msdz

Donald Duck is who I am voting for!!

Seriously, only reason why I would Vote for Clinton would be the fact the first female president PLUS her husband had been a president. So that would make it into history books and record books. Hillary, well she already ran the country once before, so we know how that will be already, lol.
Obama I seen him in an interview yesterday and he was stammering all over himself with the crap he was dishing out. He just does not seem to be the person to run the country, his lies are to easy to detect the way he stumbles over himself.
I really do not care for either of them at all. I would vote for McCain but I will most likely not vote at all cause I just am not satisfied with any of them at all. Also, why is he hardly ever in the media? I mean to me that is a much as saying he isn't even running but just there so the republicans have somebody they can vote for.

The other thing is I really do not get into all the political stuff. Most people vote for who their friends or family likes the best anyway. They never really search and read up on the people to find out as much as they can. PLUS I think that if a person can not run for presidency till 35 years old then they should not be allowed to vote till then either. I believe then the person is more mature and actually following politics instead of the once ever 4 years deal when we vote for a president. I mean how many of you really follow what is going on?

__________________

Atomic Dog

I do. CSPAN run nearly 24/7 on my tube. :P

Voting for someone just so they can be the first ANYTHING (whether woman or black or black woman president) is hardly any reason to vote. Doesn't really indicate a knowledgeable vote either.

Obama's Health Care plan, though similar to Clinton's, attempts to make Health Care affordable for everyone rather than mandated. His plan to balance the budget also seems stronger, IMO, than Hillary's. He's also said he would sit down with our enemies and open up diplomatic discussions...something Hillary said she wouldn't do. These are just a few of the reasons I find Obama to be the better candidate.

__________________

msdz

As you can see I said I was NOT voting for anybody cause I do not care for any of them, I just was stating that would be a first to have a female president AND her husband was president as well.
The majority of people that are under 30 usually have no clue of politics is what I am getting at, there are a few exceptions though. Shoot I know a 8 year old that has more political knowledge than most 20 or 25 year old people.

__________________

UnDeaD77

I hate them all, I'd vote for a monkey before I voted for any of them.

__________________

Zoopy

Everyone in their 20s will vote for Obama because John Stewart told them to.

War.mongeR1

This is a fascinating election year indeed.

Hillary Clinton - She may have lied about sniper fire, and tells different stories depending on the crowd she's talking to, BUT when it comes to explaining her policies, she actually has plans of HOW she's going to do things. Whether or not you agree with the policies, at least she has details, and she beats Obama every time in that regard.

Barack Obama - He can't explain his policies worth a darn. All he says is change change change, BUT doesn't really know HOW he's going to implement those changes. I want details. On the other hand, he is such a good speaker and a much more likable character than the other two, that he could be a good leader in that regard. He might actually entice people to follow him as a leader. He does have a silver tongue. That also kind of worries me that people blindly follow him because he's so darn likable, instead of really looking into things further.

John McCain - Not a pacifist and not going to pull out of Iraq. You might not agree with the war, but he would be a great defender of our country on our own turf for sure. Poor guy spent 5 1/2 years in the Hanoi Hilton, and everyone should at least give him respect and credit for enduring that one alone. After he was rescued, he stayed in the military! He's tough as nails and won't let the US get pushed around. But yes, he's too soft and liberal on certain issues. He doesn't have the charisma that Obama does, but if it comes to a debate between those 2, then McCain is going to win in my opinion. This due to the fact that he explains policy realistically and doesn't offer as many pipe dreams.

Although it's the democrats turn for Executive power, my PREDICTION is that McCain is going to win, with a Democratic congress. Ya never know, though.

__________________
"Common sense is not so common." -Voltaire

Atomic Dog

I think you underestimate the 30- age bracket. The most intelligent political conversations I seem to have are with young 20somethings. This may be due to the past 8 years of a failed administration and a war that's taken it's toll on everyone in this country, however. Much like the Vietnam era that birthed a whole new sense of political awareness amongst the youth of that era.

And as for Jon Stewart...to date he's brought on more supporters of Clinton (including Madelaine Albreight, who is a fantastic woman...I'd vote Albreight) than he has of Obama. But you can't point at Jon and say that political satire is somehow a faulty motivation for the youth to get involved. Political satire has fueled politics since the inception of politics.

And for War.monger
If you're looking for the issues laid out by the candidates and their proposals for dealing with them, they're very easily accessed at:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/

__________________

RedForman

I'm with Undead, it's a sad state of affairs that these are the choices, to be honest. At least on the Democrat side of the ticket. As for the Republican side, I was more of a Romney fan. I think his ability to budget and successfuly run businesses would have been a boon to the nation, but sadly this is no longer a choice.

__________________
"I've been working since I was sixteen. I fought two in wars. Hell, I've killed people. I'm not saying that I didn't enjoy it..."
-- Red Forman

|TG-Irr|RedForman

War.mongeR1

True. Thanks for linking that. BUT I have yet to hear him lay any of these things out on television. All you hear is change. It is good to know he has plans, though.

BTW, I believe this should be moved to the Sandbox.

__________________
"Common sense is not so common." -Voltaire

Atomic Dog

I've heard a bit of it watching the uncut/unspun version of his speeches on stations like CSPAN...most of the media only picks up on the sensational aspects of the speeches and dogs the rest. Unfortunately for Hillary, that translates to a focus on the lies and bumblings rather than the issues. The saddest state of the current election, IMO, is the media itself.

Guys like Richardson, Kucinich and Paul went relatively untelevised even though their positions on the issues are much more in line with what American people are really looking for out of a candidate and, ultimately, from this idea of "change."

And yeah, this is definitely a Sandbox thread.

__________________

War.mongeR1

Boy, are you right. That is really sad how little the other guys were covered. It almost seems like the Media has some sort of conspiracy to put certain people in charge. On the Republican side, I knew TONS of small business people who LOVED Ron Paul, and I knew more real conservatives who LOVED Mike Huckabee. On the Democrat side, I don't know a single person who LIKES Hillary, but I know several who like Richardson and Kucinich. Whether you're a Democrat or Republican, you should all be upset about the bias in media coverage. I'm not talking liberal versus conservative spin...I'm noticing candidate spin.

__________________
"Common sense is not so common." -Voltaire

Atomic Dog

I hear ya man. Thankfully, Ron Paul is a determined man and is still in the race. To me, he's a much more worthy republican candidate than McCain...really unfortunate he got the shaft.

__________________

SharinganTH1422

Er..."racist tendencies"?

Seriously?

The man spent the length of an entire speech talking about "healing the racial divides" and how it was important to address the concerns of blacks, but also to address the concerns of disillusioned whites who have "genuine concerns" that must not be ignored.

I don't think I've ever heard an American presidential candidate be so clear on his agenda for achieving true racial equality. And thus your conclusion that Obama exhibits "racist tendencies" seems like a completely incorrect one.

I think you may have it slightly back-to-front.

I'm a British citizen. Thus I'm neither a Republican nor a Democrat. Neither a conservative nor a liberal.

My concern is not with "right versus left". But with "right versus wrong".

I'm watching the US presidential race with much interest because the recent administration has substantially damaged America's moral and economic standing in the world today.

And I'm telling you this as someone who's living across the pond.

Reverend Wright is a nut job, no doubt. He's obviously a man embittered by living through a period in history where blacks, while "free", were still treated as second class citizens in their own country. And there was nothing they could really do about it.

But he was also the man responsible for Obama's faith in Christianity, that is obviously very important to him. He likened the Rev to a crazy grandfather - someone he loved because of their shared history, but he didn't necessarily like everything that came out of his mouth.

Obama has actually consistently shown that he's the most non-racist, pro-integration candidate out there. And he actually has a tangible agenda for how to go about solving some of America's racial issues.

Of course, Murdoch's FOX News will continue to twist this and hammer it around America. But I have confidence that most Americans won't fall for their propaganda trickery.

Would you mind explaining what you mean by the term "Muslim sympathiser"?

"Ridiculous" is right

With all due respect, you do sound a wee bit paranoid. But then, I can relate to that feeling. I mean, whenever I watch Hilliary talk, I can't seem to shake that sense of desperation I get from her. Like someone literally clinging to a potential legacy, tooth and nail. And with McCain, I almost get this Reaganesque vibe - the ruthless corporate sellout who presents himself as this friendly old fart.

__________________
Anger is a gift - Malcolm X

...If you can dream--and not make dreams your master,
If you can think--and not make thoughts your aim;
If you can meet with Triumph and Disaster
And treat those two impostors just the same...

Rincewind

I hear that.

__________________
~~ Veritas simplex oratio est ~~
No matter how far a wizard goes, he will always come back for his hat. --T. Pratchett

<---- You know you're getting old when you rely on your forum meta-data to remind you how old you are.

Required Reading for all TG sandboxers

Steeler

If you listen to that 5 minutes of Wright that someone cobbled together from years of sermons, you find that A) a lot of that is clearly taken out of context with the express purpose of making him sound more radical than he really is, and B) he's saying very little that wasn't said by Rev. King at various times back in the day.

The sad fact is, if you are black in America you face a completely different set of cultural and economic challenges than you would if you were white. And if there are any whites out there who have ever been angry at your government or your country for the things that it has done, you should be able to grant that same right of anger to a black person without declaring them racist or un-American for saying so. In many cases, it's the same anger with a different set of rhetoric, a different vocabulary.

Anyway, I hope I'll have the chance to vote for Obama. I prefer his domestic and foreign policy positions to all of the other candidates. I just wish he hadn't snubbed Edwards. That would have been a good combination on the ticket but apparently there's some friction there.

__________________