Meet your new thread, same as the old thread.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
http://www.presidentpolls2008.com/po...ion-Polls.html

http://www.presidentpolls2008.com/po...ion-Polls.html

2 to 3 %

It's time to reinstate the literacy requirement for voting.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Huckabee is yet another smiley, centrist from Arkansas. I thought the Democrat party loved smiley, centrists from Arkansas?

What's generally wrong with Romney? Although I'm a Rudy guy, I'd damn well trust the founder of Bain Capital over a no-experience, empty suit like Obama or [pick an adjective] like Hillary.

The man has two wholly transparent characteristics: (1) he stands for absolutely nothing, and is a pure opportunist; and (2) he would sell his own daughter into slavery if it benefited him.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Why not? He thinks exactly what you do at least one day of the week.

Now that, that's really good.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
How many of you right now are actually supporting SOMEONE?

I'm not talking about the ostensible nominee for your party - hell, 2008 is shaping up to be a repeat of 2004; namely, most people will merely vote AGAINST the nominee of the other party*

I have said countless times I am FOR Giuliani.

I think it is safe to say that Ty is FOR Obama.

But is anyone else out there seriously and actually committed to any of these folks?

Please discuss.



*If anyone here admits they voted FOR Bush or FOR Kerry (except maybe Panda), they are lying.

I'm for Obama. I like his message on a lot of things, but I'm pissed that he took the expediency route on tax policy. I wonder if he's got enough experience for foreign policy, but I can't think of a single Republican other than McCain who does and I disagree with Hillary.

In general, I think he'd do the least harm, and if he got enough of a majority, he might actually be a force for change.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
How many of you right now are actually supporting SOMEONE?

I'm not talking about the ostensible nominee for your party - hell, 2008 is shaping up to be a repeat of 2004; namely, most people will merely vote AGAINST the nominee of the other party*

I have said countless times I am FOR Giuliani.

I think it is safe to say that Ty is FOR Obama.

But is anyone else out there seriously and actually committed to any of these folks?

Please discuss.



*If anyone here admits they voted FOR Bush or FOR Kerry (except maybe Panda), they are lying.

I'm not committed yet. But I consider it an abundance of riches - I truly like both Hillary and Obama. I have not warmed to Edwards.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Some?

Besides - Paul isn't really a libertarian. He spouts a few mantras here and there, but at heart, he's really a populist xenophobe.

Likely the qualities winning him the "racialist" vote.

S_A_M

[SlaveNoMore]

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
I'm not committed yet.

How can you not be? The only thing left for either of them - hell, any candidate - to do is fuck up. Their positions are set.

[LessinSF]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
I'm not committed yet. But I consider it an abundance of riches - I truly like both Hillary and Obama. I have not warmed to Edwards.

It's hard to warm to a screamer, particularly if you have ever worked in a law firm.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Personally, I tend to find that if you poke them, most libertarians are just greedy motherfuckers whose sole political philosophy is "I got mine, I'm keeping it."

That fits the ones I knew -- but it was a very small sample size.

S_A_M

[SlaveNoMore]

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
The man has two wholly transparent characteristics: (1) he stands for absolutely nothing, and is a pure opportunist; and (2) he would sell his own daughter into slavery if it benefited him.

Actually, this sums up Edwards quite well.

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
How many of you right now are actually supporting SOMEONE?

I'm not talking about the ostensible nominee for your party - hell, 2008 is shaping up to be a repeat of 2004; namely, most people will merely vote AGAINST the nominee of the other party*

I have said countless times I am FOR Giuliani.

I think it is safe to say that Ty is FOR Obama.

But is anyone else out there seriously and actually committed to any of these folks?

I am FOR Hillary in a lukewarm sense. (Which may be your point.)

As for the others, I like Obama a lot but have concerns. I have many more concerns about Edwards, and like him less. I would be happier with HRC than with either of these two.

S_A_M

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
How can you not be? The only thing left for either of them - hell, any candidate - to do is fuck up. Their positions are set.

As a general rule, I spend money on general elections, not primaries. And so I don't have to make up my mind until it's time to walk into the polling booth a few weeks from now. If I had to make up my mind today, I'd vote for Hillary based not just on her experience, but also on her constancy over the years and the impressions I've had meeting her. She had a depth of knowledge about some of the issues we were discussing that was impressive on any level and rare in a politician. She is clearly presidential timber.

I have not yet met Obama, and if he can stand up over time, and can keep running a campaign like he is now, he might well be even better.

[Gattigap]

I like Obama. He's the only one in the field that I can stand listening to anymore.

Among his other sins, I think Edwards has jumped the shark recently with his All Populism, All the Time message.

I cannot bear the thought of reliving the Clinton Drama for another 4 to 8 years.

On the Republican side, Romney is a cipher, and a transparent one at that, but it seems that he has the potential to be a competent president if it comes to that.

I admit to liking McCain a little because, well, I still have a soft spot for the guy, despite the neoconservative knucklehead that he's turned out to be.

Huckabee is fun to watch, in part because he'll play a role in destroying what's left of the Reagan coalition, but he doesn't really know what he's doing as a candidate, and he's not gonna win anything in any event. He'll have his day in the sun in Iowa, and maybe South Carolina, but far as I can tell, he doesn't have anything approaching a national campaign apparatus, and I think you still need one to actually win a nomination.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
As a general rule, I spend money on general elections, not primaries. And so I don't have to make up my mind until it's time to walk into the polling booth a few weeks from now. If I had to make up my mind today, I'd vote for Hillary based not just on her experience, but also on her constancy over the years and the impressions I've had meeting her. She had a depth of knowledge about some of the issues we were discussing that was impressive on any level and rare in a politician. She is clearly presidential timber.

I would like HRC more if she weren't in a permanent defensive crouch. She may even have good reasons for the posture, given all the shit she's received over the years, but that doesn't mean I want to vote for her.

[SlaveNoMore]

Gattigap
I like Obama. He's the only one in the field that I can stand listening to anymore.

He seems like a genuinely nice guy. I'd invite him to dinner, but wouldn't vote for him

Among his other sins, I think Edwards has jumped the shark recently with his All Populism, All the Time message.

Given his background, it comes across as satire

I cannot bear the thought of reliving the Clinton Drama for another 4 to 8 years.

You ain't kidding, although she is the most "leader-like" of the Dems

On the Republican side, Romney is a cipher, and a transparent one at that, but it seems that he has the potential to be a competent president if it comes to that.

I don't disagree with the cipher comment, but I think it's an unfortunate consequence of candidates all pandering to 250K otherwise unimportant citizens of Iowa.

I admit to liking McCain a little because, well, I still have a soft spot for the guy, despite the neoconservative knucklehead that he's turned out to be.

He's a hero, and gives great TV, but I hate 2/3s of his positions and would rather have a beer with Obama. Or Cheney.

Huckabee is fun to watch, in part because he'll play a role in destroying what's left of the Reagan coalition, but he doesn't really know what he's doing as a candidate, and he's not gonna win anything in any event. He'll have his day in the sun in Iowa, and maybe South Carolina, but far as I can tell, he doesn't have anything approaching a national campaign apparatus, and I think you still need one to actually win a nomination.

In the end - concur. He's a two-trick pony, if that. Crashes faster than Dean. Or Buchanan.