who would you vote for and why?

[stevesnj]

Obama for me too...McCain is just too much of the same crap thats been in the WH for 8 years, we just need something different and Obama has great ideas and is very believable (as much as a politician can be). Plus he most likely wont die of old age while in power.

 

[jsteinb95]

I'm not voting and have never voted, so I don't think it matters much who I WOULD vote for. It would be McCain though.

 

[sportrider]

I have a lot of respect for McCain, something can be said about his integrity.

no one left behind.

 

[fz6nick]

I would of voted for Huckabee
[ame="http://youtube.com/watch?v=MDUQW8LUMs8"]YouTube - Mike Huckabee Ad: "Chuck Norris Approved"[/ame]
Norris for vp!

Im gonna vote for Big John.

I do not like that they are both senators. They only spend our tax money. Governors have experience running a Governemnt.

McCain would be a better preisdent b/c of his experince.

Its kinda like a 16 year old vs a 28 year old raising a kid. Except on a 300 million x bigger scale.

 

[Fred]

I have a lot of respect for McCain, something can be said about his integrity.

no one left behind.

I agree that he's a hell of a soldier. Unfortunately, military prowess doesn't translate into political integrity and/or competence.

Fred

 

[jetfz'r]

doin as mc-cain says about the offshore oil WONT lower gas prices anymore than a few cents IF AT ALL in the next 10 years even 15 years. and theyre gonna run out around the time they impact prices at all. Theyll run out within 20 years or so and you'll be in the same boat as you are now ANYWAY just at the expense of ALOT of enviornmental damage.

it is a short-term vision that is very destructive in the long-run.....all for some MEAGRE benefits here and now. Would you light a fire in your living room to warm yourself for 30 seconds if it meant burning your house down to not have a home to live in in the long-run? extreme example i know but the same logic applies.

long-term solutions are whats needed. not temporary patches. the oil WILL run out very soon in the arctic and the offshore sites if you start drilling. its not gonna help anything. but if you adapt your economy and get your society living without oil....then you can really come up with a solution. only the government has the power to start pushing away from oil.



dont just buy into it. question it.

Wrong...oil companies that will be drilling there have huge HES (Health and Environmental Safety) departments. They are very anal about keeping the environment clean. Drilling now will not deplete the oil reserves within a few years. The size impact of drilling in Alaska would be equivalent to that of a postage stamp on a football field. China has partnered with Cuba and will be drilling wells about 60 miles off the Florida coast. Would you rather trust them to keep the environment clean, and use the oil we could have, or let American companies drill? The technology we have today gets more oil and gas out than ever before with very minimal impacts on the environment.

Needless to say I will be voting for McCain. I am sick of all the propaganda that got us to the price of oil and gas that we have today. DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW, or you can listen to the proaganda saying it is not a solution and continue seeing your gas cost go up.

 

[FZ1inNH]

Obama. I am sick of useless war. I fully support the soldiers who are fighting but not the jerk who sent them for no reason other than to fatten his own pocket because he's so deep into Arab oil that he sickens me.

The 8 Clinton years were the best I've ever had. So what the guy had an overactive libido! He just got caught doing what they ALL do except the current moron, who wouldn't understand a sexual offer if it was presented with pictures!

I'm tired of seeing my fellow Americans as well as all the other supporting Allied country's soldiers getting killed for no apparent reason at all. McCain only represents more of the same useless deaths.

So, Obama is the lesser of two evils for myself.

 

[mdr]

IMO, there is no good/great choice this time... or the last time either!

We'll have to take it on the chin regardless of who wins.

The highest office in the land is not something you can learn "on the job", it does require true foreign policy knowledge gained over the years, regardless of whether or not you agree with the policies in place, the contact with leaders of other nations/governments and their policy makers is crucial.

We are not in a position to simply yank all the troops out of the middle east without serious repercussions.

I must say this upcoming election I almost have to agree with my oldest daughter(who also is voting for the first time) and feels it's not worth it.

However, I have told her of how important it is to vote! To not do so would be a slap in the face to those who have given their life so that I can vote!!

Regardless of whom you vote for you must do so, it is our civic duty and a privilege denied many!!

Just an observation - but many of our recent presidents have been state governors, not legislators or foreign service types (state department wonks). In fact, I can't think of the last time a president went into office "fully qualified" on the foreign relations aspect. Most have learned "on the job" though I'd say it's evident some learned quicker and better than others.

I agree that we should all vote, but I also think we should all spend some time researching the candidates positions and know something about them - from an independent (not party affiliated or leaning) source if you can find one . As for those who aren't willing to make that basic effort to get the facts right - maybe it's best they do "sit this one out". If you make the effort then even if you decide to vote against a candidate instead of for one, you'll be doing so for a defensible reason.

 

[mdr]

We have more oil in alaska than iraq does. But thanks to the enviromentalists woodstock hippy guys we can't drill as of yet.

I'd google "oil reserves" before I made rash statements like that first one. You're not even close to being right.

 

[sportrider]

as of right now the national oil reserve is 700 million barrels of oil. off the coast alone there is supposed to be over 700 trillion barrels. in the anwr there is more oil then in the middle east combined. that doesn't include the shale fields in Colorado. our country is more then capable of being self sufficient. we have allowed cheap labor to drive big industry away, small businesses are going under because of ridiculous tax demands. our very nation in a whole is at risk of terrorist attacks because of weak borders.

Obama's plan for the borders is to help Mexico's economy to remove the desire for people to come here seeking employment. the last time I checked the terrorists weren't Mexicans. as an American that has directly felt the effects of the recession, how about helping our economy. he proposes to invest $150 billion over 10 years to advance the next generation of biofuels and fuel infrastructure. who's going to pay for that? as well as the 20 billion for more tax rebates and an additional 40 billion for the housing crisis and unemployment. this is a direct Quote from his website; "Obama will restore fairness to the tax code and provide 150 million workers the tax relief they need. Obama will create a new "Making Work Pay" tax credit of up to $500 per person, or $1,000 per working family. The "Making Work Pay" tax credit will completely eliminate income taxes for 10 million Americans." who's going to pay for all this? if you remove 10 million tax payers where does the revenue come from? if you raise the taxes for the wealthy that hurts small business, who owns the small businesses? in fact the only thing I agree with obama on referring the economy is amending NAFTA.

McCain's plan for the housing crisis isn't to throw money at the problem, it is to simpily offer people who qualify a chance to refinance with an FHA 30 year fixed loan. why should the tax payers have to bail out everyone who honestly did not qualify for a home they bought, and chose a bad loan. he proposes a tax cut for employers, that would help lower the cost of doing business in the US.

 

[lonesoldier84]

We have more oil in alaska than iraq does. But thanks to the enviromentalists woodstock hippy guys we can't drill as of yet.

if you were to start drilling in alaska today it would run out within 20 years with today's capabilities....and even sooner as the tech continues to get better.

it will massacre the northern environment and VERY delicate eco-system up there. all for 15 or so years of oil which will leave everyone in the EXACT SAME PLACE as they are now....just with a big ugly mess thrown in. Same with the off-shore oil, it might have more than alaska but not much more I dont think. Same logic still applies.

Solution isnt drill more. Solution is find another REAL solution to the problem. Something that will actually help in the long-run (and 20 years isnt even the longrun if you think about it, but let's at least start with something that; work for more than 20 years)

:Flash:

 

[FZ1inNH]

if you were to start drilling in alaska today it would run out within 20 years with today's capabilities....and even sooner as the tech continues to get better.

it will massacre the northern environment and VERY delicate eco-system up there. all for 15 or so years of oil which will leave everyone in the EXACT SAME PLACE as they are now....just with a big ugly mess thrown in. Same with the off-shore oil, it might have more than alaska but not much more I dont think. Same logic still applies.

Solution isnt drill more. Solution is find another REAL solution to the problem. Something that will actually help in the long-run (and 20 years isnt even the longrun if you think about it, but let's at least start with something that; work for more than 20 years)

:Flash:

I tend to agree but also want to point out that Hydrogen cars are a 10 year reality if refueling stations are put into place or Honda perfects the "Home Energy Station" which will not only allow you to refuel your car every night but also power your home 24/7 with water. So, drill now, drill here and then aggressively pursue the Honda dream of Hydrogen Cars/Homes. We'll be free from foreign oil long before the US can run out.

Last, regarding refineries, not one proposed possible building area has been approved in the last 28 years. NIMBY is the reason. People have no problem crying about the oil crisis but then put their foot down when it might be possible to alleviate some or most of the problem. People, you can't have your cake and eat it too!

 

[OZXJR]

Just my 2 cents ,but whoever you vote for your still going to end up with a politician

 

[lonesoldier84]

I tend to agree but also want to point out that Hydrogen cars are a 10 year reality if refueling stations are put into place or Honda perfects the "Home Energy Station" which will not only allow you to refuel your car every night but also power your home 24/7 with water. So, drill now, drill here and then aggressively pursue the Honda dream of Hydrogen Cars/Homes. We'll be free from foreign oil long before the US can run out.

Last, regarding refineries, not one proposed possible building area has been approved in the last 28 years. NIMBY is the reason. People have no problem crying about the oil crisis but then put their foot down when it might be possible to alleviate some or most of the problem. People, you can't have your cake and eat it too!

thank heavens for NIMBY!!

and KIRBY too. that guy is too cool.

 

[wrightme43]

ARRRRGGGGHHHHHHHH

Watch this. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPch2k63uj4"]YouTube - "Joe, American" Challenges the Presidential Candidates[/ame]


I will get into Anwar in a minute. Watch this video.

 

[wrightme43]

You know all those pictures of mouintains and green valleys? Yeah. THATS NOT WHERE THEY ARE GOING TO DRILL. The area is a desolate wasteland.

It like putting airport in Ohio. One airport in the whole freaking entire state of Ohio.

 

[wrightme43]

Do you have any idea what the north coast of Alaska is like? Its a frozen hell most of the year, and for a few months it thaws and becomes short scrubgrass humock landscape with water. The photos you see of Anwar are of Anwar. JUST NOT ANYWHERE EVEN REMOTELY NEAR WHERE THE DRILLING WILL TAKE PLACE! You are being lied to.

Have you ever been to a modern drill site? I have. I have stood on the freaking rig, I have been in the engineers shack, I have been there and seen it. It doesnt destroy the landscape. 3.13 square miles out of

 

[Avalon786]

I'd vote for Ron Paul. Dunno if i'll vote for anyone else...
Also Alex Jones would really clean this "mess" that the people are letting the USA become...I'd deff vote for him!

 

[mastakilla]

im canadian so i cant vote.

but i would vote for obama. he is not republican. that is all he needs to be in my book. i think everything the republican party stands for and does is dangerous to the world at large in the short- and long-run, and to the US internally in the long-run.

what he said, althought I'm European and not Canadian.

 

[dako81]

Neither. I'll write in Ron Paul or vote for someone who isn't a D or R. They're all on the same team, except for Ron Paul which is obvious since they've tried to make him look like a fool.

It's too bad that he's the only one with a proven track record of trying to reduce spending and the size of government: (From Wikipedia)

He regularly votes against almost all proposals for new government spending, initiatives, or taxes; he cast two thirds of all the lone negative votes in the House during a 1995–1997 period. He has pledged never to raise taxes and states he has never voted to approve a budget deficit.

Seems like he's the only one who has actually pledged something to his constituents and actually has followed thru. No wonder they call him "Dr. No"

His nickname "Dr. No" reflects both his medical degree and his insistence that he will "never vote for legislation unless the proposed measure is expressly authorized by the Constitution".

Sounds good to me, especially since he's backed it up for over 10 years in congress.

But, like Ozfazer6 said, if you vote for any of them, you'll still end up with a politician. I guess I'd rather not vote for the best politician, but the person who has a proven track record of adhering to the constitution and protecting individual rights.