NationStates Jolt Archive

Obama announced today that he is running for President. I think what he is really planning is to position himself to be Hillary's VP. I don't think he can get enough votes in the primary to get the nomination, but Hillary can. At some point, I see Obama making a deal, dropping out of the race, and supporting Hillary.

That might be a great strategy as polls are showing Hillary cannot win the election if McCain or Rudi is the Republican candidate. However, if you have a Clinton-Obama ticket they could pull it off. Obama could pull in the far left and black votes that Hillary can't.

What do you think? Poll coming.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070210/ap_on_el_pr/obama2008_13

I think that someone.......anyone.......should come up with a rational and less terrifying candidate......I haven't seen anyone yet on either side that didn't make me want to vomit.

:(

How about we elect neither, for the good of america?

Hillary's a bitch, and Obama will never get elected.

Seriously, if Hillary's elected videogamers will be sent to gitmo.

I have checked on you the Republicans are running, or any of the third parties yet. So, far, though, I'm liking Obama. Sure, I disagree with his politics, but he seems honest, and if that's reason enough for Adams to tell his friends to vote for Jefferson, that's good enough for me.

I think that someone.......anyone.......should come up with a rational and less terrifying candidate......I haven't seen anyone yet on either side that didn't make me want to vomit.

:(

How about you Smun? Why don't you run? :D

How about Rudi? What don't you like about him?

How about you Smun? Why don't you run? :D
I am too young :(

How about Rudi? What don't you like about him?
too authoritarian.

Obama announced today that he is running for President. I think what he is really planning is to position himself to be Hillary's VP. I don't think he can get enough votes in the primary to get the nomination, but Hillary can. At some point, I see Obama making a deal, dropping out of the race, and supporting Hillary.

That might be a great strategy as polls are showing Hillary cannot win the election if McCain or Rudi is the Republican candidate. However, if you have a Clinton-Obama ticket they could pull it off. Obama could pull in the far left and black votes that Hillary can't.

What do you think? Poll coming.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070210/ap_on_el_pr/obama2008_13

The polls I've seen have Hillary beating both McCain and Giuliani (http://pollingreport.com/wh08gen.htm). In fact, the only situation where a Republican beats a Democrat in the Newsweek poll is when Giuliani edges out John Edwards 47-46. Both Obama and Clinton beat McCain like a red headed stepchild.

So, far, though, I'm liking Obama. Sure, I disagree with his politics, but he seems honest, and if that's reason enough for Adams to tell his friends to vote for Jefferson, that's good enough for me.

An honest politician? http://www.nearlygood.com/smilies/confused4524.gif That's an oxymoron.

Obama could pull in the far left and black votes that Hillary can't.
Why? Because he's against the Iraq war? Oooh, radical. :rolleyes:

Why? Because he's against the Iraq war? Oooh, radical. :rolleyes:

No because he makes no bones about being a liberal while Hillary is trying to pass herself off a a centrist. That's why the liberal wing of the party is upset with her.

HELL NO! That is retarded. He better not do that.

he's running for the #1 spot.

No because he makes no bones about being a liberal while Hillary is trying to pass herself off a a centrist. That's why the liberal wing of the party is upset with her.

She's not trying to pass herself off as a centrist. She is a centrist. Gods, man, we've been trying to say that for a decade now and it still doesn't seem to get through.

Actually Hillary is farther left and more popular with blacks than Obama.

And I think that Republican scare tactics will lead moderates to the republicans in droves if Hillary runs. She simply isn't a very likeable person, and is probably more detached than John Kerry.

Hilary makes baby jesus cry, so if I were an American, I'd go with Obama.

its 11 months before there is even a semblance of a vote. it would make no sense for obama to be running for vp. it just doesnt take that much effort to get the #2 spot.

right now it seems like the nomination (and the presidency) is hillary's to lose. she could manage to do it. its happened to others. if she screws the pooch, obama is the nominee and quite possibly the president.

Obama could pull in...black votes that Hillary can't.

wait, we're going off of these ridiculously early polls, but ignoring the fact that in these polls hc is carrying african-americans too?

Obama seems the most sincere of the canidates, he's the guy I'd put money on. Hillary is often seen as too liberal (though she isn't as much as some think), whereas Obama seems more untouchable by the media (interesting article in Newsweek about it)

Actually Hillary is farther left and more popular with blacks than Obama.

And I think that Republican scare tactics will lead moderates to the republicans in droves if Hillary runs. She simply isn't a very likeable person, and is probably more detached than John Kerry.

Polls have shown that blacks overwhelmingly support Obama over Hilary, although Hillary still has quite a comfortable lead over Obama amongst Democratic voters.

She's not trying to pass herself off as a centrist. She is a centrist. Gods, man, we've been trying to say that for a decade now and it still doesn't seem to get through.

Well, she is a little right of Ted Kennedy (hick) and a bit left of Sean Hanity so I guess that would make her a centrist in some people's book. :p

How about we elect neither, for the good of america?

Hillary's a bitch, and Obama will never get elected.

Seriously, if Hillary's elected videogamers will be sent to gitmo.

Don't worry. Hillary is unelectable. The Democratic voters had better start figuring out that to win elections they need the middle of the country and the middle of the country wants a populist candidate who acts working class convincingly and talks about bringing jobs to the US.

Polls have shown that blacks overwhelmingly support Obama over Hilary, although Hillary still has quite a comfortable lead over Obama amongst Democratic voters.

Actually, the last poll had Hillary with a 2-1 lead over Obama in black voters. I expect that to change over the coming months, but as of right now, she still holds a lead.

Don't worry. Hillary is unelectable. The Democratic voters had better start figuring out that to win elections they need the middle of the country and the middle of the country wants a populist candidate who acts working class convincingly and talks about bringing jobs to the US.

How is I find myself constantly defending Hillary when I don't even like her? If she's so unelectable, then why does she beat the hell out the leading Republicans right now?

Don't worry. Hillary is unelectable. The Democratic voters had better start figuring out that to win elections they need the middle of the country and the middle of the country wants a populist candidate who acts working class convincingly and talks about bringing jobs to the US.

If Hillary can get over the "far left" view man see her as, and conect with female moderates, she has a good chance of winning. Plus the fact she has perhaps the biggest treasury of anyone running.

The Nazz: My info is old, it appears you are correct

I thnik Republican smearing may come to backfire on them if they go overboard, as people are generally sick of it, but Democrats need to stay clear of the mud-slinging as well

How is I find myself constantly defending Hillary when I don't even like her? If she's so unelectable, then why does she beat the hell out the leading Republicans right now?
George W. Bush.


I sincerely hope that Hilary doesn't get the nomination. It will turn into Kerry all over again.

If Hillary can get over the "far left" view man see her as, and conect with female moderates, she has a good chance of winning. Plus the fact she has perhaps the biggest treasury of anyone running.

The Nazz: My info is old, it appears you are correct

I thnik Republican smearing may come to backfire on them if they go overboard, as people are generally sick of it, but Democrats need to stay clear of the mud-slinging as well
Everyone says they're sick of mudslinging every election before using it as the basis of their vote.

How is I find myself constantly defending Hillary when I don't even like her? If she's so unelectable, then why does she beat the hell out the leading Republicans right now?

It's too early to tell who the leading Republicans are right now, but I guarantee you that when it comes down to voting for a president there are too many people who either dislike Hillary because the media told them to or because she doesn't seem working class and populist to them that she can't snag a win. If the Republicans run someone like Giuliani then he'll beat Hillary easily. He comes off as a moderate, and it's way too easy for the "liberal" media to paint Hillary as a radical to the uninformed masses.

Everyone says they're sick of mudslinging every election before using it as the basis of their vote.

Just like Americans want bipartisan teamwork yet refuse to back down from their positions and despise candidates who do.

Everyone says they're sick of mudslinging every election before using it as the basis of their vote.

except it's gotten to a point the many voters are just pissed off at it, it's gotten ridiculous in the past few elections (didn't hear much about it in Midterms though)

Actually Hillary is farther left and more popular with blacks than Obama.

Why do you say she's further left?

The only political difference between them that I can think of is the Iraq War vote, and as far as "leftier-than-thou" goes, Obama wins there.

except it's gotten to a point the many voters are just pissed off at it, it's gotten ridiculous in the past few elections (didn't hear much about it in Midterms though)
Don't you remember the playboy-bunny scandal?

Best one in a while, imo. Included sex and racism.

As long a left wing democrat wins the election & undoes everything that retarded imbecile george bush has done. & a wishy washy centralist who can't change anything is not the answer. The USA needs a firm & devote Enviromentalist & Liberal!

Personally I want Al Gore to run, he should have won in 2000, but that asshole bush stole the election. Gore will fix & protect the enviroment therefore saving the Planet from certain radical change & eventually collapse.

Stop the damn glutinous greedy & corupt corporations
I am a Liberal & Enviromentalist and damn proud !

As long a left wing democrat wins the election & undoes everything that retarded imbecile george bush has done.

Personally I want Al Gore to run, he should have won in 2000, but that asshole bush stole the election. Gore will fix & protect the enviroment therefore saving the Planet from certain radical change & eventually collapse.

Stop the damn glutinous greedy & corupt corporations
I am a Liberal & Enviromentalist and damn proud !

Welcome to NS General. I'd appreciate it if you would answer one question. If Al Gore is such a big environmentalist, why does he fly aroung in a private jet instead of using a commercial airliner?

Don't you remember the playboy-bunny scandal?

Best one in a while, imo. Included sex and racism.

That's true, they played heavily on racism in that, but it was a sentorial race, the national scale might make canidates tread more lightly, unless they want large numbers of angry people

How about we elect neither, for the good of america?

Hillary's a bitch, and Obama will never get elected.

Wait, we should not elect Obama, because he will never get elected?

How about we elect neither, for the good of america?

Hillary's a bitch, and Obama will never get elected.

Seriously, if Hillary's elected videogamers will be sent to gitmo.


What is the big problem with Hilary other than being a bit wishy washy middle?

Clinton-Obama ticket? Yeah... sure. No way can a black person and a female run for the top offices and win.

Why? Because he's against the Iraq war? Oooh, radical. :rolleyes:

Obama, against the war?

I'm not so sure... (http://antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=10181)

Obama announced today that he is running for President. I think what he is really planning is to position himself to be Hillary's VP. I don't think he can get enough votes in the primary to get the nomination, but Hillary can. At some point, I see Obama making a deal, dropping out of the race, and supporting Hillary.

That might be a great strategy as polls are showing Hillary cannot win the election if McCain or Rudi is the Republican candidate. However, if you have a Clinton-Obama ticket they could pull it off. Obama could pull in the far left and black votes that Hillary can't.

What do you think? Poll coming.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070210/ap_on_el_pr/obama2008_13

Feh. I'd support Obama, but definitely not Hillary Clinton.

Obama, against the war?

Against starting it, yes. As Clinton was not at the time.

I think that someone.......anyone.......should come up with a rational and less terrifying candidate......I haven't seen anyone yet on either side that didn't make me want to vomit.

:(

I want Jesse Ventura to run. :)

Against starting it, yes. As Clinton was not at the time.

True.

Obama announced today that he is running for President. I think what he is really planning is to position himself to be Hillary's VP. I don't think he can get enough votes in the primary to get the nomination, but Hillary can. At some point, I see Obama making a deal, dropping out of the race, and supporting Hillary.

That might be a great strategy as polls are showing Hillary cannot win the election if McCain or Rudi is the Republican candidate. However, if you have a Clinton-Obama ticket they could pull it off. Obama could pull in the far left and black votes that Hillary can't.

What do you think? Poll coming.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070210/ap_on_el_pr/obama2008_13

He's gonna run for President but if he does not get the nomination (whinch he probably won't) he could be tapped as the Vice President but not Hillary's Vice President because Hillary wants the election focused on her and not on her VP candidate.

The polls I've seen have Hillary beating both McCain and Giuliani (http://pollingreport.com/wh08gen.htm). In fact, the only situation where a Republican beats a Democrat in the Newsweek poll is when Giuliani edges out John Edwards 47-46. Both Obama and Clinton beat McCain like a red headed stepchild.

HA!

I doubt it!

Oh and what is the breakdown as I do not see it?

She's not trying to pass herself off as a centrist. She is a centrist. Gods, man, we've been trying to say that for a decade now and it still doesn't seem to get through.

A centrist does not go after the video game industry.

A centrist does not go after the video game industry.

What if she's an evil centrist? ;)

*runs*

HA!

I doubt it!

You know, there's a link in that post you quoted. You could click on it or something and not look so much like a tard.

http://www.workingforchange.com/webgraphics/WFC/TMW020707_2.jpg

Yeah, that's about where it sits.

A centrist does not go after the video game industry.
Neither does a liberal. So what is she?

Answer: depends on what issue you're talking about, obviously

He ought to consider running for VP. He's popular, but isn't nearly as popular as Hillary. A Hillary-Obama ticket would probably be the best thing for the Democrats.

A centrist does not go after the video game industry.

That's true - it seems more in line with right-wing notions of the state upholding conservative standards of morality.

You know, there's a link in that post you quoted. You could click on it or something and not look so much like a tard.

I did. I do not see the breakdown of who they polled. What is it before I put any trust in it.

He ought to consider running for VP. He's popular, but isn't nearly as popular as Hillary. A Hillary-Obama ticket would probably be the best thing for the Democrats.

In what regard considering Hillary's statement about blacks down in New Orleans?

That's true - it seems more in line with right-wing notions of the state upholding conservative standards of morality.

Very few republicans jumped on it. Hell, very few people jumped on it because it is stupid.

Hell, very few people jumped on it because it is stupid.

Then Clinton took a stupid position on something. How does that make her less of a centrist?

I did. I do not see the breakdown of who they polled. What is it before I put any trust in it.

That's right--I forgot. You don't understand how polls work, and therefore don't believe them when they contradict your belief.

I think that someone.......anyone.......should come up with a rational and less terrifying candidate......I haven't seen anyone yet on either side that didn't make me want to vomit.



Guliani is the best that I know of...

And he ain't too bad, actually. Cleaned up NYC (which should be its own state, it's got so many people) pretty good.

I think that someone.......anyone.......should come up with a rational and less terrifying candidate......I haven't seen anyone yet on either side that didn't make me want to vomit.

:(
Well McCain and Giuliani wouldn't be THAT bad compared to Hillary and Obama. I'd definitely prefer them (and Ron Paul & Tancredo over either pair).

Well McCain and Giuliani wouldn't be THAT bad

Guliani and McCain.

Why? Although Guliani is authoritarian compared to the others:

1) He is good at domestic stuff (cleaning up the streets)
2) He won't hang videogamers unlike a certain candidate..
BTW, before I forget, Larry the Cable Guy on this candidate:

"Better watch out
I think she's a guy
Can't quite tell but SOMETHIN' ain't right
Hillary Clinton's coming to town."

3) Judging by #1, he'll boot soldiers from Iraq by 2009 (I think...)

That's right--I forgot. You don't understand how polls work, and therefore don't believe them when they contradict your belief.

So what is the breakdown of the poll? How many of each did they poll? I looked through it and did not see it. So tell me, what was the breakdown?

It is a legitament question to ask. Why are you bashing the question? The numbers are only as good as the people they poll. If they polled more from one segment than the other then the numbers are useless. If they are mostly equal, then I can believe the polling data. Until such times as numbers are given, I'll remain skeptical.

Guliani is the best that I know of...

And he ain't too bad, actually. Cleaned up NYC (which should be its own state, it's got so many people) pretty good.

I agree.

Hillary just comes off as a bitch and she is clearly a politician in that she never comes out and says anything straight. Asked repeatedly if she regrets her decision voting for the war, she of course answers with political babble. Obama is straight out with his opposition and further I see him as more of future looking man and Hillary just complains about the past and says what "I would have done if I was president". Real irritating.

I think we should wait until we see the dozen and a half candidates debate. After one or two debates, I am not sure that Obama or Hilary will be the front runners. Hilary is too rational sounding and Obama is a bit too slick for most people.

I am not sure who will be the VP on the republican ticket will it be Giuliani McCain or McCain Giuliani. It will be pretty weird.

Clinton-Obama ticket? Yeah... sure. No way can a black person and a female run for the top offices and win.

Agreed. It could only be worse if it was a gay-polygamist ticket.

Tancredo

ARE YOU FUCKING NUTS?!

I live in his district. He's a right-winged racist insane nutso who only cares about immigration and always tries to take the wrong steps to solve the illegal immigration problem. He acts rational and calm during elections but once they're over he goes right back to being the fucktard that he is. He called a section of Miami a third-world country recently, if I recall correctly. Tancredo is not presidential material in any way shape or form.

ARE YOU FUCKING NUTS?!

I live in his district. He's a right-winged racist insane nutso who only cares about immigration and always tries to take the wrong steps to solve the illegal immigration problem. He acts rational and calm during elections but once they're over he goes right back to being the fucktard that he is. He called a section of Miami a third-world country recently, if I recall correctly. Tancredo is not presidential material in any way shape or form.

He's not even really congressional material, and that's not a particularly high bar to clear.

He's not even really congressional material, and that's not a particularly high bar to clear.
Aye, that much is true. I voted for Winter. In my precinct, amazingly enough for what it consists of, Winter won by a clear margin. Too bad overall Tancredo beat him. Winter might have been vaguely decent.

No because he makes no bones about being a liberal while Hillary is trying to pass herself off a a centrist. That's why the liberal wing of the party is upset with her.
Liberal = far left?

She's not trying to pass herself off as a centrist. She is a centrist. Gods, man, we've been trying to say that for a decade now and it still doesn't seem to get through.
She's as centrist as Eutrusca.

How is I find myself constantly defending Hillary when I don't even like her?
Kneejerk political hackery.

Kneejerk political hackery.

Wait, wait, did you just call Nazz a political hack? Nazz is many things, and I certainly don't agree with all of his political positions, but Nazz is no hack, of that I can assure you. Hell, even I wanted to defend Clinton against all the stuff posted in this thread, and I despise her for her pro-censorship opinions.

And ignore anything Celtlund says about a political spectrum. He's firmly entrenched in the American system of politics. (Not that that's a bad thing necessarily, but it leaves him with a limited perspective.)

whatever he's running for he'll make a good one.

i can remember when i was just starting highschool or maybe just before, before jfk won the nomination and everyone thought america would never elect a roman catholic president, it was just like, where obama is now.

i think obama could BE our next JFK. wouldn't surprise me a damd bit.

i mean he's just the kind of long shot people get behind because he is, exactly the same position young senator john kennidy was in, at this point prior to the election that put him in office.

kennidy wasn't perfect, he still had to kiss the ass of that anti-commi nonsense that was prevalent at the time, and he made me take p.e. which i hated, but other then that, we haven't had a better one since, and i really think obama stands a real good chance of filling those shoes.

he's not the only one in the running who'd make a good one of course, just as adalai stevenson was a consideration at this point in kennidy's campaign.

but the parallels are just so amazing, if you'd been arround then maybe you'd know what i mean.

and in 1958, a roman catholic was just as "unellectable" as a woman or an african american is sometimes still blindly considered now.

so give me five to one against and pay out accordingly when he wins.
i'll take that bet and he'll make one hell of a damd good president when he does.

=^^=
.../\...

OBAMA 08! im not sure i want hilary in office. One clinton was bad enough...
But, then again ANYONE, could do a better job than George Fucking Bush
I like Obama. he seems like a good and honest man. Yes, he may have a longshot of winning with all of the racist fucking hicks in this country, but i believe he will win

Clinton-Obama ticket? Yeah... sure. No way can a black person and a female run for the top offices and win.

I find that amazing, that someone from New York would make a statement like that. Now, if someone from Mississippi made that statement....:rolleyes:

Feh. I'd support Obama, but definitely not Hillary Clinton.

So, if it were a Hillary-Obama ticket you would vote for the Republican, Libertarian, or Independent?

I find that amazing, that someone from New York would make a statement like that. Now, if someone from Mississippi made that statement....:rolleyes:But, it's true. America isn't ready to vote for a black person or a female. The two of them together is like a double whammy.

And ignore anything Celtlund says about a political spectrum. He's firmly entrenched in the American system of politics. (Not that that's a bad thing necessarily, but it leaves him with a limited perspective.)

Thank you for the compliment.:)

Thank you for the compliment.:)

Out of curiosity, why do you see that as a compliment? As I noted in my post, it gives you a limited perspective.

Out of curiosity, why do you see that as a compliment? As I noted in my post, it gives you a limited perspective.

For several reasons and I don't think my perspective is as limited as you suggest. First of all I see the American political system as a very good system, at least for Americans. It works for us and has done so for several hundred years. However, that doesn't mean it is the best system for other countries and I'm not suggesting they adopt our system.
Secondly, I am active in the political process as your post suggests. I'm not one who sits around and just whines, I actually get out and support candidates that I think are the best person for the office no matter what their party.
Third, although I do lean to the side of conservatives on some issues, I find myself more of a centrist on a vast majority of issues.
Last, I’m constantly evaluating my stance on issues and willing to listen to other people’s ideas and positions.

So what is the breakdown of the poll? How many of each did they poll? I looked through it and did not see it. So tell me, what was the breakdown?

It is a legitament question to ask. Why are you bashing the question? The numbers are only as good as the people they poll. If they polled more from one segment than the other then the numbers are useless. If they are mostly equal, then I can believe the polling data. Until such times as numbers are given, I'll remain skeptical.

Would you like the names and addresses of those polled so you can verify the information personally, as well?

For several reasons and I don't think my perspective is as limited as you suggest. First of all I see the American political system as a very good system, at least for Americans. It works for us and has done so for several hundred years. However, that doesn't mean it is the best system for other countries and I'm not suggesting they adopt our system.
Secondly, I am active in the political process as your post suggests. I'm not one who sits around and just whines, I actually get out and support candidates that I think are the best person for the office no matter what their party.
Third, although I do lean to the side of conservatives on some issues, I find myself more of a centrist on a vast majority of issues.
Last, I’m constantly evaluating my stance on issues and willing to listen to other people’s ideas and positions.
Fair enough. I should point out though that I meant more of the American political spectrum than anything else about the American system of politics. By that I mean our spectrum is simple a small part of the real-world spectrum, at least from their vantage point, which I happen trust. But still, fair enough.

Would you like the names and addresses of those polled so you can verify the information personally, as well?

http://www.nearlygood.com/smilies/thumbup.gifROFLMAO

Wait, wait, did you just call Nazz a political hack? Nazz is many things, and I certainly don't agree with all of his political positions, but Nazz is no hack, of that I can assure you. Hell, even I wanted to defend Clinton against all the stuff posted in this thread, and I despise her for her pro-censorship opinions.

And ignore anything Celtlund says about a political spectrum. He's firmly entrenched in the American system of politics. (Not that that's a bad thing necessarily, but it leaves him with a limited perspective.)

Thanks. I should note that it takes me twice as long to defend Hillary because I'm holding my nose with one hand while I'm typing. I don't like her positions on issues--she's a triangulator like her husband, and while that was necessary after 1994, it's not necessary now, because triangulation has moved what was once the center to the right-wing now, and I want a president who's going to drag it back. Hillary won't do that, so she's not my choice for the Democratic nominee. That said, I'll vote for her in an instant if she gets the nomination, because Hillary's better than anyone the Republicans will nominate, hands down.

Excellent article in Rolling Stone: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/13390609/campaign_08_the_radical_roots_of_barack_obama/

Thanks. I should note that it takes me twice as long to defend Hillary because I'm holding my nose with one hand while I'm typing. I don't like her positions on issues--she's a triangulator like her husband, and while that was necessary after 1994, it's not necessary now, because triangulation has moved what was once the center to the right-wing now, and I want a president who's going to drag it back. Hillary won't do that, so she's not my choice for the Democratic nominee. That said, I'll vote for her in an instant if she gets the nomination, because Hillary's better than anyone the Republicans will nominate, hands down.

You really think she is better than Rudi? Why? I think Rudi would make an excellent President. He is more of a Centrist with his stand on abortion, gun control, and gay rights than others. He did an excellent job of cleaning up N.Y. city. I want to find out more about his foreign policy, environmental, and energy independance, and immigration stances though.

edit...--she's a triangulator like her husband, and while that was necessary after 1994, it's not necessary now, because triangulation has moved what was once the center to the right-wing now, and I want a president who's going to drag it back....

I don't understand what you mean by "triangulator." Please explain. Thank you.

Would you like the names and addresses of those polled so you can verify the information personally, as well?

:rolleyes:

Liberal = far left?
In the US it refers usually to the centre-left, but I suppose it goes further than that.

You really think she is better than Rudi? Why? I think Rudi would make an excellent President. He is more of a Centrist with his stand on abortion, gun control, and gay rights than others. He did an excellent job of cleaning up N.Y. city. I want to find out more about his foreign policy, environmental, and energy independance, and immigration stances though.
President, for me, is more a party decision than a person decision, except in extreme cases. Take Rudi, for example. For him to get the nomination, he's going to have to make promises on those issues on which he's supposedly moderate, and he's already started making those noises. Why? Because the party demands it. So no matter what he says personally, he's going to nominate Supreme Court Justices like Alito--he's already said so. It doesn't matter if I like him more or not (I don't, but that's another matter)--he carries the party baggage, and I despise that baggage. So unless the Democrats nominate someone like, oh, Zell Miller or Joe Lieberman, I'm voting for whoever the nominee is, no matter who the Republicans nominate.

President, for me, is more a party decision than a person decision, except in extreme cases. Take Rudi, for example. For him to get the nomination, he's going to have to make promises on those issues on which he's supposedly moderate, and he's already started making those noises. Why? Because the party demands it. So no matter what he says personally, he's going to nominate Supreme Court Justices like Alito--he's already said so. It doesn't matter if I like him more or not (I don't, but that's another matter)--he carries the party baggage, and I despise that baggage. So unless the Democrats nominate someone like, oh, Zell Miller or Joe Lieberman, I'm voting for whoever the nominee is, no matter who the Republicans nominate.

And this proves that you are a party hack. Anyone who puts party above anything else is a bad voter plain and simple. I tell my staunch Republican Dad the same damn thing too.

I don't understand what you mean by "triangulator." Please explain. Thank you.

That's what Bill Clinton called it--the third way of politics. Take just enough of your opponent's idea to steal it from him, but enact the policy in such a way that it benefits you. The problem is that Bill Clinton was smart enough to make it work, but he was the exception rather than the rule. The people who have followed him have taken it to mean adopting your opponent's position, throwing your own constituencies under the bus, and calling it bipartisanship. Hillary's video-game position, for instance, is a perfect example of bad triangulation. Bill's version of welfare reform, however, is a perfect example of doing it well, politically speaking.

And this proves that you are a party hack. Anyone who puts party above anything else is a bad voter plain and simple. I tell my staunch Republican Dad the same damn thing too.

Like I give a shit what you think about me. :rolleyes: When I vote for state and local races, I worry about candidate first, but President is different, because it's not just a person. It's an entire branch of government, complete with think tanks and advisers. It doesn't matter what Giuliani thinks about abortion personally--he's going to nominate an anti-abortion judge because he'll owe that part of his party for getting him elected.

Like I give a shit what you think about me. :rolleyes: When I vote for state and local races, I worry about candidate first, but President is different, because it's not just a person.

No it is the exact same thing. If you worry about candidates at the state and local races, you should do the same thing for federal races as well. That is being consistent. By voting party for President, you are ignoring everything else for your mind is already decided. My mind is never made up till I look at what each candidate stands for.

It's an entire branch of government, complete with think tanks and advisers.

And they exist outside of the Executive Branch as well. To look at party only is stupid and idiotic. I do not care if you ignore what I am saying anymore. It does not matter to me but at least I vote with a clean conscience and who I think best suites the office based off of what they believe in. I do not care if the person is a Democrat or a Republican.

It doesn't matter what Giuliani thinks about abortion personally--he's going to nominate an anti-abortion judge because he'll owe that part of his party for getting him elected.

Or he could surprise the hell out of you. You just do not know until one gets into office. That's the problem with politics. You do not what type of candidate you are going to get till they get into office.