2008 USA presidential elections - Page 2

January 14, 2008, 3:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aerith

Would someone be kind enough to explain to me exactly what's happening with them and who's up for election?

It was all over the news the other day that Obama and Hillary had won over a state each or something, so I assumed that it was them two up for election.

However.

I go to wikipedia to look it up, and there is like, 12 different candidates or something, and it got me totally confused

So yeah, explain it to me.

And, if you're an American, who are you going to / would you (if you were old enough) vote for?

Scrutator already said it, but the way the two major parties select candidates is through the 'caucus'. It's basically a preliminary run to see just how much support a candidate can get so that the party can choose whoever gives them the best chance to win the White House.

And my, my priest was right when he said the whole world was watching this.

The country is going to turn Democrat this year, as it already has in the Senate. It's just a question of whether it's Obama or Clinton. I'd say Obama gives the most chance to the Democrats because he was the first to say that 'Americans want change'. That got people riled up in Iowa, and he almost followed through in New Hampshire, but apparently that failed miserably. As for the track record, the candidate who wins Iowa generally doesn't make the presidency, but you never know.

January 14, 2008, 7:00 AM

Quote:

I read somewhere that someone predicted that, if Hillary came to power she'd be assassinated, and if Obama came to power he'd cause massive riots.

i doubt it, for a black guy, obama is not really that black, he is not threatning to white people, a bit like MLK.
and i dont think anyone would bother to assainate clinton.

there are 12 candidates but only a few are important.
Barrack Obama and Hilary Clinton for the Democrats, and John McCain, Mitt Romney and kinda mike huckabee.

people tend to think that clinton is an unfeeling bitch, which is why everone madfe such a fuss bout her almost crying.
and people think obama is inexperienced as well as he wont carry out his promises.

Mike Huckabee is a christian fundamentalist who doesnt believe in evolution and lacks widespread appeal.

romney is a mormon, and very well funded, but doesnt really connect with voters, and he is duplictious

and then theres John McCain who almost ran out of money, he seems like the only normal republican candidate.

i think obama will win as he just got backing from john kerry, and as z said america is turning democrat

January 21, 2008, 7:17 PM

I want Hillary to win

I'm a total fangirl of hers. I think she's experienced, intelligent, and practical. Obama seems like a great guy and all, but he doesn't have very much experience. He has charisma and idealism; it takes more than that to lead a country.

It really annoys me that everyone calls Hillary a "bitch." Why exactly is she a bitch? Also the crying thing: is that really what it takes for a woman to be elected? To show that she's "feminine" and "emotional" by crying? That's so unbelievably sexist. Her behavior would be perfectly acceptable if she were a man. She immediately gains votes when she cries. Ugh.

It seems like it's the fad to support Obama, especially amongst the young people. Luckily for Hillary supporters (aka me >_>), those young supporters either can't vote or don't turn out to vote. Young people are notoriously apathetic at the polls. I don't think Obama will necessarily win because "he got support from Kerry." Who actually cares about/likes John Kerry? If people actually liked him, he would have won the presidency in '04. The fact that Oprah supports Obama will probably influence people more. Also, I wouldn't assume that just because Obama is black that he can secure the black vote. The Clintons have a very strong background in working for civil rights.

Anyway, I read somewhere that the Democratic candidates were asked what they would do with Musharraf(the 'president' of Pakistan) if they were elected to office. Edwards and Obama said they would oust him; Clinton said she wouldn't. That just speaks to how experienced she is politically. You throw him out, and there is a very good chance that extremists will seize power (aka: Al Qaeda).

Obama is just too idealistic to me. He's not realistic enough. I feel like people get swept up in his charisma and his popular appeal. As for Republican candidates...I don't really know very much about the Republican candidates because I'm not Republican. :p Though, Romney creeps me out, and I really hope he isn't elected.

January 21, 2008, 11:12 PM

hilary has 2 more years in the senate then obama, the rest of her experience is that of being first lady, which i dont think really counts.
and i think that hillary would have all of her cabinet female, not because they are best at what they do but because of the fact that they are women.

Quote:

I don't think Obama will necessarily win because "he got support from Kerry." Who actually cares about/likes John Kerry?

the democratic candidate is chosen by the democrat party, and support form kerry would carry some weight.

Quote:

That just speaks to how experienced she is politically. You throw him out, and there is a very good chance that extremists will seize power (aka: Al Qaeda).

i doubt al qaeda would be able to take power, if they ousted Musharaffe then they would also be able to stop al qaeda gaining power, the state of emergenct was just an excuse to put his opponents under house arrest, not because he feared islamic militants.

Quote:

Obama is just too idealistic to me. He's not realistic enough

people vote with there heart not there brain, and idealists have won before, ie wilson

id like juiliani to be president though

January 21, 2008, 11:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Young Knives

hilary has 2 more years in the senate then obama, the rest of her experience is that of being first lady, which i dont think really counts.
and i think that hillary would have all of her cabinet female, not because they are best at what they do but because of the fact that they are women.

the democratic candidate is chosen by the democrat party, and support form kerry would carry some weight.

i doubt al qaeda would be able to take power, if they ousted Musharaffe then they would also be able to stop al qaeda gaining power, the state of emergenct was just an excuse to put his opponents under house arrest, not because he feared islamic militants.

people vote with there heart not there brain, and idealists have won before, ie wilson

id like juiliani to be president though

Wow. Yeah, that makes complete sense. And then, when Hillary elected an all female cabinet, they would all do each others nails and hair and talk about the cutest senators. ......Right?

She's been in the United States senate four years longer than Obama. And being first lady "counts." She didn't just sit around the White House doing nothing. Who do you think helped Bill Clinton with many political situations? Who actually wrote a several health care reform acts? Why, she did!

As for John Kerry...um, no that really doesn't carry very much weight. He isn't a very influential member of the democratic party. Not to mention, in many states, it is the vote of the people that elects the delegates. Many people will be influenced (rather sadly...) by what celebrities endorse what candidates.

Right, the United States would be able to wag its giant finger and keep Al Qaeda out of power. Because that's what happened in Iran, right? The Shah of Iran left due to Carter's pressure, and it didn't turn into a religious state ruled by the Ayatollah. Oh wait, that's exactly what happened. Even if the United States did attempt to keep Islamist militants out of power, that would require some sort of military invasion...and we all know how popular "Iraqi Freedom" is right now. I think it's also worth noting that when a country has nuclear weapons (ie: Pakistan), it is *generally* a good idea not to destablize it further by throwing out its current leader, as unpopular as he might be. Especially when it is a well known fact that a crazy-ass Islamist group is hiding out in the country.

I think, quite frankly, people who "vote with their heart and not with their brain" are ignorant and ill-informed. This isn't about picking your future lover. This is a presidential nomination. Idealism is terrific and all, but when a war that no one wants is happening, I don't want to hear fairy tales and vague ideas of change. I want realism. Call me crazy, I guess?

I could go on for ages about how I dislike Giuliani, but I won't really bother. Having seen his actions as the Mayor of New York, it's pretty clear to me that he's a douchebag and a bully. He also has almost no chance to win.

January 22, 2008, 2:14 AM

Quote:

Wow. Yeah, that makes complete sense. And then, when Hillary elected an all female cabinet, they would all do each others nails and hair and talk about the cutest senators. ......Right?

no.

Quote:

As for John Kerry...um, no that really doesn't carry very much weight. He isn't a very influential member of the democratic party. Not to mention, in many states, it is the vote of the people that elects the delegates

thats when they are voting for who they want to be president, not who is going to be elected as presidential candidate for the democrat/republican party.

Quote:

I could go on for ages about how I dislike Giuliani, but I won't really bother. Having seen his actions as the Mayor of New York, it's pretty clear to me that he's a douchebag and a bully. He also has almost no chance to win

i dont want him to win because of his politics though

January 22, 2008, 3:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Young Knives

no.

thats when they are voting for who they want to be president, not who is going to be elected as presidential candidate for the democrat/republican party.

i dont want him to win because of his politics though

See what I did there, though? I used your sexism and took it a step further.

Anyway, I think you need to brush up on your American politics. It's sort of a confusing process because it's state by state and done through local governments. Presidental candidates are decided through state primaries and caucuses. Generally (it's different in every state), people vote for whatever candidate (Democrat, Republican, etc) they like, and those votes count towards the delegate who then is legally bound to vote for the candidate. Some states hold closed primaries, where you must be registered with the party to vote in their primary, and some hold open primaries, where you don't need to be registered in any party to vote in the primary. The people of the United States do, in fact, have most of the say in what candidates are chosen. ...Though I think it's an overly complex system.

...You...don't want Giuliani to win the presidency because of his politics? Um...what is it then? His charm? His good looks? Are we talking about the same man?

January 22, 2008, 3:21 AM

george bush is bad at english right? but what about guiliani?
his inaugrual speech would be something. to quote the daily show he has 9/11 tourettes.
he does have some attributes that do make a good politician, though not a good person

Quote:

See what I did there, though? I used your sexism and took it a step further

i was going to accuse you of being deliberatley obtuse. i didnt mean it in a sexist way, but some of the greatest presidents employed cabinets who wernt 'yes men/women' ie lincoln and FDR.

i thought the primaries were just to gauge popular opinion, not to actually decide who was selescted as the candidate for each party, and that that was done by the party itself?