http://www.electoralcompass.com/page/0/thema+s/
Printable View
In tallying who I was closest to on each issue, Huckabee is more my kinda guy.
Number 2...is actually....Hillary. However, I just don't believe her or any of her stances. So oh well.
Rudy came in #3 for me. Almost everyone else had at least one point from me though.
I am closest with Mcain and Romney along with the Huck mister coming a close third. Obama is farthest from my views. None the less Clinton is the only one that can mae me leave the US if she is elected.
Yeah, I'm sure she's spending millions upon millions of dollars on a Presidential bid she doesn't believe in. Give us all a break. :roll:Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k2...eadisgoing.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by ChrisW
Yeah, especially on this forum. The bias is abundant. The pile ons by the conservative members to the moderates and liberals vastly and grossly apparent.
Chris presents a valid point. It happens that there are a lot of Republican/right-wing members here. If by "biased" you mean that there are going to be people that don't care for the left side or say things that side with the right, then yeah, you're right. I don't think it's a bad thing.
Personally, I believe Hillary to be a complete phony. I think she's a bit two-faced. But that's just my belief. I don't push that on others, especially here.
However, I think I debate fairly. If you'd like to discuss it, I'm up for that. I just don't care for Hillary. Is it that bad of a thing?
Also, I think using the word "pile on" is an unfair term to use just because someone is in the minority in political view. We don't go on the attack, nor do we disrespect your opinions. If so, please let me know. You are more than welcome to invite left-wing friends.
Mine were:
Rudy
McCain
Huckabee
Romney
Paul
This is an interesting topic. I happen to agree with Phil--I think Hillary is a panderer and she flip flops on her message depending on who she's speaking to. One of the big issues I had with Bill was he decided by poll...they would poll then he'd decide. I think that she cares more about fundraising and votes than she does about the real issues, as the White House would likely become a hotel for big donors again if she were to win. Plus, I do not think she is qualified to be president.
That said, while I am a Republican, I don't see any clear winner from the current field. However, if Bloomberg entered the race, all bets would be off-no special interests, and no one could AFFORD to buy him off. Absent that, it's up in the air...
I would even vote for a Democrat if his views met mine, but I would do anything to keep Hillary out of the White House--she doesn't even belong in NY.
For Chris, if you have liberal friends, bring em on my friend--
Well, I guess there's always me...Quote:
Originally Posted by Art at ISP
1 - Obama
2 - Edwards
3 - Clinton
Although I do support, and will vote for Clinton.
I agree that Bill Clinton decided by poll. Take the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy for instance - he could have eliminated it altogether but would have lost a lot of his bipartisan support that he enjoyed in his early years as as President. In the end - politicians are more alike than they are different. If you think Mike Huckabee has been completely honest throughout his campaign (or any other candidate) you're delusional. It's the nature of their business.Quote:
Originally Posted by Art at ISP
I think the only TRULY qualified person we've had run for office in the last ten years is Wes Clark (I would have voted for him in 2004).
For the record, my answers were Edwards, Guiliani, and Clinton (in that order). I'm a moderate by nature but tend to vote for Democratic politicians.
Further...in my mind, the politicians that truly MATTER in this day and age are those we elect to Congress. A majority congress can run circles around a President.
Agreed. I also firmly believe political office has become nothing more than a playground for the wealthy. However, in the times we live in (i.e. the war on terrorism), I don't believe a liberal is the right person to be the Commander in Chief. Thompson will have my vote.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisW
Did Kenny and I just agree on something? Yikes.
See? We Americans are more alike than different. :borat:
That being said, I respectfully disagree with your assertion that someone being a liberal doesn't qualify one to be a wartime President. Ever heard of a dude named Harry S. Truman?
I think that "liberal" back during Truman didn't quite mean the same thing it does today. Not necessarily pertaining to you, Chris, since I don't know your views, but I know a lot of anti-war people that happen to like Truman. Keep in mind that the Truman Doctrine is how we justified Korea and Vietnam and was the start of the Cold War.
Chris, my gut feeling is that the candidates the Democratic party is turning out are more concerned with stifling our military and law enforcement officers and being "politically correct" rather than really addressing the security issues at hand, which given the current circumstances can and will be a fatal mistake. Yes, I'm very conservative, but I'd like to think I'm not too closed minded to consider the other side's point of view. But as I said before, I truly believe in my heart of hearts that no Democratic candidate has what it takes to be POTUS at this time.
When I see polls like this, I always have a good time wondering why I don't match with any candidates. Who the hell is a pro-military liberal supposed to vote for!
(Like Chris, I miss the days when Wesley Clark had his hat in the ring...)
I don't think being liberal or conservative necessarily makes you more or less suited to be a wartime president, if you have a solid plan and execute it correctly. The problem is, everyone is still treating the War on Terror like it was possible to win by military force. You can't fight extremists with missles...killing them only makes them stronger. You can only fight with propaganda; by turning their followers against them. Show me a candidate who understands how to do that, and he or she has my vote.
(Until then, I'll probably vote for Obama, because I like his views on government transparency.)
I am closest to Hillary, but I am leaning towards voting for Obama in the primary. I also like Obama's views on government transparency and accountability but more importantly I like his Internationalist point of view as I feel the US needs to move closer to Europe in many respects. I seriously feel that the silly jingoistic attitude by people on the right in this country is one of the main reasons the US is so well hated abroad these days and it needs to be suppressed. Huckabee and Thompson and their folksy followers seem to be the poster children for that. I dont know what Romney represents, McCain is past his prime and Giuliani screwed up his chance. Giuliani was the only Republican I would have voted for and it would have been nice to see an Italian President to go with an Italian House Speaker (despite being from different parties)