Do the candidates bother you?

hsmith · 11-03-2007, 02:02 PM

Take Romney for instance. He is spending millions of his own money to run for president. So much so that he isn't running to be president for the people, he is running to be the president. Where not serving America is his goal, but just being the leader is his goal. I think this is transparent through almost all of the candidates, save a few. Romney, Giuliani, Clinton, Edwards, McCain - the all want to be the president, not serve the american people.

Simius · 11-03-2007, 02:19 PM

Originally Posted by hsmith

Take Romney for instance. He is spending millions of his own money to run for president. So much so that he isn't running to be president for the people, he is running to be the president. Where not serving America is his goal, but just being the leader is his goal. I think this is transparent through almost all of the candidates, save a few. Romney, Giuliani, Clinton, Edwards, McCain - the all want to be the president, not serve the american people.

I don't see how him spending his own money makes him any less for the people than someone who is spending other people's money on their campaign. IIRC Perot spent a lot of his own money on the campaign and nobody claimed he was doing it just to be The President and his campaign was somehow less than for the people than the other candidates.

Rouger2 · 11-03-2007, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by hsmith

Take Romney for instance. He is spending millions of his own money to run for president. So much so that he isn't running to be president for the people, he is running to be the president. Where not serving America is his goal, but just being the leader is his goal. I think this is transparent through almost all of the candidates, save a few. Romney, Giuliani, Clinton, Edwards, McCain - the all want to be the president, not serve the american people.

You have to have a healthy ego to run for President, but that is a good question. How do you really know. They have to be good strong leaders but they must love the people and lead for us. You know that Lincoln and Washington were lovers of the people, but do we have any today.

RMNIXON · 11-03-2007, 04:37 PM

You make a very good point. Maybe that is why our choices suck? Can you imagine a time when somebody like George Washington or General Eisenhower needs to be asked to be President but does not want the job? Colin Powell won't even think about it.

AVengeance · 11-05-2007, 12:11 PM

There is ONE choice that doesn't suck. The media has not declared him the winner, though, and in at least one instance, specifically decreed that he WOULD NOT WIN. We don't decide who's going to be president, anyway. Bummer.

thomez · 11-05-2007, 08:01 PM

The whole process sucks terribly .... those with thick wallets narrow the choices down for us so we only see those that are acceptable to them.... normally not in the best interests of the people.

MAN_defination · 11-10-2007, 11:32 AM

president are very specializied in the whole frame of country. if they bother then that means listen them and wait till their expected outcome will happen

hsmith · 11-10-2007, 11:57 AM

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

You make a very good point. Maybe that is why our choices suck? Can you imagine a time when somebody like George Washington or General Eisenhower needs to be asked to be President but does not want the job? Colin Powell won't even think about it.

And lets not forget

Bloomberg could swoop in and *buy* the Presidency with his billion dollars.

motivez · 11-10-2007, 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by MAN_defination

president are very specializied in the whole frame of country. if they bother then that means listen them and wait till their expected outcome will happen

What?

Galactic Gigolo · 11-10-2007, 04:27 PM

Romney bothers me because he strikes me as the type who will say and do anything to become President, and his actions show just that.

Giuliani bothers me because he's a total warmonger who will continue this disastrous foreign policy of Bush's, only more hawkish.

McCain is not the same McCain that he was seven years ago. Big problem there.

Clinton bothers me because she's full of shit and does a poor job of concealing it. She also seems like she'd be just as hostile towards the media as Bush is.

Edwards is rather homosexual.

The policies of the other Democratic candidates bother me, but they're not as off-putting and focus-grouped as Clinton, so I can only hope something changes in the next few months.

RMNIXON · 11-10-2007, 04:37 PM

Originally Posted by Galactic Gigolo

Edwards is rather homosexual.

lew · 11-10-2007, 05:02 PM

Originally Posted by Rouger2

You have to have a healthy ego to run for President, but that is a good question. How do you really know. They have to be good strong leaders but they must love the people and lead for us. You know that Lincoln and Washington were lovers of the people, but do we have any today.

Lincoln loved the people so much that he killed about a million of them.

JaJae · 11-10-2007, 06:52 PM

Obama: Where does he stand on the issues? He only gives vague answers to questions. He's too "safe" on issues.
Edwards: Made his millions off scamming the courts, dishonorable. Not worthy of being president.
Hillary: No
Richardson: Needs to stop sucking up to Hillary and get his own opinions out there, his views would be popular if he would do something.
Kucinich: Wacko, every election has their one retard, Dennis is the retard of this election
Gravel: Booooooring. Don't know where he stands on any issues cause he bores me to sleep before his mouth even starts moving.
Dodd: He's good at pointing out inaccuracies in other people's views, but doesn't talk enough about his own.
Biden: Jerk, but he make a lot of sense.

Hunter: Needs to crawl back under the rock he came from. He's a useless candidate, brings nothing to the table.
Rudy: Bush Lite
Huckabee: Quite often makes a lot of sense when talking about the economy, but then he starts talking about social issues and he needs to learn to stop trying to legislate his fucked up morals.
McCain: Haven't really ever liked him. He's too busy talking out of both sides of his ass to really make much sense regardless.
Romney: The platform he's running on isn't that bad, it's too bad he's a fucking fraud. Sorry I don't believe he woke up one day and suddenly had middle of the road conservative views that would make him electable. I ain't buyin what he's sellin.
Tancredo: Another one of those brings nothing to the table candidates. He needs to stop talking about immigration and find a new topic. His views on immigration aren't even helping him. He's like a broken record.
Thompson: I like a lot of his views, but I don't know if I can trust what he's saying. He comes off as shady and lazy.
Paul: Seemed principled and dependable.

All in all, I'll likely be voting against a candidate this upcoming election rather than for someone. My favorites are: Biden & Richardson from the Dems. Paul and Thomspon from the GOP. These are obviously subject to change on a whim.

motivez · 11-10-2007, 07:13 PM

Hillary: Complete panderer, she'll always be centrist for political reasons instead of because that's where she actually stands.. I also don't trust her with the power BushCheney has grabbed any more than I do them..

Obama: I like his hopeful message, but he lacks specifics and experience, many rookie mistakes this campaign

Edwards: Didn't take up the causes dealing with poverty and whatnot until he knew he was running for President again..

Richardson: Most experience by far, great resume.. sucks at debating. I think he could get shit done if he had a real shot, too bad he doesn't

Kucinich: Far more intellectual than the other Democrats running, but has no shot because of his crazy ideas

Gravel: Comic relief

Dodd: Seems to be a person of principle and willing to stand for what he believes in but hasn't been able to make the jump to top tier.. I think he'll be a VP candidate

Biden: Straight talker, but unelectable because of chronic foot in mouth disease

---------

Rudy: Socially liberal, wants to be President of 9/11, running solely on his performance after 9/11.. people don't realize he was walking around because he ignored warnings to move his office to someplace other than the WTC, and the firefighters hate him...

Huckabee: Tries to be economically moderate, but is too socially backwards to get my vote

McCain: Did a 180 on every issue he believed in 2000, can't trust him anymore

Romney: Wants to be President for the prestige, not for the right reasons, complete flip flopper despite decent business credentials..

Thompson: Not a serious candidate, he doesn't have the passion needed to win

Paul: Man of principle, consistent, stands up for what he believes regardless of the political consequences. I like him.

JaJae · 11-10-2007, 07:58 PM

^ We agree on a lot here motz

hsmith · 11-14-2007, 12:14 AM

Originally Posted by JaJae

Obama: Where does he stand on the issues? He only gives vague answers to questions. He's too "safe" on issues.
Edwards: Made his millions off scamming the courts, dishonorable. Not worthy of being president.
Hillary: No
Richardson: Needs to stop sucking up to Hillary and get his own opinions out there, his views would be popular if he would do something.
Kucinich: Wacko, every election has their one retard, Dennis is the retard of this election
Gravel: Booooooring. Don't know where he stands on any issues cause he bores me to sleep before his mouth even starts moving.
Dodd: He's good at pointing out inaccuracies in other people's views, but doesn't talk enough about his own.
Biden: Jerk, but he make a lot of sense.

Hunter: Needs to crawl back under the rock he came from. He's a useless candidate, brings nothing to the table.
Rudy: Bush Lite
Huckabee: Quite often makes a lot of sense when talking about the economy, but then he starts talking about social issues and he needs to learn to stop trying to legislate his fucked up morals.
McCain: Haven't really ever liked him. He's too busy talking out of both sides of his ass to really make much sense regardless.
Romney: The platform he's running on isn't that bad, it's too bad he's a fucking fraud. Sorry I don't believe he woke up one day and suddenly had middle of the road conservative views that would make him electable. I ain't buyin what he's sellin.
Tancredo: Another one of those brings nothing to the table candidates. He needs to stop talking about immigration and find a new topic. His views on immigration aren't even helping him. He's like a broken record.
Thompson: I like a lot of his views, but I don't know if I can trust what he's saying. He comes off as shady and lazy.
Paul: Seemed principled and dependable.

All in all, I'll likely be voting against a candidate this upcoming election rather than for someone. My favorites are: Biden & Richardson from the Dems. Paul and Thomspon from the GOP. These are obviously subject to change on a whim.

I can discount Thompson for you, he was a lobbyist