likely to vie for the Presidency in 2008, and I’d like to know who, in your opinion, will be elected to the highest office of the United States. The ‘other’ option is necessary—I could’ve overlooked some strong contender.

My vote goes to Senator McCain—he seems to be quite popular in the US (of course, I’m looking from afar :)), and the Democrats can be trusted to miss a good opportunity again… or they're not?

It is a bit premature, I know, to make such assumptions before the Congressional election of 2006, but still...

Well, which is it to be?

(Poll to be added.)

Justin Timberlake

Homer Simpson

I very much look forward to the 08 campaign. Both primaries will be exciting and this is the first time in my lifetime - and I don't know how long - since neither candidate running is an incuimbent or VP.

Weird Al Yankovic.

I very much look forward to the 08 campaign. Both primaries will be exciting and this is the first time in my lifetime - and I don't know how long - since neither candidate running is an incuimbent or VP.

Maybe Dick should run since Helen Thomas said she would off herself if he did.

Hillary Clinton on a Republican ticket. :mad:

Elvis Presley.

I very much look forward to the 08 campaign. Both primaries will be exciting and this is the first time in my lifetime - and I don't know how long - since neither candidate running is an incuimbent or VP.
Indeed, it is the first time in the lifetime of most of the people alive--the last such contest was between Herbert Hoover and Alfred Smith, back in 1928.

Gary Coleman.

Gary Coleman.

What you talkin bout?

Eutrusca should be the next US President, with Drunk Commies as his VP.

Unless the Democrats get thier act together, I honestly don't see any of them winning.

What is happening in the Democratic party right now is a power struggle between the "moderate" types (typified by, to draw an example from the 2004 election cycle, John Kerry) and the "Angry Left" people (Howard
Dean, Micheal Moore, every prominent Democrat you can think of right now).

Hillary Clinton seems to want to run for President in 2008 or 2012, and is realligning herself with the moderate types (speaking in public about religion in a positive manner, for example- something that Democrats don't often do but think that those red-state yahoos must do on a constant basis).

This won't work. The Angry Left nutcases have most of the money and the biggest (read: most easily agitated and mobilized, almost by definition) base and, to a lesser extent, power structure.

Howard Dean is Howard Dean. He couldn't pretend if he wanted to.

The problem is that while conservatives hate and loath the Angry Left, they despise Hillary Clinton with a depth of anger beyond the power of human language to express. And there is no "moderate" ready and able to run. That leaves the Angry Left.

Its things like this that make Republican National Commitee strategists, normally staid and sober individuals, start giggling to themselves and begin skipping down the road singing James Brown's "I Feel Good" (including the saxaphone solo, nah-nah-nah-nah nahnahNAHnah!). Because any Angry left candidate will destroy him or herself quickly and easily.

Jim Hacker :)

The Fifth Street Polka Band.

I swear to god if that fucker Romney becomes president I'm moving to Canada.

You seem to have forgotten perrenial write-in candidate Head of Lettuce

Kodos!

http://www.seti.housenet.org/pics/kodos.gif

/Don't blame me if you vote for Kang!

JEBEDIAH BUSH!!!
*party dance*

Newt Gingrich....hilarious...

I'm just hoping whoever it is can both spell and pronounce elementary school vocabulary - Bush's public speaking is fairly embarrassing.

Way too early to tell. There's at least two years to go until the campaigning gets serious. On the Red side, I'm betting that McCain just won't find the support he needs in the primaries. Hasn't yet and he hasn't changed his tune dramatically. Guilliani is a much worse choice, but he seems to be far more popular, probably because he's really a Democrat in wolf's clothing. I'd like to see a bright and capable governor run, but I can't think of a good Republican right now.

On the Blue side, I think Lieberman would still be the most electable, but Edwards is more likely to carry the convention. The Dems just haven't figured out how to repeat their success with Clinton and I don't think Hillary is anywhere near the politician that Bill was.

Pfft, election, yeah right. Where's the 'Glorious American Emperor George I' option? ;)

Unless I've dramatically misinterpreted general American opinion, I reckon the Dems might as well give up if the Reps pick Giuliani.

Newt Gingrich....hilarious...
My roommate and I were in the Air & Space Museum annex at Dulles airport yesterday and Newt was taking a tour right in front of us. Kinda odd having the guy standing not 10 feet away from you.

Unless I've dramatically misinterpreted general American opinion, I reckon the Dems might as well give up if the Reps pick Giuliani.


Giuliani?? The guys a slime ball. Bringing your mistress into the mansion. Promoting a guy like Bernie boy. Those two things alnoe make me question his character, and fitness to lead a team of McDonalds workers, much less the entire country.

what about Condy? First black AND first woman president. It'd be fun to watch the NAAPC and NOW freak out over her!

McCain.

Hillary Clinton are CRAZY! She's way too far left wing. I think our nation would explode into tiny little pieces if we go from far right to far left.

John McCain is right wing, but he is very moderate. He prolly won't make it to the polls (:(), but he is, as always, "the best second guy".

Also, Mitt Romney wouldn't be THAT bad... (Massachusetts guy m'self). Although, I DO wonder how he got elected governor. He's pretty right wing(not as much as Georgie boy), in the capital of Liberal America :p.

Giuliani?? The guys a slime ball. Bringing your mistress into the mansion. Promoting a guy like Bernie boy. Those two things alnoe make me question his character, and fitness to lead a team of McDonalds workers, much less the entire country.

His Grace Emperor Rudy the First may have been a POS scumbag but he was real good at being a scumbag. Remember the squeegee men? Remember having to go to the grocery store in a tank? Remember the Mafia?

If you got in his way, he crushed you like a little bug, then called a press conference to gloat. If you pissed him off, he crushed you like a little bug, then called a press conference to laugh.

Fortunatly he used this power for good, not evil... unless he, you know, got bored or whatever. So he needs a job where he has plenty of evil to crush, like the Presidency or maybe a superheroship. Otherwise he's going to be hassling some idiot artist or streetvendor or whatever, and that would be embarrassing because he's a private citizen now.

I swear to god if that fucker Romney becomes president I'm moving to Canada.

I thought you said that about Bush being REelected? :rolleyes:

Kodos!

http://www.seti.housenet.org/pics/kodos.gif
I know where my vote's going. But when are they going to crash a flying saucer into the Capitol's rotunda...? :p

Eutrusca should be the next US President, with Drunk Commies as his VP.
If nominated I will not run. If elected I will not serve. :p

If nominated I will not run. If elected I will not serve. :p

That makes me sad :(.

I swear to god if that fucker Romney becomes president I'm moving to Canada.
ROFLMFAO!!!! :D

what about Condy? First black AND first woman president. It'd be fun to watch the NAAPC and NOW freak out over her!
LOL! I was thinking much the same thing when I was looking at the list of "prospective presidents." :D

That makes me sad :(.
Why, for God's sake??? I would make a LOUSY President! I'm not married, so the press would have a field day calling my current "the First Mistress." I can't stand fundamentalists, so they would be chanting prayers at every speech I gave. I love to go out on my own, so the incidence of heart-failure among the members of the Secret Service would skyrocket. Congress would probably piss me off so often that I would refuse to let them adjourn.

There's more, but I think you get the general drift! :D

Why, for God's sake??? I would make a LOUSY President! I'm not married, so the press would have a field day calling my current "the First Mistress." I can't stand fundamentalists, so they would be chanting prayers at every speech I gave. I love to go out on my own, so the incidence of heart-failure among the members of the Secret Service would skyrocket. Congress would probably piss me off so often that I would refuse to let them adjourn.

There's more, but I think you get the general drift! :D

EXACTLY!

Anyone but Dean or Clinton.....anyone who isn't them!!

EXACTLY!
LOL! Um ... getting some work done is better than none at all. My presidency would be the ultimate in governmental gridlock! :D

Way too early to tell. There's at least two years to go until the campaigning gets serious. On the Red side, I'm betting that McCain just won't find the support he needs in the primaries. Hasn't yet and he hasn't changed his tune dramatically. Guilliani is a much worse choice, but he seems to be far more popular, probably because he's really a Democrat in wolf's clothing. I'd like to see a bright and capable governor run, but I can't think of a good Republican right now.

On the Blue side, I think Lieberman would still be the most electable, but Edwards is more likely to carry the convention. The Dems just haven't figured out how to repeat their success with Clinton and I don't think Hillary is anywhere near the politician that Bill was.



If I had to have a democrat, it would either be Edwards or Lieberman.

A head of lettuce.

If I had to have a democrat, it would either be Edwards or Lieberman.

LIEBERMAN? At least Edwards is normal.

But... Lieberman? Oh, you must not want any entertainment in the future.

LIEBERMAN? At least Edwards is normal.

But... Lieberman? Oh, you must not want any entertainment in the future.
Edwards??? :eek:

Edwards is an expensive suit devoid of redeeming content!

tom vilsack :p

LIEBERMAN? At least Edwards is normal.

But... Lieberman? Oh, you must not want any entertainment in the future.



He's the closest democrat to centrist I can think of...and games like GTA do NOT belong in the hands of our children. He's doing the right thing!

He's the closest democrat to centrist I can think of...and games like GTA do NOT belong in the hands of our children. He's doing the right thing!

If he has his way, they won't be in the hands of ANYONE.

I'd like to see a black, female, non-christian, homosexual leftwinger win. I just think the crrunnnccch sound the US would make as it physically implodes in on itself would be enjoyable.

But I'll settle for anybody but Hillary. I agree with her on most issues. But that doesn't matter. I hate her with a passion I usually reserve for GWB, and I'm not the only one. She would be trounced by anyone who ran against her. The head of lettuce we keep hearing about would be elected in a landslide. If there is one sure way to ensure a Republican victory in 08, it is to have Hillary run for the Democratic party. I'd say we need to put up someone who doesn't suck or lie about thier military record *cough*kerry*cough*, and someone who is charismatic and likeable enough to mobilize both the leftist base(yes it still exists, don't kid yourself.) and grab moderates. And then I want that person to run with Nader. I mean Nader is a likeable guy - he's helped america immensely with his safety crusades, he's honest, and he does have a loyal base. And considering that he takes votes from any democratic candidate, why not use that?

If he has his way, they won't be in the hands of ANYONE.

Neither will TV or radio. Or computers. Or the internet. Or freedom of speech, really.

Lieberman's just a dickhead.

Kroisistan, just out of curiosity, I know a lot of people have a strong dislike for Hilary Clinton that I would normally chalk up to ideology in a nation known for its partisanship, but why do you dislike her if you agree with many of her positions? Only asking since there seems to be a lot of animosity levelled against Senator Clinton that seems to go beyond "Eek! A 'liberal'!!" and I admittedly know very little about her.

I'd like to see a black, female, non-christian, homosexual leftwinger win. I just think the crrunnnccch sound the US would make as it physically implodes in on itself would be enjoyable.

How about a black female, because there's one available in 2008. She's got valuable expierience in both international diplomacy and military grand strategy. And she's got a small but enthusiastic base.

Unfortunatly, she's a christian and she isn't a left-winger. I don't know if she's a homosexual- she isn't married and hasn't been seen with a man in public in quite a while- but her fans and her current boss don't seem to care.

Oh, and we knbow she's a fan of the Matrix (http://www.rightwingnews.com/graphics/drrice.jpg).

What do you think?

-snip-
Condoleezza Rica has not held any elective office; the last President who never did was, as far as I know, Dwight Eisenhower. I think that's a significant disadvantage.

Forgive me (for being a foreigner with little knowledge of your system) but couldn't Bill Clinton stand again? I know presidents can only serve two consecutive terms, but could he not stand again? Surely people have got over the whole Lewinsky thing by now...

True, true- but like Eisenhower, she's a hugely popular wartime leader, enourmously appealing to her fans, up against (probably) a week and divided opposing party.

All she needs is for the War on Terror (TM) to be over or appearently so by 2008 and she'll have to activly resist being nominated.

Now, I DO know that Bill Clinton cannot run again, and that no, a lot of people have not gotten over the Lewinsky thing :/

I'm not American, but I wouldn't be surprised if Senator Clinton was the next president.

Surely people have got over the whole Lewinsky thing by now...

Hah, hah, silly foreigners!

Seriously, I doubt if anyone will ever get over Monica (except Bill, and those days are over now- badaDUM!)

Speaking as a Neoconservative, I don't get Monicagate either, never did. There are so many good, solid, legal reasons to tar and feather both Clintons and exile them to Paris that making a big deal over some chunky ho was a tactical error, to say the least.

Everyone involved lost big time, except for future American high schoolers in History Class- finally, a chapter that's interesting!

True, true- but like Eisenhower, she's a hugely popular wartime leader, enourmously appealing to her fans, up against (probably) a week and divided opposing party.

All she needs is for the War on Terror (TM) to be over or appearently so by 2008 and she'll have to activly resist being nominated.
IMHO comparing Rice to General of the Army Eisenhower as a wartime leader is a bit of a stretch. She isn't a military commander, after all.

And that absence of a husband... The Hard Right will be very alarmed.

I'd be more than happy to cast my vote for Dr. Rice or Senator McCain. Together, they'd be my "dream ticket", and I wouldn't care a bit which one was at the top of the ticket. :)

Why, for God's sake??? I would make a LOUSY President! I'm not married, so the press would have a field day calling my current "the First Mistress." I can't stand fundamentalists, so they would be chanting prayers at every speech I gave. I love to go out on my own, so the incidence of heart-failure among the members of the Secret Service would skyrocket. Congress would probably piss me off so often that I would refuse to let them adjourn.

There's more, but I think you get the general drift! :D

Make me your VP (even though we have seriously clashing views on just about everything) and trust me, the media will be so busy with me that they won't have TIME to cover you.

I voteed Hillary. Not necessarily because I support her, or want her to be the next President, but I think she has a good chance and will be a strong contender. Anyone who thinks she ain't running in '08 well, you are deluded. She's running.

And if she gets the nod in the Democratic Primary, I will vote for her, too. For me, the letter infront of the name being a "D" has always been the most important thing to me in an election. Damned if I'll vote for an R...not even an R like McCain, though, if I ever would vote an R, it would be someone like McCain.

How about a black female, because there's one available in 2008. She's got valuable expierience in both international diplomacy and military grand strategy. And she's got a small but enthusiastic base.

Unfortunatly, she's a christian and she isn't a left-winger. I don't know if she's a homosexual- she isn't married and hasn't been seen with a man in public in quite a while- but her fans and her current boss don't seem to care.

Oh, and we knbow she's a fan of the Matrix (http://www.rightwingnews.com/graphics/drrice.jpg).

What do you think?

Well I've read some of Condi's stuff before she became Sec of State, and I can honestly say I'm scared of what she might do if she had that much power. The writings I read were extremely imperialistic, both culturally and militarily(suggesting that American values are universal and thus we have every right to bring them to other nations by any means), and suggest that should it suit America, we should not be required to abide by any treaty we have signed, including the Geneva convention. I couldn't vote for someone like that. Plus she's never held any elected office.

But she is a fan of the Matrix... hmm choices choices. :D

I was just making a joke about the black female thing, I wouldn't vote for Condi.

IMHO comparing Rice to General of the Army Eisenhower as a wartime leader is a bit of a stretch. She isn't a military commander, after all.

And that absence of a husband... The Hard Right will be very alarmed.

A stretch, yes, but not that big of one, as Tommy Franks won't run and Proconsul Bremer is a jerk.

As for what you call the Hard Right (I think you mean the Christian Conservatives), I'm going to let you in on a little secret:

Just because we agree with them most of the time doesn't mean we like them any more than you do. Trust me on this. They're creepy.

When the Democrats are finally destroyed (as fortold by the Book of Prophesy as revealed by Evil High Dark Lord Grand Master Karl Rove) the big political divide in this country will be between Neocons (relativly liberal on social matters) and Christian Coalition types (relativly dovish on international relations).

IMHO

Forgive me (for being a foreigner with little knowledge of your system) but couldn't Bill Clinton stand again? I know presidents can only serve two consecutive terms, but could he not stand again? Surely people have got over the whole Lewinsky thing by now...

No, Clinton can never run again. at least, not Bill. The U.S. law says that a President may serve ten years, or two terms. So, a VP, for example, could finish out 2 years of a term in which the elected Pres died, and then run for two of his own terms. But if the VP in question served 3 years of an unfinished term, he'd only get to run for one of his own.

That is how U.S. law works in terms of term limits on the Presidency. Two terms or ten years, total, in your lifetime, regardless of whether or not they are consecutive.

Example, Bush Sr., having served only one term...could run again...but only for one term. Clinton, having served two full terms, is no longer eligible to run.

[QUOTE=Kroisistan]Well I've read some of Condi's stuff before she became Sec of State, and I can honestly say I'm scared of what she might do if she had that much power. The writings I read were extremely imperialistic, both culturally and militarily(suggesting that American values are universal and thus we have every right to bring them to other nations by any means), and suggest that should it suit America, we should not be required to abide by any treaty we have signed, including the Geneva convention.[QUOTE]

Yes. She's one of the few real neocons in the administration. Paul Wolfowitz was another one, but now he's off to run the World Bank or some other orginazation that hands out my tax money to foreigners for reasons I don't understand.

Bush, you should know, is only mildly a neocon.

I voteed Hillary. Not necessarily because I support her, or want her to be the next President, but I think she has a good chance and will be a strong contender. Anyone who thinks she ain't running in '08 well, you are deluded. She's running.

And if she gets the nod in the Democratic Primary, I will vote for her, too. For me, the letter infront of the name being a "D" has always been the most important thing to me in an election. Damned if I'll vote for an R...not even an R like McCain, though, if I ever would vote an R, it would be someone like McCain.

Congratulations! You vote solely upon party lines rather than what someone says (EDIT: As in, what their politics actually seem to be.)

Please stop voting.

I picked Joe Biden, not that I really can say I think he'll be the next president, but more so that I think he would make a very good one. He's a moderate and well respected and has tons of foreign affairs knowledge and seems to be quite realistic in the things I've heard him say. He is willing to work with both sides of the isle and could go a long way to perhaps mending the wounds of America and the wounds with the world created by Bush Jr.

Just my opinion.

McCain's awsome hed make a great president, so republican, yet not annoying. No offense to anyone but i dont see hilary clinton winning the 08 election.

I also believe that Bill Richardson (http://www.governor.state.nm.us/index2.php) of New Mexico would make a damn fine president.

He's the closest democrat to centrist I can think of...and games like GTA do NOT belong in the hands of our children. He's doing the right thing!


yeah well GTA is rated M and you have to be 18 to get it. so... children arent getting them unless someone over than 18 gets it for them.

A stretch, yes, but not that big of one, as Tommy Franks won't run and Proconsul Bremer is a jerk.

As for what you call the Hard Right (I think you mean the Christian Conservatives), I'm going to let you in on a little secret:

Just because we agree with them most of the time doesn't mean we like them any more than you do. Trust me on this. They're creepy.

When the Democrats are finally destroyed (as fortold by the Book of Prophesy as revealed by Evil High Dark Lord Grand Master Karl Rove) the big political divide in this country will be between Neocons (relativly liberal on social matters) and Christian Coalition types (relativly dovish on international relations).

IMHO


Eh, it's not like we're too fond of your neo-imperialism ourselves. Just keep to yourselves and help us defeat the evil democrats, then we can get down to the real issues :D

Done.

McCain's awsome hed make a great president, so republican, yet not annoying. No offense to anyone but i dont see hilary clinton winning the 08 election.



McCain should just admit it: He's not a real Republican, he's a phony! A big, fat phony!!! Hey everybody, this guy's a phony!

all and all i cant name names because i dont know enough about any of them other then I hope to god it isnt hillary, america needs to get away from the first one family gets prez then their son, wife, daughter runs a couple years later...

I mean that is evently how Monarchys got formed in the first place. And i think the person will be a general moderate, probably leaning slightly right, since americans are tired of the bickering between both parties, they actually want to see shit get done instead of constant retortoric and blocking of anything and everything just because it has a republican or democratic backing. Though who knows, the louder the minority radical left continues to yell the more moderates vote right. Which is basically why bush won relection. The radical left LOST the election for Kerry because they were so stupidly anti bush and loud they alienated moderates, and that message got attached to all democrats, and they seem to continue doing this, so maybe the democrats will lose even worse in the coming years if they dont get these people to shut up or tone down their radicalism.

all and all i cant name names because i dont know enough about any of them other then I hope to god it isnt hillary, america needs to get away from the first one family gets prez then their son, wife, daughter runs a couple years later...

I mean that is evently how Monarchys got formed in the first place. And i think the person will be a general moderate, probably leaning slightly right, since americans are tired of the bickering between both parties, they actually want to see shit get done instead of constant retortoric and blocking of anything and everything just because it has a republican or democratic backing. Though who knows, the louder the minority radical left continues to yell the more moderates vote right. Which is basically why bush won relection. The radical left LOST the election for Kerry because they were so stupidly anti bush and loud they alienated moderates, and that message got attached to all democrats, and they seem to continue doing this, so maybe the democrats will lose even worse in the coming years if they dont get these people to shut up or tone down their radicalism.



Nah, I'd rather the radical left keep screaming their anti-Bush mantras. It's good for us Republicans :D

yeah well GTA is rated M and you have to be 18 to get it. so... children arent getting them unless someone over than 18 gets it for them.

oh come on now, all americans are stupid little babies that cant do anything for themselves, they need a mighty paternal government to rule over them in every aspect of their lives
(democratic party motto)

McCain should just admit it: He's not a real Republican, he's a phony! A big, fat phony!!! Hey everybody, this guy's a phony!
What do you mean by that?

Elizabeth Windsor. At least, if I have anything to do with it.

What do you mean by that?



He's an independent in Republican's clothing. His actions reflect that :D

oh come on now, all americans are stupid little babies that cant do anything for themselves, they need a mighty paternal government to rule over them in every aspect of their lives
(democratic party motto)



Eh, I would have to agree with the democrats on the parental control issue *shocked*. Many parents are too irresponsible to raise their children properly, government does need to step in at points.

Hilary Cant wait til 2008. She has a great chance in being the leader of the country if she changes to a republician.

McCain should just admit it: He's not a real Republican, he's a phony! A big, fat phony!!! Hey everybody, this guy's a phony!

You're right. He's a man of character and integrity pretending to be a republican. Burn him!!

On a serious note, I really doubt a woman or a minority could get elected as president in the USA at this time in history. The red states would never vote for either a woman or a minority. And like it or not, even some democrats wouldn't. Sadly the USA is still very much a man's world, even if more women vote.

oh come on now, all americans are stupid little babies that cant do anything for themselves, they need a mighty paternal government to rule over them in every aspect of their lives
(democratic party motto)

Wow. I guess you caught me.

I was just trying to make the government arbitrarily bigger for no good reason at all. I just want to invade every aspect of your life. My bad.

All that stuff about helping the poor, ensuring social justice, protecting the environment, making the nation and world a better place - an utter farce designed to inflate the size of the government because I think you are a mindless child. Us trying to keep the state and church separete to ensure the rights of atheists and religious minority - a shameless lie. Oh it looks like we're actually trying to keep the government OUT of certain areas, like the bedroom, personal religon, etc, but in reality, we are just treating you like a child and secretly putting the government into your life. Attempting to regulate industry to protect workers and the environment - you got me, I just hate freedom.

And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for those meddling NS'ers, and thier dog...

You're right. He's a man of character and integrity pretending to be a republican. Burn him!!



Well, you did get the "burn him!" part right. He's more like an independent pretending to be a man of character and integrity :D

On a serious note, I really doubt a woman or a minority could get elected as president in the USA at this time in history. The red states would never vote for either a woman or a minority. And like it or not, even some democrats wouldn't. Sadly the USA is still very much a man's world, even if more women vote.

The very, very sad truth. It makes me sick, really.

On a serious note, I really doubt a woman or a minority could get elected as president in the USA at this time in history. The red states would never vote for either a woman or a minority. And like it or not, even some democrats wouldn't. Sadly the USA is still very much a man's world, even if more women vote.


What are you talking about? Do you really think we are so shallow? I guarantee you that, if it came down to Condi and....say....well, any wicked democrat running for president, Condi would win in a landslide. Gender and race have nothing to do with it. The red states wouldn't change their political ideology to fit some shallow standards you dare impose upon them, and I'm offended that you even suggest it.

Hilary Cant wait til 2008. She has a great chance in being the leader of the country if she changes to a republician.



If she changed to Republican, we would all change to democrat :rolleyes:

What are you talking about? Do you really think we are so shallow? I guarantee you that, if it came down to Condi and....say....well, any wicked democrat running for president, Condi would win in a landslide. Gender and race have nothing to do with it. The red states wouldn't change their political ideology to fit some shallow standards you dare impose upon them, and I'm offended that you even suggest it.

You're delusional.. I don't just say this based on just this post, but the totality of your posts.

You're delusional.. I don't just say this based on just this post, but the totality of your posts.


And I say don't say that you are delusional, rather, you pick your reality by cherrypicking the aspects you like and ignoring the ones you don't like. I don't say this just on the post you made but on the totality of your posts.

And I say don't say that you are delusional, rather, you pick your reality by cherrypicking the aspects you like and ignoring the ones you don't like. I don't say this just on the post you made but on the totality of your posts.

I would need an external metaphysical agent to decipher that comment.

I would need an external metaphysical agent to decipher that comment.

ROFL :)

And I say don't say that you are delusional, rather, you pick your reality by cherrypicking the aspects you like and ignoring the ones you don't like. I don't say this just on the post you made but on the totality of your posts.

Your originality is also quite amazing.. Why don't you just copy what I said back to me? Oh right, you did!

I think for myself, I don't rule my life based on a relic book known as the bible. Free thought, you might want to try it some time.

Anyway.. I don't wish to flame you or start a flame war.. so, I shall cease and desist.

Your originality is also quite amazing.. Why don't you just copy what I said back to me? Oh right, you did!

I think for myself, I don't rule my life based on a relic book known as the bible. Free thought, you might want to try it some time.

Anyway.. I don't wish to flame you or start a flame war.. so, I shall cease and desist.



Yes, silly ol' brainwashed me :rolleyes: Relying on the knowledge of an omniscient Being instead of my own fallible mind. Prefering wisdom to intellectual arrogance. Humility, you might want to try it some time.


I, too, shall now cease and desist...let's get back to lampooning each other's presidential picks ;)

let's get back to lampooning each other's presidential picks ;)

Deal!

Nyah nyah! Yor presidential candidates are a bunch of wienies with the moral standing of embezzling child pornagraphers, and their mommies dress them funny!

:p

I picked Joe Biden, not that I really can say I think he'll be the next president, but more so that I think he would make a very good one. He's a moderate and well respected and has tons of foreign affairs knowledge and seems to be quite realistic in the things I've heard him say. He is willing to work with both sides of the isle and could go a long way to perhaps mending the wounds of America and the wounds with the world created by Bush Jr.

Just my opinion.

Now who is the delusional one? Senators don't get elected President (last one was JFK).

As per the bolded: :p

BTW That whole plagerizing thingie would come back to bite him, again.

Now who is the delusional one? Senators don't get elected President (last one was JFK)

I do believe I said that I didn't per se think he would become president. So, sorry, no delusions here. However, you just contradicted yourself.. first you said "Senators don't get elected President" then you put in brackets that in fact a Senator has in fact been elected in the past. So it is possible.

I still think he would make a good choice though. However in the post below that one I stated I thought Bill Richardson of New Mexico would probably be a great choice. Think before you type. ;)

Jon Stewart for president.

I shall be the President in 2008! Now let's see, I'd be... 15 then...damn.

JEBEDIAH BUSH!!!
*party dance*
While he calls himself "Jeb" his name is actually "John Ellis." Jeb is just a way to make him seem more "folksy" and "in touch with the electorate."

I thought you said that about Bush being REelected? :rolleyes:

Yeah, except I didn't. Who are you, anyway?

What are you talking about? Do you really think we are so shallow? I guarantee you that, if it came down to Condi and....say....well, any wicked democrat running for president, Condi would win in a landslide. Gender and race have nothing to do with it. The red states wouldn't change their political ideology to fit some shallow standards you dare impose upon them, and I'm offended that you even suggest it.

She wouldn't get the chance. She wouldn't make it out of the Republican primaries.

What you talkin' 'bout Willis?

Corrected. ;)

By the way, Hilary won't win because despite her political skills, she's a cold-hearted bitch and everyone hates her. Popularity and being able to relate with the normal folk is what gets a politician into office.

<snip>My vote goes to Senator McCain—he seems to be quite popular in the US (of course, I’m looking from afar :)), and the Democrats can be trusted to miss a good opportunity again… or they're not?
Please Ghod... not the Manchurian Candidate. I'd rather Hillary won. At least I'd know what to expect. McCain is as predictable, stable and beneficial as a major Tornado.

If we're lucky, they will al drop dead and Ron Paul will drop his Republican cover and step in as the Libertarian.

I think Geena Davis is gonna win.

She wouldn't get the chance. She wouldn't make it out of the Republican primaries.



I disagree. Now, if there was a better candidate, of course she wouldn't. But, if she was our only chance of winning, they would choose her without second thought.

I disagree. Now, if there was a better candidate, of course she wouldn't. But, if she was our only chance of winning, they would choose her without second thought.

Well, then I have to agree with Stephistan's evaluation of your mental state. If you believe that this country is ready to elect a black woman, you are in need of help.

Anyway.. I don't wish to flame you or start a flame war.. so, I shall cease and desist.
ANOTHER FIRST! WOW! :D

I do believe I said that I didn't per se think he would become president. So, sorry, no delusions here. However, you just contradicted yourself.. first you said "Senators don't get elected President" then you put in brackets that in fact a Senator has in fact been elected in the past. So it is possible.

I still think he would make a good choice though. However in the post below that one I stated I thought Bill Richardson of New Mexico would probably be a great choice. Think before you type. ;)

3 out of 43 presidents have been senators with that last one 40plus years ago. I stand by my statement. It is possible, but slightly as Senators really have no leadership skills. Which is why Govenors are usually elected.

Learn a little something about my nation and it's politicial history before you type!

Here's a democrat dream ticket: Dodd and Kennedy. Happy hour is mandated into law and all of the "waitress sandwiches" you want!

JIMMY BUFFETT!!!!!!!!! (With Alan Jackson on a VP ticket)

And if Hillary Clinton wins, I'm buying a permenant residence in Margaritaville...or Canada, provided I can get margaritas there.

No, seriously, I think that if we elect Jimmy, the US, and the world, will be a hell of a lot better.

Here's a democrat dream ticket: Dodd and Kennedy. Happy hour is mandated into law and all of the "waitress sandwiches" you want!
ROFLMAO!!!! Ooooooooooooooooo! Can I run for office, please! LOL!

However in the post below that one I stated I thought Bill Richardson of New Mexico would probably be a great choice.

Why?

ROFLMAO!!!! Ooooooooooooooooo! Can I run for office, please! LOL!


Yes, you can be Secretary of Kicking it Old School (as the kids say these days).

BTW I hope you didn't want to engage in a waitress sandwich with "Lead Foot" Kennedy. :eek:

Well, then I have to agree with Stephistan's evaluation of your mental state. If you believe that this country is ready to elect a black woman, you are in need of help.



How can race and gender affect one's electability? It's not like a past affair, adulterous marriage, or openly homosexual relationship. You can't help your race and gender, you cannot abstain from practicing Blackosexuality or Womantery. I'm sure nobody with common sense would allow one's race and gender to change their political ideology.

If McCain's health wasn't fading, I'd say him, but recently he hasn't been the healthiest of men, so I voted other.

How can race and gender affect one's electability? It's not like a past affair, adulterous marriage, or openly homosexual relationship. You can't help your race and gender, you cannot abstain from practicing Blackosexuality or Womantery. I'm sure nobody with common sense would allow one's race and gender to change their political ideology.

Then you severly overestimate the amount of people with common sense, especially from places like Birmingham, Alabama (present company excluded). People WILL vote based on race, religion, and gender, over things such as political beliefs or campaign promises.

Then you severly overestimate the amount of people with common sense, especially from places like Birmingham, Alabama (present company excluded). People WILL vote based on race, religion, and gender, over things such as political beliefs or campaign promises.



I understand that racism still persists...but would someone honestly change their entire political ideology, the party they vote for, the issues they stand for...because the candidate supporting them is black and female?

Yes, you can be Secretary of Kicking it Old School (as the kids say these days).

BTW I hope you didn't want to engage in a waitress sandwich with "Lead Foot" Kennedy. :eek:
OMG! Hell no! LOL! :D

How can race and gender affect one's electability? It's not like a past affair, adulterous marriage, or openly homosexual relationship. You can't help your race and gender, you cannot abstain from practicing Blackosexuality or Womantery. I'm sure nobody with common sense would allow one's race and gender to change their political ideology.

Common sense? You're claiming racist voters use common sense instead of bigotry to cast their vote? The success of the Republicans in the past 25 years is due largely to the "Southern Strategy". They have admitted this and apologized for it just recently. I.E. They admit they courted the formerly Democratic Red States by capitilizing on their racism. It worked beautifully. It's amazing how you can get a bunch of people to vote against their economic interest by simply giving them a chance to vote for their hate.

I understand that racism still persists...but would someone honestly change their entire political ideology, the party they vote for, the issues they stand for...because the candidate supporting them is black and female?

Yes. They already did this en masse. It's called the Southern Strategy.

By 2008, even the Presidency will be outsourced!
Tony Blair will be looking for a job but better yet, a third George!
George Galloway! Yoo Hoo!

Gune, please use a smaller text that doesn't burn my eyes :mad:

What I dont understand, is why nobody put John Kerry?

Honestly. Kerry nearly won last election, against an incumbant. When Al gore went against a non incumbant, he got more votes than any other party. Assuming that things in iraq dont get drastically better by next election, I think kerry could win.

And John edwards? No way. As with Cheney, you can stand him fine as a VP(if you are for that party), but as president? God no.

What I dont understand, is why nobody put John Kerry?

Honestly. Kerry nearly won last election, against an incumbant. When Al gore went against a non incumbant, he got more votes than any other party. Assuming that things in iraq dont get drastically better by next election, I think kerry could win.

And John edwards? No way. As with Cheney, you can stand him fine as a VP(if you are for that party), but as president? God no.



Because people want a good president who actually takes a stand on issues. If the Republican presidential candidate was flip-flopping on issues like Kerry was, you wouldn't see me voting for him. I'm sure the Dems would love a candidate with firm ideals.

3 out of 43 presidents have been senators with that last one 40plus years ago. I stand by my statement. It is possible, but slightly as Senators really have no leadership skills. Which is why Govenors are usually elected.
Governors like "Weird Al" Yankovic, eh?

Learn a little something about my nation and it's politicial history before you type!
It is plausible to assume that the major parties will nominate, for example, Senator Clinton and Senator Allen in 2008.

Please Ghod... not the Manchurian Candidate. I'd rather Hillary won. At least I'd know what to expect. McCain is as predictable, stable and beneficial as a major Tornado.

If we're lucky, they will al drop dead and Ron Paul will drop his Republican cover and step in as the Libertarian.
So you think that McCain is mentally unstable, having been imprisoned by the North Vietnamese?

I find it hillarious to see republicans state that Lieberman is a moderate democrat when in fact he is more conservative than any republicans I'd care to think of.

I think Al Gore, Howard Dean and Russ Feingold would make great presidents. They are my favourites in that order.

I think Al Gore, Howard Dean and Russ Feingold would make great presidents. They are my favourites in that order.


If you think those guys would be good try these guys, (http://www.apas.com/personal/australia_2003/highlights-2003/images/3-monkeys.jpg) or these 3! (http://www.three-stooges.com/3-stooges.jpg)

If you think those guys would be good try these guys, (http://www.apas.com/personal/australia_2003/highlights-2003/images/3-monkeys.jpg) or these 3! (http://www.three-stooges.com/3-stooges.jpg)Those are the incumbent.

The three guys I mentioned have had nothing but sucess as politicans. Al Gore would've been even greater that Clinton, Howard Dean was an excelent governor of Vermont and Russ Feingold was the only senator to have the guts to stand up against the Patriot Act.

Those are the incumbent.

The three guys I mentioned have had nothing but sucess as politicans. Al Gore would've been even greater that Clinton, Howard Dean was an excelent governor of Vermont and Russ Feingold was the only senator to have the guts to stand up against the Patriot Act.




....Howard Dean? That would be like the right picking Fred Phelps :rolleyes:

"3 out of 43 presidents have been senators with that last one 40plus years ago. I stand by my statement. It is possible, but slightly as Senators really have no leadership skills. Which is why Govenors are usually elected."

Yah, people usually choose Governors, because they have control of an entire state. They are the state's commander in chief. PLUS, they stand up more to Presidents. The President has no control over what a Governor does.. its funny to watch, you'll notice that the President will usually do more for a Governor, than vice versa.

By the way, I am looking for a Dodd/Ford ticket, or a McCain/Shays ticket.

....Howard Dean? That would be like the right picking Fred Phelps :rolleyes:Please... Phelps is a sick human being... Howard Dean is a doctor and revolutionized Medicare in Vermont.

All you who expect Hillary Clinton to win should understand that she won't for the same reason GWB won for two terms. America doesn't like crazy liberals

All you who expect Hillary Clinton to win should understand that she won't for the same reason GWB won for two terms. Because she doesn't have her friends rig elections? Or have the Supreme Court appoint her as President?

America doesn't like crazy liberals
Oh, wow. There's a curve ball. :rolleyes:

Robin Cook was right.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61304-2005Apr17.html

http://www.alternet.org/columnists/story/21841/

Because she doesn't have her friends rig elections? Or have the Supreme Court appoint her as President?


Oh, wow. There's a curve ball. :rolleyes:



No, she just has infinite recounts until she somehow acquires the amount of votes to win :rolleyes:

Please... Phelps is a sick human being... Howard Dean is a doctor and revolutionized Medicare in Vermont.



They're both sick human beings. Howard Dean openly expressed hatred of Republicans! Can you imagine us being represented by a man who said he hates us!? That, and he tends to argue from emotion and screaming rather than logic.

They're both sick human beings. Howard Dean openly expressed hatred of Republicans! Can you imagine us being represented by a man who said he hates us!? That, and he tends to argue from emotion and screaming rather than logic.
And Bush doesn't show hatred of Democrats? Who was the guy that said "either you're with us or you're against us?" Who was the guy that implied that Democrats are as big a threat to America as the "tens of thousands of trained killers waiting to attack us"?

Those are the incumbent.

The three guys I mentioned have had nothing but sucess as politicans. Al Gore would've been even greater that Clinton, Howard Dean was an excelent governor of Vermont and Russ Feingold was the only senator to have the guts to stand up against the Patriot Act.


Hahaha, try again! :p

They're both sick human beings. Howard Dean openly expressed hatred of Republicans! Can you imagine us being represented by a man who said he hates us!? That, and he tends to argue from emotion and screaming rather than logic.He has dissagreed with full conviction with the Republican view on several issues, but he has never expressed or proliferated hatred. He is a colourful public speaker, but that's just his style. His political record as governor of Verrmont is simply outstanding.

McCain won't run because he knows that the GOP will never nominate him. Look for someone who can credibly appeal to the hard right without appearing to be a complete ass. Romney might be it.

"3 out of 43 presidents have been senators with that last one 40plus years ago. I stand by my statement. It is possible, but slightly as Senators really have no leadership skills. Which is why Govenors are usually elected."

Yah, people usually choose Governors, because they have control of an entire state. They are the state's commander in chief. PLUS, they stand up more to Presidents. The President has no control over what a Governor does.. its funny to watch, you'll notice that the President will usually do more for a Governor, than vice versa.

By the way, I am looking for a Dodd/Ford ticket, or a McCain/Shays ticket.


Correct.

BTW Do you think Ford would join Dodd in a waitress sandwich if asked?

He has dissagreed with full conviction with the Republican view on several issues, but he has never expressed or proliferated hatred. He is a colourful public speaker, but that's just his style. His political record as governor of Verrmont is simply outstanding.



"I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for."

And Bush doesn't show hatred of Democrats? Who was the guy that said "either you're with us or you're against us?" Who was the guy that implied that Democrats are as big a threat to America as the "tens of thousands of trained killers waiting to attack us"?



"Either you're with us or against us" was directed to other nations, not democrats, who were opposing the US after 9/11.

Mark Warner, present Virginia Govenor?

Yeah, he'd make a decent president, either that or John McCain.

"I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for."What was the context of that statement? I'd hate republicans too they very moment they decided to hand over their GOP to the PNAC.

It all depends on the context. Said as a general point of view it is a stupid comment, but I'm sure there was a context.

What was the context of that statement?


Eh, that's not one of the things that context can redeem. He stated he hated the Republicans.



"I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for, but I admire their discipline and their organization," the failed presidential hopeful told the crowd at the Roosevelt Hotel, where he and six other candidates spoke at the final DNC forum before the Feb. 12 vote for chairman.



Sorry, but admiration of our discipline and organization does not compensate for hating us.

"I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for."
"It's important for you all to understand that when our country speaks, that we mean it, and we do what we say. I said either you're with us or you're against us. I meant that." -- GWB, Rufus King High School, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, May 8, 2002 Either you support Bush or you support the terrorists. Bush is no better than Dean in loving the other side.

Eh, that's not one of the things that context can redeem. He stated he hated the Republicans.

What was the context of that statement? I'd hate republicans too they very moment they decided to hand over their GOP to the PNAC.

It all depends on the context. Said as a general point of view it is a stupid comment, but I'm sure there was a context.

?

"It's important for you all to understand that when our country speaks, that we mean it, and we do what we say. I said either you're with us or you're against us. I meant that." -- GWB, Rufus King High School, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, May 8, 2002 Either you support Bush or you support the terrorists. Bush is no better than Dean in loving the other side.



Lies. It's either you support America and its ideals or you oppose it. He never mentioned "me", he mentioned "us" which is the totality of the nation.

ANOTHER FIRST! WOW! :D

Uh huh, this coming from the guy who has been forum banned twice and numerous official warnings. I've never been warned even once for breaking ANY forum rules.

Why do people make this type of shit up? To get under my skin Eutrusca? Haha, doesn't work with me. I just take it from the source it comes from.

what about Condy? First black AND first woman president. It'd be fun to watch the NAAPC and NOW freak out over her!
Too much of a "yes" man. :eek:

Lies. It's either you support America and its ideals or you oppose it. He never mentioned "me", he mentioned "us" which is the totality of the nation.
Yes, but the subtlties of the context put that implication into people's heads. He still said "either you're with us or you're against us." It is our guess as to who this "us" is. He's also said on several occasssions, that "some people in Washington don't CARE about America's security," and we are to immediatly associate those "terrorist sympathizers" with the Democratic party. Nevertheless, he's convinced many of his sheep to hate the resistence, and we are seeing it everyday; it's particularly evident on FOX News.

It'll be Jeb Bush. On the ticket for vice president will likely be either Rudy or Pataki, since both of them would take New York without a problem.

The biggest reason I can see for Hillary losing is simple; Name one state that she could win that Kerry didn't? Yes, she's very popular in Illinois, California and Massachusetts, but they would vote for Hitler as long as he ran on the deomcratic ticket. Meanwhile, if Jeb and either Pataki or Rudy were opposing her, New York would fall to the Republicans, and Jersey would likely fall as well. Pennsylvania and Wisconsin were very close last time, and could tip over to the Republican side too, as the vice presidential candidate would be very moderate.

Yes, she's very popular in Illinois, California and Massachusetts, but they would vote for Hitler as long as he ran on the deomcratic ticket.

Godwin's Law!

You lose!

Godwin's Law!

You lose!

What if I use Stalin instead, is there a law for that?

What if I use Stalin instead, is there a law for that?

Well, I don't think there is one for Stalin... but you should perhaps at least use someone who's alive! LOL. Although I have heard that in America even a dead guy can win an election..so go for it.. haha.

What if I use Stalin instead, is there a law for that?
He studied for priesthood in Georgia, he worked with anti-government militias... that's too extreme, the Democrats wouldn't nominate Stalin. ;)

lol @ people who think Giuliani has a chance.

Biden 2008!

Biden 2008!

Biden/McCain 2008!

lol @ people who think Giuliani has a chance.

Biden 2008!

I just hope he doesn't plagerize his campaign speeches. :p

I just hope he doesn't plagerize his campaign speeches. :p

You mean like using terms like "Axis of evil"?

Barbara Bush

I'm hoping for Charles V.

Im hoping for someone that is strong on borders, language, culture. Someone who is a strong conserative. Someone who believes in a strong military. Hmmm I dont think that will happen :mad:

Biden/McCain 2008!

What the hell??

I don't get it, why do people always seem to think that McCain would switch over? That's about as likely as Geraldo shaving that mustache off.

Though I like the idea of Biden/McCain, I don't see McCain switching over.

Now Biden/Obama on the other hand...

What the hell??

I don't get it, why do people always seem to think that McCain would switch over? That's about as likely as Geraldo shaving that mustache off.
Its sort of like the Yankees in baseball. If you can't grow your own talent, take someone else's ;)

I would love to see Obama run....however i think he needs to steep in the senate for a little longer if you ask me....i can see him running sometime in the next decade...and frankly i think he can see himself doing that too. However i would like to see Clinton/Clark....Clinton because shes a head-screwed-on-the-right-way liberal and clark because hes enough of a moderate/ slightly gun happy enough to convince some democrats in the more rural areas of america....however i highly doubt wesley clark would run again but you never know. For reference im an american and i was hoping for a Dean/Clark last year....instead i got the brady bunch...and democrats wonder why we lost.

Godwin's Law!

You lose!
:D

What the hell??

I don't get it, why do people always seem to think that McCain would switch over? That's about as likely as Geraldo shaving that mustache off.

If he gets forked over the way Bush forked him over in 2000 he might, but you're right under normal circumstances.