OK, then, who would you vote for?
- Thread starter unclepercy
- Start date
Re: RE: OK, then, who would you vote for?
You suggested the only male I could think of - I was trying to ferret out a few female possibilities. If you didn't have "Seattle" by your signature, I'd know for sure you were American with that idea.
I agree.
Uncle
zenfisher said:
You suggested the only male I could think of - I was trying to ferret out a few female possibilities. If you didn't have "Seattle" by your signature, I'd know for sure you were American with that idea.
I agree.
Uncle
RE: OK, then, who would y
I agree she would be a great president and has the financial ability to run but I am not sure certain states that go republican would vote for her, thats all.
I agree she would be a great president and has the financial ability to run but I am not sure certain states that go republican would vote for her, thats all.
RE: OK, then, who would y
Opera would be good but too many bigots in the USA, unfortunatly. Maybe she should run for the Senate first?
Opera would be good but too many bigots in the USA, unfortunatly. Maybe she should run for the Senate first?
RE: OK, then, who would y
Has Oprah indicated she wants to run? I know she wants to catch child molesters now. Oprah Takes On Child Molesters
Has Oprah indicated she wants to run? I know she wants to catch child molesters now. Oprah Takes On Child Molesters
Ocean Breeze said:
I thought of Dr. Phil - another Texan. I understand he is extremely hard to work with, belligerent, non-negiotiable, and a big bully.
He ain't that smart - I know a lot about him. I know the school he went to - went there myself for a while. I dunno, but I think people are beginning to get enough of the Texas drawl, colloquialisms, etc, i.e. "that dog won't hunt."
Maybe, though....
Uncle
RE: OK, then, who would y
In the last election, Gen Wes Clark would have made an excellent President. I think the US needs to move on from the 9-11, security, war on terrorism focus, try to restore its competitiveness, reach out to neglected allies and give multilateralism a shot again - so I am not convinced that given the current needs Wes Clark is the best person for the job - but he would be waaaaay better than Bush.
From the republican side, John McCain would make a good candidate - at least he would restore some integrity to the office.
On the Democrat side, Wes Clark, Hillary Clinton (although she would be a lightning rod for right wing hate - so would be unelectable). I don't think Barak Obama has the experience yet. John Edwards certainly has the intelligence and charisma to get elected. Dianne Fienstein would also be a good candidate, but would be perceived as being way too liberal to be elected.
In the last election, Gen Wes Clark would have made an excellent President. I think the US needs to move on from the 9-11, security, war on terrorism focus, try to restore its competitiveness, reach out to neglected allies and give multilateralism a shot again - so I am not convinced that given the current needs Wes Clark is the best person for the job - but he would be waaaaay better than Bush.
From the republican side, John McCain would make a good candidate - at least he would restore some integrity to the office.
On the Democrat side, Wes Clark, Hillary Clinton (although she would be a lightning rod for right wing hate - so would be unelectable). I don't think Barak Obama has the experience yet. John Edwards certainly has the intelligence and charisma to get elected. Dianne Fienstein would also be a good candidate, but would be perceived as being way too liberal to be elected.
Re: RE: OK, then, who would y
No, no, you are quite off base with this comment. There may be bigots in the USA - but OPRAH is the exception to the rule. I have absolutely no doubt that she would win if she chose to run.
However, with her latest project of arresting child molesters, she has proclaimed that she has come full circle and that she knows for certain that this is what she was meant to do with her life. She has been approached and flat out refused to take on a political mantle. Hey, don't fix it if it ain't broke.
Uncle
neocon-hunter said:
No, no, you are quite off base with this comment. There may be bigots in the USA - but OPRAH is the exception to the rule. I have absolutely no doubt that she would win if she chose to run.
However, with her latest project of arresting child molesters, she has proclaimed that she has come full circle and that she knows for certain that this is what she was meant to do with her life. She has been approached and flat out refused to take on a political mantle. Hey, don't fix it if it ain't broke.
Uncle
Re: RE: OK, then, who would y
Excellent points.......( IMHO). Wes Clark, John Edwards and their likes ..........would be a profound and positive change in the entire US milieu now. Kinda too bad that politics in the US is like a rooster fight.(blood , guts, gore and big bucks).....with little emphasis on the quality, CHARACTER , stability , intelligence and CAPABILITY of the man. at least guys like Clark , Edwards have a reasonable and SOUND professional resume. The bloke in the WH now has a resume alright and if people had really paid attention to it.......would know they were '"hiring' a loser....
Now.......... Still think Dr. Phil would be a contender...... as the whole nation needs some serious psycho therapy in order to get it's collective head in order. {and some serious reality testing} ( IMHO)
LeftCoast said:
Excellent points.......( IMHO). Wes Clark, John Edwards and their likes ..........would be a profound and positive change in the entire US milieu now. Kinda too bad that politics in the US is like a rooster fight.(blood , guts, gore and big bucks).....with little emphasis on the quality, CHARACTER , stability , intelligence and CAPABILITY of the man. at least guys like Clark , Edwards have a reasonable and SOUND professional resume. The bloke in the WH now has a resume alright and if people had really paid attention to it.......would know they were '"hiring' a loser....
Now.......... Still think Dr. Phil would be a contender...... as the whole nation needs some serious psycho therapy in order to get it's collective head in order. {and some serious reality testing} ( IMHO)
RE: OK, then, who would y
John Edwards would make a good president one day, 2012 would be a good year for him to run, unless he ran as vp under Clinton in 2008.
John Edwards would make a good president one day, 2012 would be a good year for him to run, unless he ran as vp under Clinton in 2008.
Re: RE: OK, then, who would you vote for?
While you may have stated that later in your thread...your original question was whom did we wish to see run. As for for a woman ...either Patty Murray or Maria Cantwell. However, I think that neither has the cash or national exposure to pull it off.
unclepercy said:
While you may have stated that later in your thread...your original question was whom did we wish to see run. As for for a woman ...either Patty Murray or Maria Cantwell. However, I think that neither has the cash or national exposure to pull it off.
RE: OK, then, who would y
Unfortunately, the best candidates - ie the most electable, are not necessarily the best people for the job. Bush is a fabulous candidate but a terrible president. Kerry on the other hand was a horrible candidate (Senator Lurch) but would have been a very good president.
Unfortunately, the best candidates - ie the most electable, are not necessarily the best people for the job. Bush is a fabulous candidate but a terrible president. Kerry on the other hand was a horrible candidate (Senator Lurch) but would have been a very good president.
RE: OK, then, who would y
I don't think Michael Moore would be a very good president, No 1. I think he would be as divisive as Bush is, albeit in a better way.
More importantly, I think losing him from his present role would be very damaging. We need people like him making movies, writing books, and offering alternative viewpoints to the corporate-controlled press.
I don't think Michael Moore would be a very good president, No 1. I think he would be as divisive as Bush is, albeit in a better way.
More importantly, I think losing him from his present role would be very damaging. We need people like him making movies, writing books, and offering alternative viewpoints to the corporate-controlled press.
