JREF Community 08 Presidential Consensus

[MilwaukeeMike]

I am surprised by some of the voting so far on the poll. Surprised by Rudy's popularity in the JREF community. I think some of this popularity with Rudy is because there simply are not a very good field of Rep's running... Though I could be wrong.

GO Milwaukee Brewers!!!!!

Had to get a shameless plug for them in.... Sorry

 

[steverino]

... you certainly have to come up with something better than that...

I can't stand Hillary either. I admit that I can't explain it. But it does have something to do with her being fake. I appreciate the fact that she is trying to break through the glass ceiling of male-only presidential politics, but then I have to weigh that against the fact that she is viable largely because she is the wife of an important man. Would America elect Mary Todd Lincoln? Laura Bush?

And the basis of her marriage to that important man is not built on love. It is a power arrangement. OK. Fine. But she never cops to this. She and Bill hold hands and he says he is sorry for being naughty, and they try to sell this charade to America. And I don't buy it.

I have no idea what is going on in Hillary's head, and I don't want her running the show.

 

[Tricky]

Um, fixed that for you.

LOL.

I suppose I should return the favor.

 

[Tricky]

I can't stand Hillary either. I admit that I can't explain it. But it does have something to do with her being fake. I appreciate the fact that she is trying to break through the glass ceiling of male-only presidential politics, but then I have to weigh that against the fact that she is viable largely because she is the wife of an important man. Would America elect Mary Todd Lincoln? Laura Bush?

And the basis of her marriage to that important man is not built on love. It is a power arrangement. OK. Fine. But she never cops to this. She and Bill hold hands and he says he is sorry for being naughty, and they try to sell this charade to America. And I don't buy it.

I have no idea what is going on in Hillary's head, and I don't want her running the show.

As I say, I'm not crazy about her either. She'd be about fourth on my list to vote for of the major candidates, but if I'm going to vote against her, it's going to be for political reasons, not because she was married to Bill or because she doesn't photograph well.

And you can't use her marriage against her because she is almost certainly not the only candidate who has been in a politically-based marriage. I think it says a lot for her that she was able to put her husband's infidelities aside and go on with life. Not many people would be able to do that.

And I thought that as First Lady, Hillary had more responsibility and did more things (some misguided, but she tried) than any first lady since Eleanor Roosevelt. Well, maybe Betty Ford, but Betty was more an example of courage than of political savvy. I'd say she earned her stripes at least as much as Dubya, who also got in because of his family connections.

That being said, I don't think Hillary can win, precisely because so many people, even moderates, don't like the way she looks or because she is an outspoken beatch or because they want to stop thinking about the Clintons.

 

[steverino]

LOL.

I suppose I should return the favor.

When I started this thread, my nuts were served to me on a silver platter. But here it is again.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/search.php?searchid=835009

 

[hgc]

When I started this thread, my nuts were served to me on a silver platter. But here it is again.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/search.php?searchid=835009

Context is everything.

 

[billydkid]

I can't stand Hillary either. I admit that I can't explain it. But it does have something to do with her being fake. I appreciate the fact that she is trying to break through the glass ceiling of male-only presidential politics, but then I have to weigh that against the fact that she is viable largely because she is the wife of an important man. Would America elect Mary Todd Lincoln? Laura Bush?

And the basis of her marriage to that important man is not built on love. It is a power arrangement. OK. Fine. But she never cops to this. She and Bill hold hands and he says he is sorry for being naughty, and they try to sell this charade to America. And I don't buy it.

I have no idea what is going on in Hillary's head, and I don't want her running the show.

I actually kind of like Hillary and I don't think she is nearly as bad as some people want to believe she is. My problem with Hillary is that I disagree with her fundamentally on so many things. This whole "It takes village" mentality is not my thing. Though I do agree with the idea that government has always served the interest of the rich and the powerful and pretty much always will. Why shouldn't we like someone who thinks it should also serve the interests of powerless?

The problem comes when you have beauracrats (spelling) taking the role of nanny in the lives of people and deciding for people things they should want to decide for themselves. It should be noted that I believe that Obama does not hold quite this same view of government and that his inclination is to be suspicious of the role government might play in people's lives. I wish I had the quotes, but I have read somethings that indicate to me that he isn't your typical - government is the answer to your problems - liberal. Some of his book leads me to believe his is not your typical lefty Democrat.

Mike Gravel (although he appears to be a little bit nutty), Ron Paul (some wrongly accuse him of being nutty), Obama - these are the people I would most like to see be President (among the available choices). I don't understand why conservatives have not flocked to Ron Paul....Oh, that's right, Ron Paul actually is a conservative and actually believes in limited governmental power and he actually believes the Constitution should be adhered to. Those things would be just the sorts of issues that give "conservatives" the willys. I am hoping the Libertarians manage to put up a candidate who is not laughable. I wouldn't expect any libertarian to win or even do well. I would just hope the person is credible enough to draw attention to the libertarian positions - you know, that liberty stuff upon which this country was founded.

 

[hgc]

Mike Gravel (although he appears to be a little bit nutty), Ron Paul (some wrongly accuse him of being nutty), Obama - these are the people I would most like to see be President (among the available choices). I don't understand why conservatives have not flocked to Ron Paul....Oh, that's right, Ron Paul actually is a conservative and actually believes in limited governmental power and he actually believes the Constitution should be adhered to. Those things would be just the sorts of issues that give "conservatives" the willys. I am hoping the Libertarians manage to put up a candidate who is not laughable. I wouldn't expect any libertarian to win or even do well. I would just hope the person is credible enough to draw attention to the libertarian positions - you know, that liberty stuff upon which this country was founded.

Perhaps it's because that kind of conservative (libertarian) is rarer than you think. The neo-cons, the corporate welfarists and the religious right also call themselves conservative. Seems to me that the libertarians don't have much of a home left in the GOP.

 

[hubbub2]

How about a ground roots movement to get James Randi elected president?

If "The Amazing Randi" ran for Prez, I'd vote early...and often!

 

[hgc]

How about a ground roots movement to get James Randi elected president?

If "The Amazing Randi" ran for Prez,

Randi was born Canadian, ergo constitutionally unqualified. Too bad.

I'd vote early...and often!

By legerdemain I'd hope.

 

[steverino]

I actually kind of like Hillary and I don't think she is nearly as bad as some people want to believe she is...Why shouldn't we like someone who thinks it should also serve the interests of powerless?

We do "like them." We just don't believe they will deliver.

 

[billydkid]

Seems to me that the libertarians don't have much of a home left in the GOP.

You couldn't be more right about that. Actually, the alliance between libertarians and conservatives has always been a very tenuous one. It has only gotten more so in recent years. The left likes our take on the critical importance of the preservation of individual liberty and the right - well, I used to think they liked our take on limited government. In fact, they are big advocates of authoritarian government and government activism in support of corporations. Conservatives never remotely understood libertarianism. What the left has consistently failed to recognize is the economic liberty is integral to personal liberty. I have never been comfortable with either the right or the left. Both ends are pro-state, they simply have different agendas. Libertarians are the odd man out. Generally they believe in pro-choice - about everything.

 

[g4macdad]

As I say, I'm not crazy about her either. She'd be about fourth on my list to vote for of the major candidates, but if I'm going to vote against her, it's going to be for political reasons, not because she was married to Bill or because she doesn't photograph well.

And you can't use her marriage against her because she is almost certainly not the only candidate who has been in a politically-based marriage. I think it says a lot for her that she was able to put her husband's infidelities aside and go on with life. Not many people would be able to do that.

And I thought that as First Lady, Hillary had more responsibility and did more things (some misguided, but she tried) than any first lady since Eleanor Roosevelt. Well, maybe Betty Ford, but Betty was more an example of courage than of political savvy. I'd say she earned her stripes at least as much as Dubya, who also got in because of his family connections.

That being said, I don't think Hillary can win, precisely because so many people, even moderates, don't like the way she looks or because she is an outspoken beatch or because they want to stop thinking about the Clintons.

I would never vote for her only because of her political history. She has stood behind Bush on almost all issues.

I have nothing against the way she looks or the fact that she is a woman.

 

[Tricky]

I would never vote for her only because of her political history. She has stood behind Bush on almost all issues.

I have nothing against the way she looks or the fact that she is a woman.

That's fine. Those are some of the reasons I don't much favor her. I would stop far short, though, of saying I would never vote for her. For example, suppose the nominees were her and Mitt Romney? I'd grimace and vote for the lesser of two evils.

 

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Dennis Kucinich's wife is a twenty something new age hippy vegan that eschews all animal products and believes in karma.

http://kucinich.us/elizabeth

Do you really want this woman in the White House?

Yes.

 

[Dustin Kesselberg]

I find it amazing that anyone would blackball a candidate based on the morality of a candidate's spouse. Are you saying that Giuliani's current wife has a sense of ethics that so twisted that you cannot vote for him no matter what his qualifications might be?

Yes, You have to remember that she could influence him. If she is the first lady. Also, you need to question him for marrying such a woman.

 

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Yes, I am aware that you don't like her. But even if she had a personal grudge against Imus (and having someone joke about a very painful aspect of your personal life might do that to someone) she pretty much just had to get in line to bash Imus. Which politicians stepped up to defend him?

Edwards.

She proposed to keep retailers from selling violent and pornographic video games to children. Are you in favor of selling them to children? Or are you perhaps a minor who is annoyed because you have a difficult time acquiring these things?

Define "violent and pornographic". The problem with this is it's extremely difficult to define and with such a law, she would of actually put many video game stores out of business because that's just about ALL they sell.

But the "removing them from the market" is totally bogus and you know it. You don't have to buy them from a retailer. You can buy them on-line. While I think her steps to protect children would be ineffective, you certainly have to come up with something better than that, or else logically, you need to harbor the same poisonous hatred for every politician who comes out against pornography and violence that you have for Ms. Clinton.

No. Making laws against selling them to 'children' would in effect make them difficult for anyone to get. Her law would have made new game ratings for such games as "GTA san andreas" above the "mature" level which would of relegated such games to being sold in a small number of stores. How many major video game outlets sell actual pornographic games? None that I can name.

 

[rtalman]

I noticed that Sportsbook . com has their latest betting odds (as of May 10) on the winner of the 2008 presidential election with Hillary in the lead at 8-5, followed by Rudy at 2-1, Obama at 7-2, and Gore at 4-1.

I would not lend much credence to their odds, however (even though this is how they make their money), since they are taking bets on Arnold [FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Schwarzenegger (250-1), Bill Clinton (300-1), and George W Bush (200-1), all of which would require a constitutional amendment for them to be elected.

Other media figures they are listing include [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica] Bill OReilly (750-1), [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica] Clint Eastwood (750-1), Michael Moore (1000-1) and [/FONT][FONT=Arial, Helvetica] Bill Maher (bottom of the odds sheet at 2500-1).
[/FONT]

 

[Dustin Kesselberg]

I think a white christian man will most likely get the nomination for both parties and will become president. Which one? I don't know. I doubt it will be Rommey though since he's a Mormon. I don't believe America is ready for either a woman, a black man or a Mormon for president unfortunately there are still plenty of narrow minded bigots living in America, even if they don't realize it themselves.