And they don't need anybody - though people sure seem to be betting on Hilary and Barack if money is indication , like I said it's theirs to lose with a tremendously unpopular Republican mess of an administration as counterpoint and a flaccid slate of GOP candidates inheriting its legacy.
This could possibly be toeing the line, but can you imagine how disgustingly unkept Hillary is ... well, I won't even go there. Oh man, I just nearly vomited.
i do find it very funny that someone who supports a president who allows a gay male hooker to visit the white house over 200 times would go on about stuff like this.
And Hillary, Barack both have major issues, which means the election will be close. An upset can very well happen.
With all of the public's disapproval of the R and D candidates, this would be an excellent election for a strong 3rd party to make a push.
lots of people that vote though..have no outside looking in perspective, and just vote for Republican or Democrat "cause my mommas mommas momma done it all their life" or "I've been a Repub/Dem all my life and I'm gonna die one!" or they're just old and won't even change their views. ever.
Based purely on how she's voted and the comments she's made since becoming Senator, she's basically a more masculine version of Bush. In foreign policy, she's as "neo-conservative" as they come. She might have done a better job than Bush in Iraq, but she'd have started the same war. Oh, but she once supported the most expensive, least efficient form of nationalized healthcare, so she must be different.
and if the young people think they have anything better to do than help save this country..... then they are truely as stupid as I think they are. if there is to be an upset, I have got to hope it is Obama both the frontrunners (HrC and Rudi) are lying slimeballs who will continue the moral spiral we are currently experiencing... can you say business as usual? the third parties are too disjointed to make a real push (as a true moderate, I would love it if one were to succeed, but they wont unless something drastic changes)
While no dove Hillary Clinton is definately no neo-con. Her Senate record has so far shown that she is actually a lot more of a consensus builder. While its possible she still might've invaded Iraq if she had been president in 2003 it seems very unlikely she would've done it the same way Bush has. In regard to her health care proposal she seems to have learned a big lesson from that and has actually not led on very divisive issues as a Senator and has worked quite a bit across the aisle. While she is still dogged by the reputation of divisiveness her Senate record shows otherwise.
A very huge assumption on your part. I'm not a fan of Ms. Clinton, but there is no evidence that a Clinton Presidency, at the time Bush shoved his war down America's and the world's throats, would have chosen to invade and occupy Iraq. That is pure speculation. In my opinion, given a completely different cabinet, advisors, and interpreters of intelligence, she would have chosen a different path. And my opinion is no less valid than yours, given that we're dealing with alternative history. (a genre I enjoy reading, BTW.) D&D. Impeach Bush and Cheney.
Neither. Hopefully a 3rd party could get enough votes that they would be automatically included on ballots and in debates, etc. in the next election. I really see little difference between the two, and if there were no other choice I would probably vote for Rudy because I find him less irritating on TV.
I don't think Giuliani stands a chance. Mitt Romney will get the GOP. I want Barack to get the Dem too, but if not, then Joe Biden. I like Paul as the GOP, but it won't happen.
Romney might have a difficult time winning over the religious right since he's a Mormon, which could work against him in the GOP race.
Here's an interesting zogby poll if the election were held were held today. http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1338
Oh jiminy crickets...... Anyone who honestly thinks that this woman would make a good president needs to take a closer look at her back ground. There were more terrorist attacks on the US under Bill Clintons presidency then I care to mention. What makes you think Hilary will be any different. She will push for federalized health care which has been proven to be a failure and will bankrupt this nation. I hate to be the one to break it to you but zoby polls are crap Where is Ronald Reagan when we need him. Maybe Fred Thompson is the answer...
What a terrible choice to make...I'll echo Stupid Moniker's thoughts on this and would hope that someone else whether it is Romney, Fred Thompson, Edwards, or even Wesley Clark get the nomination. I don't really like Rudy, but I cannot vote in good conscience for Hillary Clinton. If Satan was running against her, I would vote for Satan. I would like to see the Republican candidate be Romney or Fred Thompson or anyone other than Rudy. Democratic candidate is not as important to me, however, if it is someone else OTHER than Hillary, then it will be easier for me to stomach a Democratic President. I wish there was a really strong 3rd party candidate but I don't think it will happen. I hate to throw my vote away on someone who has no chance in hell. God, I hate our political system.
