This is for you, ES:
Who, oh, who do you love for the job of President in 2009?
You may still be "shopping around", AKA UNDECLARED.
Okay! Very valid; say so.
Or, for religious reasons, you may not vote;
you don't have to discuss that, but just say,
"I don't vote."
All answers are valid answers. Everybody gets an "A" on this test.
_________________________________________________
*Below are they whom have thrown their hats in the ring, starting with
the Republicans, and they are in alphabetically order, by surname:
Meet the Declared Republican Candidates for President of
the United States, for the 2008 Election year;
Note: All images were obtained from the same site and listed as
the candidates "official portrait".
Sam Brownback Newt Gingrich Rudy Guiliani
Mike Huckabee Duncan Hunter John McCain
Ron Paul Mitt Romney Tom Tancredo
Fred Thompson Tommy Thompson
Possible Republican Candidates:
Tom Coburn Chuck Hagel George Pataki
These have filed with the Federal Elections Commission (FEC):
Hugh Cort
David Ernst Furniss
Daniel Ayers Gilbert
Walter D. Kennedy
Mark Klein
Michael Charles Smith
Richard Michael Smith
Raymond L. McKinney
Keith SprankleVern Wuensche
Meet the Declared Democratic Candidates for President of
the United States, for the 2008 Election year:
Joe Biden Hillary Rod Clinton Chris Dodd
John Edwards Mike Gravel Dennis Kuchinich
Barack Obama Bill Richardson
Possible Democratic Candidates:
Wesley Clark Al Gore Tom Vilsack
These have filed with the Federal Elections Commission (FEC):
Dal LaMagna
James Prattas
Danny M. Francis
There they are. One of those faces is the face of
the next President, number 44, of the
United States of America. Or, maybe it's one
of the listed names. Who? You tell me.
___________________________________________________
*As of July 25, 2007, and is obviously subject to change.
___________________________________________________
I want to apologize to the other political parties for
not posting your candidates, but feel free to name them,
as well as your Party.
Also, I purposely did not list any information about
these candidates, knowing that YOU,
the American Citizenry,
can speak to your candidate
far better than can I; so
"do your stuff."
This promises to be an informative
discourse, provided each candidate is
represented.
Tell us about your candidate,
and why you support him or her.
Thank you, for your participation.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 40
Thank you Nalita for a wonderful artivle/forum.
As for the republicians, I'm an out spoken independant woman--you know someone they would not only find offensive, but whose rights they are trying to limit.
ANYBODY but someone strongly connected to "Shrub!"
I have listened to the Reps raise Reagan from the dead one too many times. None of them are the "next" Reagan. I still hear way too much thumping of their chests to seriously entertain that they would not become war mongers. There are some who have "curb appeal," such as Guiliani or Thompson, but they're too big business for me!
http://www.speakout.com/VoteMatch/senate2006.asp?quiz=2008
http://www.selectsmart.com/president/2008.html
Funny how the highest ranking woman in government in the history of this nation is actually a Republican isn't it Teresa?
Oh and other than the right to commit infanticide exactly what rights of women are Republicans trying to limit?
Nancy Pelosi is a Republican?
I had said I wasn't going to comment in this forum, because this is a forum for the electorate, but as a point of clarification, your man has thrown his hat into the ring. Every photo you see has declared, or in the case of "possibles", are testing the waters, according to FEC records. I also checked my information on Wikipedia. So, Ty Phoon, your man is in!
Typicalleft wing rhetoric
And why do you like your candidate? What issues are causing you to support him or her?
"Barack Obama is not for you. You disagree on all important issues."
According to my quiz choices - Duncan Hunter is the man for me. LOL.
http://www.ontheissues.org/default.htm
Similar website.
but I don't think he will either. After all what if he lost again or
the same thing happened, he would die of a heart attack inside
6 months I think.
On the Republican side I find them all nice people, and I think
Tommy Thompson is the best qualified. I detest Romney as a
total stuffed shirt, Guiliani is a windbag, but he is showing well
and says some gutsy things, I have to give him credit though.
I would not vote for a Republican, anywhere right now I am
so angry at them.
In fact, I wish Lou Dobbs was running for President. I'm reading
his book "War on the Working Class". He thinks a productive
thing to do would be for everyone to register independent in
order to send a message to both parties. He is also for public
funding of elections.
On the Democrat side, I like Edwards, Clinton Biden probably
equally and in no particular order.
To me Obama made a major goof that reveals a lot about him
when he naively said he would sit down with anyone to talk.
I think he has no idea of the Presidency by that remark.
I would also like to see Nader run, whether he won or not, and
I would not vote for him, but he would continue his huge public
service by getting into the debates and showing America someone
who has really served their country, knows what he is talking
about and would find and rip out the weak points in the
other candidates.
By the way - Nalita .... what happened to your other article on the debate?
You made a couple of interesting points. Although, Edwards has been harassed about that haircut, he wasn't born with the silver spoon in his mouth. You really do get the sense that Biden isn't an elitist. Do you think the media told the American people who the front runners should be? It's almost like a number of these other candidates aren't even considered as viable options, and weren't considered viable from the start.
> Do you think the media told the American people who the front runners should be?
Yes. Don't you think that is always the case to some extent in any society - we all have limits and boundaries of what we are allowed to think and be exposed to. I am not sure I would villify our process for the way we do it, there is Kucinich, there are other ideas that 'might" be able to take hold if they resonate with Americans.
> It's almost like a number of these other candidates aren't even considered as viable options, and weren't considered viable from the start.
Yes, the largest statement I could make about this the total lack of any non-hostile coverage of anything "Leftist". When anything leftist makes it to the news there are bounding and framing comments always present to make sure everyone knows it is socially disproved of. The reason they can be considered bounding statements is that they are so absurd and unsupported. Such as "communism failed in Russia, we don't want it here" throwing any social idea under the umbrella of Russian totalitarian dictatorship - not a fair comparison. Or the "under socialism, everyone ends up equal, do you want that"? In Europe not everyone is equal by a long shot, nor are any of the countries there aiming for that.
What makes a lot more sense when you set these types of arguments against the people who are making them is that they support the contuation of the status quo, that is they help protect the wealth and power of those who have already proven by the last 30 years they are no performing well as managers and caretakers of the country.