|
Post by Vlad on Mar 5, 2008 6:29:21 GMT -5
We are finally down to a few realistic outcomes of the race for the US presidency. Let's see who would be President if the S'cubies were deciding this contest. I included Nader and an "other" category for those who are not comfortable with any of the major three candidates.
Vlad
|
|
|
Post by Rachael on Mar 5, 2008 13:45:13 GMT -5
Hmm. So far the S'cubie vote is backing up the "Hillary wins with women" exit poll data.
|
|
|
Post by Vlad on Mar 5, 2008 14:13:25 GMT -5
I don't have issues with having a woman president and would vote for the right one myself. I jsut wouldn't vote for this one. It's not a gender thing.
My major sticking points:
Mandated Health care: I don't want "mandated" health care. I am not so sure that Obama won't end up going that direction (I am not talking about mandated child health care here) but at least he is saying that he doesn't want to.
Withdrawing from Iraq: A lesser point here, but I don't feel Clinton is committed to withdrawing as much as she realized that her voting constituency is.
Undesirable ties: Ms. Clinton's definitely an insider and is definitely a globalist. She's owned by the same groups that own our current administration. That also own John McCain. To me, they are two faces of the same coin. I haven't yet seen Obama's connection to the globalists, but I am sure they will be doing their utmost best to own him as well. His connection with Rezco does trouble me from what I am hearing, but in my mind, this is a time of the devil we don't know vs. the one we do being better. Or at least not worse.
Also, Bill Clinton did some pretty dubious deals with China during his terms. I can not believe that Hillary Clinton is not going to be surrounded by exactly the same people he was and won't be following the same standards.
Personality: I want a president that will hopefully try sensible diplomatic policies. John McCain is a warmonger. Clinton jsut comes across rather abrasive to me. Obama... well, he seems inclined to pursue matters as I think they should be pursued. You know, actually talking to our enemies; trying to work out solutions.
Vlad
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on Mar 5, 2008 14:54:53 GMT -5
Hmm. So far the S'cubie vote is backing up the "Hillary wins with women" exit poll data. Not with me, though. Sorry. Aside from the very excellent points Vlad made, which also represent some of my big sticking points, I really don't want the period from 1988 to 2012 to be Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton. More later. Must eat.
|
|
|
Post by Rachael on Mar 5, 2008 18:03:58 GMT -5
Hmm. So far the S'cubie vote is backing up the "Hillary wins with women" exit poll data. Not with me, though. Sorry. Aside from the very excellent points Vlad made, which also represent some of my big sticking points, I really don't want the period from 1988 to 2012 to be Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton. More later. Must eat. Don't have to apologize to me - though I *am* sitting here in my Hillary shirt. Seriously, though, I'm thrilled with my choices. And not actually concerned with "legacy" issues. I wouldn't care whose son Bush was had he not been a major disaster in just about every way possible. Africa. He didn't mess up most of Africa.
|
|
|
Post by Vlad on Mar 5, 2008 19:25:36 GMT -5
Not with me, though. Sorry. Aside from the very excellent points Vlad made, which also represent some of my big sticking points, I really don't want the period from 1988 to 2012 to be Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton. More later. Must eat. Don't have to apologize to me - though I *am* sitting here in my Hillary shirt. Seriously, though, I'm thrilled with my choices. And not actually concerned with "legacy" issues. I wouldn't care whose son Bush was had he not been a major disaster in just about every way possible. Africa. He didn't mess up most of Africa. Shhhh! He still has most of a year! Don't draw attention. *waves hands mystically* These are not the African states you are looking for... move along. Vlad
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Mar 7, 2008 23:20:22 GMT -5
Hmm. So far the S'cubie vote is backing up the "Hillary wins with women" exit poll data. I think the machine is in full swing, and that's why Hillary will win. But you never know -things could swing in the other direction depending on what happens in the world. I don't want to see McCain win, because if he does it will be because people will be manipulated into voting for him out of fear.
|
|
|
Post by SpringSummers on Mar 8, 2008 12:15:30 GMT -5
Hmm. So far the S'cubie vote is backing up the "Hillary wins with women" exit poll data. I think the machine is in full swing, and that's why Hillary will win. But you never know -things could swing in the other direction depending on what happens in the world. I don't want to see McCain win, because if he does it will be because people will be manipulated into voting for him out of fear. I just put my vote in for McCain. I think it's all very close, but since I'm being asked to predict - if I had to bet big bucks on it, I'd have to put my money on McCain.
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on Mar 8, 2008 16:39:13 GMT -5
Hmm. So far the S'cubie vote is backing up the "Hillary wins with women" exit poll data. I think the machine is in full swing, and that's why Hillary will win. But you never know -things could swing in the other direction depending on what happens in the world. I don't want to see McCain win, because if he does it will be because people will be manipulated into voting for him out of fear. I don't want to see McCain win either (for reasons too many to enumerate), nor Hillary. Although the point could be made that there is not a huge amount of difference between Obama and Hillary, I still like Obama better. I just find Hillary to be off-putting, and it's the same complaint I had about Bill; their political stances seem to be that of expedience, rather than what is good for the country. Other's mileage may vary.
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on Mar 8, 2008 16:40:50 GMT -5
I think the machine is in full swing, and that's why Hillary will win. But you never know -things could swing in the other direction depending on what happens in the world. I don't want to see McCain win, because if he does it will be because people will be manipulated into voting for him out of fear. I just put my vote in for McCain. I think it's all very close, but since I'm being asked to predict - if I had to bet big bucks on it, I'd have to put my money on McCain. God I hope you're wrong.
|
|
|
Post by Onjel on Mar 8, 2008 17:54:41 GMT -5
My question is this: Is this a prognosticating thread/poll or a voting thread/poll?
|
|
|
Post by Vlad on Mar 8, 2008 18:13:31 GMT -5
My question is this: Is this a prognosticating thread/poll or a voting thread/poll? From the poll question: "...cast your vote for to the next POTUS." From the opening post: "Let's see who would be President if the S'cubies were deciding this contest." I intended the poll to show who the S'cubies would elect president. I think most people took it that way. The discussion following the poll is about whatever they want to discuss that is relevant to the topic, including who they think "might be" elected, even if they are voting for someone else. Of course, voters have a tendency to screw up the most clear and detailed voting instructions. Damned butterfly ballots! Vlad
|
|
|
Post by Sharky on Mar 8, 2008 18:38:26 GMT -5
I'd gladly vote for the right woman. Unfortunately, the Constitution keeps Ms. Thatcher from running. ;-)
|
|
|
Post by Vlad on Mar 8, 2008 19:03:22 GMT -5
I'd gladly vote for the right woman. Unfortunately, the Constitution keeps Ms. Thatcher from running. ;-) That damn, pesky Constitution. Someone ought make a law against it. Vlad
|
|
|
Post by Sharky on Mar 8, 2008 19:43:11 GMT -5
I'd gladly vote for the right woman. Unfortunately, the Constitution keeps Ms. Thatcher from running. ;-) That damn, pesky Constitution. Someone ought make a law against it. Vlad The Supremes would just find it unconstitutional. They're weird like that.
|
|