• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Who do you think would be best for 2008?

Who would you support in 2008?

  • John McCain(AZ-R)

    Votes: 7 25.0%
  • Barbra Boxer(CA-D)

    Votes: 3 10.7%
  • other Dem

    Votes: 7 25.0%
  • other Rep

    Votes: 11 39.3%

  • Total voters
    28
I think we're not looking at enough Govenors...they tend to do better than Senators. It might be someone not on the national radar yet.
 
John Edwards?
This guy represents much of what is wrong with America. Ambulance chasing crook.
Hillary Clinton?
Wolf in sheep's clothing.
But not much else out there to choose from at the moment.
 
Oh, ouch, you hurt me deeply mistermain, and now in the spirit of what I hope to become, I am going to hire a lawyer and sue you. Really, he is exactly what America is supposed to represent if you listen to president bush...someone who made it. Someone who worked hard and eventually made it not because of wealth or power, but because they were smart and driven to succeed.

That is why he did well as a lawyer...and let me tell you the three biggest cases of his were not ambulance chasing cases...for example, one was where the person was paralyzed if I am not mistaken because of what happened. That was who he represented. What most people don't realize is that there are not ambulance chasers out there-all those people come to the lawyers for help and if the case has any merit, a good lawyer will take it. It is that simple. If the case doesn't have merit, a bad lawyer will take it. John was a good lawyer and is really a nice guy if you have the chance to meet him.

Hillary Clinton, well if she is my nominee I will defend her, but I won't like doing it...don't like her, don't like many of her policies, but if she is who we put up then I have a duty to the party to defend her. Sucks for me. She to me represents everything wrong with america, as does president bush...both fall to their knees when a corporation comes calliing...rather sad. I guess I am too much of a rader through and through.

I love Obama, especially on education and health care, but he is too green to run right now. I ask you to look at Gov. Warner, he is someone you may like, or at the very least not find too objectionable.
 
Stherngntlmn said:
nope too many democrats disdain her very existance and she has absolutely 0 possibility of carrying any state in the south
Bingo, and I have been saying this for a long time. But I also recognize that I will, as a dem, defend her if she becomes my candidate, because frankly, I would still rather have her than a repub.
 
ShamMol said:
Oh, ouch, you hurt me deeply mistermain, and now in the spirit of what I hope to become, I am going to hire a lawyer and sue you. Really, he is exactly what America is supposed to represent if you listen to president bush...someone who made it. Someone who worked hard and eventually made it not because of wealth or power, but because they were smart and driven to succeed.

I'm sorry i didn't mean to hurt your feelings. Actually I wasn't even responding to your post in the first place. As for the "big cases", the one that comes to mind is where he channeled an unborn child in a court room and had her "speak" to the jury. Edwards made his millions with junk science. He knows where the money is, and has made a habit of not representing people where there is not the potential of a huge payout for himself. Do you have insurance? Have you seen your medical costs skyrocket over the past few years. I know I have. While not completely responsible, Edwards, and all other ambulance chasers play a role in all of this.
 
mistermain said:
I'm sorry i didn't mean to hurt your feelings. Actually I wasn't even responding to your post in the first place. As for the "big cases", the one that comes to mind is where he channeled an unborn child in a court room and had her "speak" to the jury. Edwards made his millions with junk science. He knows where the money is, and has made a habit of not representing people where there is not the potential of a huge payout for himself. Do you have insurance? Have you seen your medical costs skyrocket over the past few years. I know I have. While not completely responsible, Edwards, and all other ambulance chasers play a role in all of this.
Can you stop using the phrase ambulance chasers, because it is just false. Call them money-chasers if you will, but don't use something that is false. I was joking about the other thing hurting, but that phrase deeply offends those who work in the legal profession because we know it to be false...just as with all the shark comments. It is like the minority representing the majority-it sucks for the majority. So...money-chasers if you must....just not ambulance chasers.

The lawyers are to cause? I say that the drug agencies are to cause, but no, don't listen to me. I will admit that they are maybe contributing about 5% to your rise in cost, but dude, the rest of it is inflation and drug companies out to make a profit at the expense of the little man.

I have health insurance and I have seen mine go up with the drug costs. Notice that? No, but we only talk about the evil of the trial lawyers. Why? Because right now the Repubs are in control and thus don't want to anger their big-money donors. Makes sense, no? That is why they passed a law protecting them from lawsuits this pass session...oh, yes they did. Protect your base so to speak and that is all that matters. Screw the little man, which is me and you.

Here is some light reading for you on the rising cost of health care...but because of drug pricing. Interesting. http://www.gladwell.com/2004/2004_10_25_a_drugs.html

And here is a nut...who has some interesting ideas and is on the right track. But what I want to note is how little he stresses the legal aspect of the rising health care costs. It is actually very market based and non-government subsidized...which is what usually people on the right want...prove me wrong, please. http://www.balancedpolitics.org/editorial-solution_to_health_care_crisis.htm
 
The lawyers are to cause? I say that the drug agencies are to cause, but no, don't listen to me. I will admit that they are maybe contributing about 5% to your rise in cost, but dude, the rest of it is inflation and drug companies out to make a profit at the expense of the little man.

You're right, they are not the only ones to blame. That's why I said they play a role, along with many others. But he is an ambulance chaser. When you or I see an unfortunate situation concerning a patient and a hospital or doctor he sees dollar signs. My father had a heart attack two years ago. He recovered from that fine, but spent two weeks in the hospital due to an improperly inserted catherter that had become infected. I could not keep count of the lawyers that crawled out of the woodwork to help him seek "justice."
My father probably could have won a sustantial amount of money, but he is a standup dude. He told them to **** themselves. He recognized that the long term consequences far outweighed the immediate rewards.

By the way, I am not a republican. I don't feel comfortable with the republicans on the list of potential candidates for 2008 either. I just have strong feelings towards Edwards and Clinton.
 
I wish Badnarik would run again. If he would get rid of his non-interventionist foreign policy he'd be a near perfect candidate. In all honesty, I dont care who wins as long as its not Hillary. I'd vote for Stalin before i'd vote for Hillary, he supports smaller government.
 
HegemonLocke said:
John McCain
Barbra Boxer
John Edwards
Hillary Clinton
Whestly Clark

anybody have thoughts on my preliminary list? As a unfaithful/unaffiliated political party voter I'm having a tough time coming up with real GOP possibilities who I would actually vote for but I think McCain is the front runner in my head. But I think the Dems on my list are pretty good too but I fear that Hillary would face too much opposition in the Congress and Edwards would be meak, timide and unexperinced. I think anyone saying Obama should relaize the "kennedy" effect shouldn't be relied on for an election as important as a this one. Lets face is Kerry, no one really wanted in '04 he was just the most powerful/recognizable/"legitimate" Dem out there. The Dems could use some powerful party figures and I think that Barbra Boxer is one an excellent example of one. Whestly Clark - to the best of my knowledge hasn't ever been elected to anything - but is that always a bad thing?

Ok I;ve thrown enough thought out there. I strongly support all Dem's to look into Barba Boxer - her record(esp. Iraq she voted NO to give the power to the president to go to war) and the Rep's to look at John McCain as a hope for strong, honorable, powerful leader with integrity to lead them to recovery from the neo-con take over.

Condoleeza Rice
 
Your father could have gotten a lot of money...that is correct. What he could have done which would have been easily as "stand-upish" is just approach with a lawyer and say I want a settlement of 10,000 with no trial and here is why. They would have gladly settled.

I have very strong feelings towards Clinton, but if she becomes my candidate, I will fight for her.
 
I don't think the Republicans will nominate McCain...they believe he's too radical..doesn't tow the line.

Don't laugh, but for me the perfect unbeatable ticket would be McCain and Hillary...in either order you like....a true bi-partisan ticket, and the best ticket for America.

But the Repubs will probably nominate someone lousy again and then start the lies and scandal rumors to beat whoever the Dems nominate.
 
None of the above.

Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf

Independent.
 
Republicans
John McCain - He has popularity, he has a good head on his shoulders, and he's expressed interest in running at least once. I don't think he will run, but it's still a possibility, and I'd consider him the best option.

Rice - I hate her. Still, she'd bring in the votes. Republicans will vote for her simply because of her party, and blacks and women will vote for her because of her race and gender, stealing votes from the democrats.

Democrats
Hilary - this is the only real option. She's got the "brand recognition", she can rake in the cash, she has decent politics, and she'll probably be the one I end up voting for.
 
Still, what about the Southern gov. factor? There is always one who just comes out of nowhere...and that candidate is Warner. He is from Virginia...no, not the Senator, who is a nutcase, the governor. He has a 60% approval rating in a red state and has even gotten work done on taxes and has done work on education. He, I believe has a strong chance and teamed with a good liberal such as John Edwards, could really energize the base.
 
I think Evan Bayh would be a very good candidate, if only he expanded his popularity and got his messages out there. He's moderate, and he can easily get the moderate votes & even a few conservative votes, winning Indiana, Ohio, Iowa, and all the other close states. However, I've come to realize that most Democrats won't support him, and have begun to already campaign for Wesley Clark - although I question his experience.
 
I really don't who the Republicans can use. Maybe Guliany or w/e his name is who used be mayor of NYC. I know he's not a true Republican though because he's a moderate. All i know is that i don't want Hillary to win.
 
Re:SENATOR GEORGE ALLEN FOR PRESIDENT AND V.P.

Being A True Virginian Like Myself,i Believe We Should Elect The Ninth President From Virginia.former Governor,u.s. Representative And A State Politician Not To Mention A Good Senatorial Record.
He Beat Out L.b.j.'s Son In-law For The Senate And Has Good Moral Values.mark Warner Does Not Plan To Run Against Him For Senate Next Year,so That Guarantees Him A Senatorial Re-election.and Have You Heard The Rumor ??? After The Mid -terms In 06,cheney Will Resign And Allen Is At The Top Of Bush's List For A V.p.,that Is Just What I Heard. George Felix Allen For President Y'all.
 
Re: SENATOR GEORGE ALLEN FOR PRESIDENT AND V.P.

ultra conservative said:
Being A True Virginian Like Myself,i Believe We Should Elect The Ninth President From Virginia.former Governor,u.s. Representative And A State Politician Not To Mention A Good Senatorial Record.
He Beat Out L.b.j.'s Son In-law For The Senate And Has Good Moral Values.mark Warner Does Not Plan To Run Against Him For Senate Next Year,so That Guarantees Him A Senatorial Re-election.and Have You Heard The Rumor ??? After The Mid -terms In 06,cheney Will Resign And Allen Is At The Top Of Bush's List For A V.p.,that Is Just What I Heard. George Felix Allen For President Y'all.

If you really want him to be president, I would advise him not to take Bush's offer, should it prove to be true. Being too close to Bush will be a poison pill in the 2008 election. Rice is the only one in the Bush admin who would stand a chance, because she seems to be a little outside the Bush box, even though they have been friends for so long.
 
Back
Top Bottom