Who Would You Vote For?

Clinton has my vote.

 

One of the democrats, perhaps Clinton, but she's ~IFFY~ soooo...who knows yet. It's tight...

 

I can't really vote, I don't know half of them as I'm dutch and we have our own politicians here.. I know for sure what I'd vote hére in my country though; the political group D66; they make the most sense.
But on american stuff.. I really do not have a clue.

 

I'm just curious why hardly anyone voted obama... I think obama is okay.
I don't know if I will vote at all because for one, I'm not COMPLETELY sure obama is the right choice, or anyone else for that matter. And our votes don't really count anyway.

Clinton is a bitch, and I think she's more republican than liberal anyway. She won't legalize cannabis.

Just thought I'd add the last time I voted (also the first) was 3 years ago. And I voted for bushit.

I am ashamed, but I was stupid then and didn't know what I wanted in a president.

 

I agree.

 

i'd like to hear something about hillary clinton besides the dubious charge that she's a 'bitch', which pretty much just sounds like an attack on her because she's a woman. i threw away my vote on ralph nader's campaign and i've put up with bush and his republican cronies for 8 years. the country is substantially worse off, and i can't take 4 more years of a republican. hillary clinton is the only non-republican candidate who has a prayer of winning a national election. she has pledged to end the medical marijuana raids, and we all know that's a first step in the right direction on national drug policy. if she says any more than that now, she won't win the national election because of the huge reactionary conservative voting block in the US. she is pro-choice and that IS very important. she wouldn't have vetoed the children's insurance bill today like the republican prez we have has done...and like any other presidential candidate would do. too many people have forgotten, if they ever knew, that our country had a budget surplus after eight years of a clinton democrat in office. now we're trillions of dollars in the red. think about it.

 

well if our little poll is any indication, if the republicans don't nominate ron paul, hillary is our next president at this point.

but we can almost bet who we're goinna have to choose between will be the corporatocracy's picks. which might still mean hillary or obama for the dems, though of course i'm backing kusenich in the primary.

i'd really like to see any green other then nader, and it looks like we're running this cristine smith, about whome i don't know near as much as i should.

actually i think i like gravel even more then kusinich but i know what kind of chance anyone worth a dam has. not that hillary or obama might not be the less harmful side of bussiness as usual. any bets the republitards won't try to run goolioni anyway?

we do need a non-republican this time, just to keep from ending up with a one party system. i wonder what's going to happen when it gets down to the wire though.

the kingmakers have never given us a woman or a minority before, other then in the sense of jfk having been catholic. there's so much going on right now to devide people and devide people i really hope we end up with someone we can both all live with, and at the same time won't so irrisponsibly pander to economic intrests that the web of life that IS in real danger from invironmenatal carelessness isn't completely undermined to the point of our collective mass suicide as a species.

you know, whether that happens from the election or by elections being suspended, and i refuse to take for granted that anything can't happen, it's really what we're faced with.

maybe, maybe, something unexpected good can and will happen. maybe we really will get a ron paul or a dennis kusenich, or if we get hillary or obama they won't turn out as either weak or detrimental as feared.

i think the best case is we get a kusenich who turns out to be a stronger negotiator then he's in the past appeared, the worst case, which can also happen, would be a president for life backed by suspended elections and martial law, one of the bush, cheny, rumsfield, rove quadroika.

life sometimes gives us best and worst cases. more often it gives us something somewhere inbetween. and that's still probably pretty much hillary or obama at this point.

and i don't think, at least i hope, neither will prove to be as environmentally irrisponsible as what we've seen from the american executive this decade so far.

=^^=
.../\...

 

Kucinich might be anti-war, but other than that he's very much pro-establishment and of the belief the government serves to run your life and basically be your daddy from cradle to grave. He's a socialist, which is what the New World Order system is based upon: socialism. Socialism has always been about controlling and managing people under the guise of helping them. The media gives Kucinich far more attention than Ron Paul, and that's because, unlike Dennis Kucinich, Ron Paul is electable and poses a real threat to the establishment. I can't think of any other politicians who talk about doing away with the CIA and the Federal Reserve.

What we need is LESS government, not more government. Freedom does not come from government, and history has proven that the bigger and more overbearing governments become, the more out of control and tyrannical they become. This is what we see today with a supposed "conservative" administration. (Not that there's a dime's worth of difference between Democrats and Republicans. Regardless of which party is in office, the agenda never changes at the top.)

 

If Paul is so big coporation why are all the big corporations shunning him, trying to keep him from getting any attention?

How is reducing regulations making it easier for people to start smaller businesses, and thus competition, monopolistic?

 

oh dear... paul mccartney...???
i love ringo starr...!

 

Clinton is not a liberal-any good liberal deserving of the name would have voted against the war in Iraq. She's for nothing but business as usual. And we're not calling Hillary a bitch because she's a woman-we're women, too-we're calling her a bitch because that's what she is. I suspect, however, that a lot of women are voting for her primarily because she's a woman, which should have absolutely nothing to do with whether someone gets your vote or not.

 

Clintons a bitch because she doesn't represent true liberal values, and she flip flops more then my a fish out of water.

Same shit with Bush you can't call what he's doing conservative. You know less government and all, all he's doing is increasing government and spending money we don't have.

Ron Paulz babbiiess

but too bad he will never get nominated, he's censored out of polls, his supporters are censored out of t.v. and they canceled the san francisco straw polls because of overwhelming support for him. bulzzzz

 

talk about bad press, nobody has gotten worse media attention throughout her career than hillary clinton has. she's tough though. she keeps on plowing ahead through all of it and finds a way. i admire that. she's been up against the patriarchy from day one. she is one strong little lady. i think voting for her will bring about the best case scenario. a) she's liberal, b) she's electable, c) she'll stop the fiscal hemorraging due to the stupid conservative agenda. do i like the idea of a female leader? damn right i do. so shoot me!

 

Ron Paul is an idiot.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKI...the-frontier.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=27356

I don't think that US enforcement of no-fly zones over Iraq had anything to do with September 11, or any other thing involving US policy toward Iraq. I don't think that the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia had anything to do with it either.

 

you must be joking. you really think they just attack us because they hate our freedom? give me a break. we've been over there stirring up shit for years, you think the 9/11 attacks were unprovoked? i love Giuliani "can i comment on that? thats just utterly ridiculous, please retract your statement" *thunderous applause*. the intelligence of republicans is below common sense

 

our world is going down the shitter and you some of you will base your vote on the legalization of marijuana? that sucks. Its your right, but it sucks ass.

Paul does seem genuine, but genuine is not enough. His policies are lacking something. I like Kucinich, except he is very strange and thus not marketable as a serious contender.

I don't know why you didn't put Biden on the list. He also seems "genuine" to me, and I agree with a lot of what he has to say.

John Edwards seems like a slick shit head to me.

 

I didn't even knew there were so many candidates. I thought I would have voted Obama if I was an american, untill I took the test that showed 98% match on Gravel and Kucinich and only 77% match on Obama.

Fred Thompson seem nasty to me... there was only a 5% match.

 

Hell, if I was American I would probably vote for someone who was going to legalize the ganj.

All of them are just puppets anyhow, and the two major parties are the same thing. Obama, Hillary, Guilliani, ahh... it's all the same.

Might as well vote for a social issue then. Now, if marijuana legalization is an issue that's close to someone's heart... I think that they're better off voting for the candidate that represents that issue than for some pawn of the system.

This election isn't that monumental as it is. The US is still stuck in Iraq, and whoever wins will still have to mostly deal with that together with social security and bank problems. The social issues have always been the same dull ones: Gay marriage, abortion, and so on... why can't they at least come up with something more original? I guess that statistics show that more idiots will vote for you if you oppose/agree with social issues that should not be decided by the government to begin with.

I won't be able to take this system seriously, and niether will I believe that voting in America actually makes a difference, until I see a major third party form. Otherwise, it's just the rich controlling the country for the benefit of the rich and no one else.

 

I could never vote for someone who wants to make it a law that a woman who gets pregnant must carry that baby to term. (including banning the day after pill.) What's the next step, no birth control. I like babies, but I don't want to force woman to have them. Even it that means I could smoke pot legally.

I would find it very hard to vote for someone who claims they believed Bush's lies and that's why they voted for the war. Before we invaded Iraq I knew it wasn't an imminent threat, so I'm sure anyone in the Senate knew that, unless they were extremely stupid. (another reason not to vote for them) I think that it seemed like it would be an easy war, so people went along because they thought they had to for political reasons. Now they can't admit that.

I couldn't vote for someone who plays on peoples fears of foreigners when any study based on reality shows that our economy is better because of immigration. Our workforce would shrink too fast if we didn't have immigration and our economy would be worse off.

I don't think that freedom is based on owning things and being able to do what ever you want with what you own, especially land. I think that takes away the rights of future generations and the poor who can't sue wealth land owners if those land owners decide to pollute and permanently damage their land and surrounding land.

I think that we must be a global nation, and should have relationships and unite with other nations. (I don't think we went to Iraq because the UN told us to; I don't know the motivation exactly, but it came from Bush, Chaney, Wolfowitz, etc. and their fear of foreign people.) To ignore the rest of the world or try to shut them out is not a solution to any problem.

It'd be nice to believe that all citizens could pull themselves up from their bootstraps, so we don't need any laws that stop discrimination. Before the civil rights movement, all citizens were much worse off. The civil rights movement was about enforcing and passing legislation that helped remove discrimination in public education, voting rights, law enforcement, etc. Before that people were full of hate, uneducated, and unable to protect their own rights.

I'd find it hard to vote for someone who ignores the "well regulated militia" in the second amendment and feels that's more important than other important rights...pandering to the gun lobby.

I don't think anyone who is genuine would get very far in a political career today, and I definitely don't think that any of us could tell if someone is genuine by watching the media or listening to a speech. It's all about policy.

I feel having Bush as president really hurt this country. It has filled us with hate for others, and more importantly filled others with hate towards us. Not because of who they think we are (as politicians try to say), but what we have done. I really hope that whoever is elected can help to rectify that. I think it may take generations to fix it. I never thought it could be this bad.

I think one of the worse things he did was try to change our education system to be about taking tests rather than learn to think critically. And I think that general trend (probably not all his fault) has created generations of people who are incapable of making a decision on who should be in charge based on who would actually make their lives better. I don't know how that trend can be changed...I hope people start thinking for themselves and educating themselves.

Peace and Love

I purposely didn't mention candidates by name....if you feel defensive or angry, I'm sorry. I hope I didn't offend anyone. I really hope things get better for all of us...the whole world.

 

You're probably right because 9/11 was carried out from inside the secret government. However, there is much animosity towards the US in the Middle East, and why do you think this is? You really believe it's because they hate us for our freedom? Westerners cannot seem to put themselves in the shoes of Middle Easterners to see how they would feel if the same thing was happening to them in their country.

And Ron Paul is an idiot but John Edwards isn't? Anyone with a brain can see Edwards is a complete phony and if elected will do nothing but serve his establishment masters that put him there. The guy is a total puppet.