Republicans/Democrats: Most acceptable candidate from the other side

Obama

 

Good question Jackie but a tough one.

I think it's imperative we change course in Iraq, so I'm inclined to say Paul. I also appreciate many of his positions. Others scare the hell out of me. But he's not going to be elected anyway, so choosing him is sort of a dodge.

That leaves only candidates that would continue the occupation of Iraq and I could never vote for someone who'd do that, but I'll leave that crucial issue out just to participate in this thread.

I'd probably go to Huckabee next. He is an extreme social conservative but he doesn't seem to traffic in the divisive politics that have recently characterized those positions. And I am impressed that, as a function of his religious beliefs, he seems to genuinely care about poor, disadvantaged people. He strikes me as reasonable and he is the only candidate on the GOP side that is actually campaigning as a moderate.

I could have considered McCain in 2000 even though he and I are miles apart on virtually every issue, simply because he didn't seem to be owned by the party machinery. Now he does. But I think that's a function of such a wide open race. Each of the serious GOP contenders are having to run very far right in order to secure the nomination. I expect McCain and Giuliani would seem a whole lot more palatable to me in a general election as they each have some potential crossover appeal.

But I guess my short answer is Paul or Huckabee.

 

Lyndon LaRouche

 

I'm not a Democrat, but I am very far left, so I'll pick a Republican since they are more on the other side.

I'll go with Ron Paul as well.

 

I disagree with all the leading Republicans on the war and economics but I like Rudy on gay issues and abortion. On the other hand I don't trust him on anything.
Since you didn't say they had to be a front runner or even running, I'll say Abe Lincoln, Lincoln Chafee or Chuck Hagel.

 

I won't put too much into this reply since, as Batman Jones has pointed out on occasion, that my choices are a classic dichotomy, i.e. Richardson and Huckabee. However, I base my selections on character as much as ability. Neither would make decisions based on how much money they could make on a side deal, as Hillary would.

 

As an independent I say that the candidate that appeals to independents or the other side is ...

Republican: Romney

Democrat: Edwards

For the reverse the candidate that appeals less to independents or the other side is

Republican: Giuliani

Democrat: Clinton

 

Ron Paul

 

I couldn't vote for any candidate that was not pro-life, so unfortunately, the Dems leave me no available options. I haven't looked into them all enough to know their policy positions because I know I won't be voting for any of them. I would pick whichever one was for a flat tax (or possibly a consumption tax), legalization of drugs and prostitution, pro-life, pro-gun, for the Iraq war, pro-intervention in Iran, anti-censorship of movies, tv, and video games, anti-death penalty, pro-Israel, and would not destroy the American health care system.

 

For someone who considers himself strongly "pro-life" you sure like war.

 

I have the capacity to recognize that war can be the lesser of two evils.

 

A lot of chickenhawk republicans also have this capacity.

 

Wah wah some idiot insulted me. Mommy, please tell this snotweasal to kindly **** off.

 

I guess your capacity to respond like a moron is the greater of the two evils.

 

Yeah, your weak insults are meaningless to me. Unlike some people, I don't have any problem expressing an opinion on a topic just because I am not directly participating in it. I guess since you are not playing for the Rockets we won't see you posting in the GARM, right?

There is no requirement to actually serve in the military in order to express an opinion regarding our foreign policy. I would have no problem with the government limiting citizenship only to those with military service. That would probably not be very good for the Dems out there though, as the military has traditionally voted to the right of the populace. Until they do so though, I have no problem with "chickenhawks". I think in many cases it is a misnomer, as there are plenty of reasons to decide against military service that have nothing to do with cowardice. Civilianhawks would be more accurate, though it doesn't have quite the same bite. I think people who use the term have about the same intellectual capacity as those who use terms like libpig. They are sad dunces that cannot come up with their own arguments so they parrot the namecalling of people to whom they have chosen to delegate their thinking.

 

trader jorge has taught you well

I never said there was, did I?

Well make up your mind!!! I thought conservatives and libertarians are for less government in peoples lives?

And whichever one wanted to decided who is a citizen and who is not.

Link? Opinion is one thing, now you've crossed the line into delusional.

Well to follow your line of thinking, I know I shouldn't but I will, I would have no problem with the government limiting people who wanted to run for president to those with armed service combat experience.

That probably wouldn't be very good for the republicans/libertarians out there. Would it?

 

Ron Paul should be eliminated from the discussion -- total cop out by the left by listing him.

I'd probably say Biden. He's the only guy with foreign policy experience and wisdom that I would trust on the left. Let's put it this way, on a very important issue -- foreign policy -- I would not feel like our country would have it's defenses weakened by a Biden Presidency, like I would with Hillary/Obama/Edwards. Of course, I do not agree with Biden on many foreign policy issues.

With any of Hillaroid/Osama/Edwards in office, I feel like the morale of our troops would plummet and our nation would be more inviting for terrorists.

 

Nice...

Notice the self-fulfilling prophecy of the TJs of the world. If a Hillaroid/Osama/Edwards presidency comes to pass and there is another attack on America, they've got their built in "I told you so."


What's funny is that if Rudy would run on his beliefs and dial down the 911 spiel, I could actually listen to him.