This is the Presidential Campaign Thread.

Barack Obama Vs. John McCain.

Edited November 6, 200817 yr by Toups

Your predictions look excellent to me, Max. I just hope you are correct. My choice is negative, because I want McCain to finish last and have to drop out. He is my least favorite of all the candidates, including Richardson. My prediction is that Obama is going to run away with this, though. I was impressed with him in the debate last night and since I'm an independent, he is swaying me.

Thanks for posting this, Max. My predictions are similar to yours, but not necessarily what I would like to see happen. For the Republicans, Romney is my first choice. I am not sure about the Democrats, but probably Obama or Clinton would be best.

I keep waiting for Obama to turn out to be a phoney but everything i see about him tells me he's for real!

I'm not judging Obama harshly yet. Hillary obviously has the most qualifications and experience being as she really has met challenges as Bill's wife and in her Senate position. I like her a lot, too.

Did anyone watch the Republican debate on Fox News tonight? I thought Mitt Romney ran away with it. He was definitely the most prepared, had the most presence, was very honorable. In fact, I loved him. He would make a President that I believe would make changes with clear headed thinking and direction just like he did in running his business enterprises. I think, his idea of winning is making America actually prosper in all ways.

Choices, choices. This should be an interesting primary.

After watching the debate tonight, I agree that Romney did a good job, and I'm not really a Romney fan. In my opinion I think that the strongest Republican canidate is Fred Thompson. Do I think he is going to win no, because I don't think that enough people know enough about him. Everyone is talking about how we need change but I think Thompson is the only one who talks about what he wants to do about making those changes.

As far as the Democrats, I agree with the above poster, I don't think Obama has enough experience yet. I'm not counting him out, but I don't know if I want him gaining his experience while in office.

I really don't like Huckabee but I am glad he beat out that smug SOB Romney. Same goes for NH, I hope McCain beats out Romney, just because I hate Romney that much. Now all we have to do is make sure Giuliani is not the person at the end, he would be worse than anything we are seeing now.

I like your predictions, Max...I predict Hillary will take NH

More by the day Hillary's chances of not only winning the white hose, but winning the democratic nomination are diminishing.

I like Edwards or Clinton. If we get anyone else as President. We are in BIG trouble!!

I'm not judging Obama harshly yet. Hillary obviously has the most qualifications and experience being as she really has met challenges as Bill's wife and in her Senate position. I like her a lot, too.

If it didn't happen during her senatorial tenure, I don't care what she's done. What's her reputation in an elected position, once she had campaign donors to answer to? Politicians are only as good as their puppet masters. Being a wife wouldn't even get Jackie O. any votes. Voting to invade a country that didn't attack America because the rest of Washington misplaced its balls is monumentally stupid. All I remember her doing for New York is trying to change ratings on video games.

Edited January 8, 200817 yr by stenbeck212

Young people are looking to Obama as if he's the new JFK If Clinton dosen't stop him tomorrow night i think he will go all the way. Unless there's another terror attack i don't think any of the GOP guys can beat him.

Hopefully Obama won't be attacked either. He reportedly has the same amount of security as Bush. If another terror attack happens here, how can the GOP's incompetence not stand out?

Being a wife wouldn't even get Jackie O. any votes. Voting to invade a country that didn't attack America because the rest of Washington misplaced its balls is monumentally stupid. All I remember her doing for New York is trying to change ratings on video games.

Give me a break. She was not just some ordinary First Lady minding her ps and qs while in office. Unlike the current Stepford Wife First Lady, Hillary actually did something as First Lady and accomplished a lot. Sure her health care plan was defeated but at least she made the effort to change the system for the better...but insurance companies, drug manufacturers, and crooked politicians put an end to such good hope and donated millions to defeat it. Because of Hillary, we came close to insuring millions of people back in 1993 who were without coverage...and trust me, many people back then did not have insurancer. After all, when Clinton first came into office, unemployment was at a huge high and with employment come the medical benefits. That is where most people get their health care...we also did not have HIPAA and COBRA at that time so, if you lost your job, you would still be entitled to benefits (not good ones but it is still there)....HIPAA and COBRA did not protect people in the early 1990s since they ceased to be in existence. I also love how Hillary spoke out for women's rights and challenged the Taliban regime and other governments in the Middle East (or in Asia) to recognize women's rights as human rights. She is also known to have accomplished much more when it comes to political issues.

As for the Iraq vote, I say look at the entire picture and realize she did not start the war-Bush did. Hillary was misled and given the wrong information by the resident moron in The White House....she may not have read the NIE but she was briefed on it and that is just as good as reading it-and many people close to her assured her Iraq had the weapons. Her experience as a First Lady in dealing with Iraq back in those days also influenced her vote...while it was the wrong decision, Hillary made up for it by calling for an end to the war and pledging to withdraw troops. Every bill in 2007 through Congress...she has voted to withdraw troops and also to not continue funding the war. You also need to realize that, at that time, it was politically the right thing to do in voting for Iraq so as to appear tough on terrorism...that, combined with the lies and manipulation told to Hillary, is enough to realize she is not the mastermind behind the farce of the Iraq War.

I have spoken to several people in New York who told me she has done a lot for the state so it is not just ratings on video games that would describe her Senate tenure.

i have NO idea who to vote for, who i want, who i like or anything. and i have no idea on how to figure it out. i dont even know what side im on. this is my first time voting and im excited... but sooo lost and confused.

i watch the debates - and no one stands out to me. i like some in theory, but dont think they would do well.

I guess im leaning to Hil

Hey Devoted: Your comment of: As for the Iraq vote, I say look at the entire picture and realize she did not start the war-Bush did. Hillary was misled and given the wrong information by the resident moron in The White House....

is kind of off base if you are trying to gather support/sympathy for Hillary. Let's remember it was based on most of the same information that Clinton had when he was sending bombs over to Iraq and lets remember, based on that same information we had several dems, including Bill Clinton, John Kerry, etc. saying Saddam had WMD's and needed to be removed. Those are facts.

Just because the war went downhill, in most part at the fault of the Bush Administration, does not mean Hillary was mislead. What the Dems did and did successfuly was to use the miscalculations of the B.A to turn it into a Bush lied situation, which was not the truth at all.

Just look at these comments: "I supported the President when he asked the Congress for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq," said Clinton in 2003 while delivering commencement remarks at Tougaloo College in Jackson, Miss.

"Saddam Hussein possesses chemical, biological weapons, and if events are allowed to run their course, will someday possess nuclear weapons."

Sen. Evan Bayh (D.-Ind.), Intelligence member Statement, Oct. 3, 2002

"I believe that Saddam Hussein rules by terror and has squirreled away stores of biological and chemical weapon."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D.-Calif.), Intelligence member Floor speech, Oct. 10, 2002

"In 1991, the world collectively made a judgment that this man should not have weapons of mass destruction. And we are here today in the year 2002 with an un-inspected four-year interval during which time we know through intelligence he not only has kept them, but he continues to grow them. . . . The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new."

Sen. John Kerry (D.-Mass.), Foreign Relations member Floor speech, Oct. 9, 2002

"I believe if Saddam Hussein continues to refuse to meet his obligation to destroy his weapons of mass destruction and his prohibited missile delivery systems, that the United Nations should authorize member states to use military force to destroy those weapons and systems."

Sen. Carl Levin (D.-Mich.), then-chairman of Armed Services and member of Intelligence Floor speech, Oct. 9, 2002

Interesting on how all these Dems (especialyl right after 9-11) said the same thing that the intelligence did. Now they are calling the President a liar for using the same information that they based their initial judgements on that he had and Clinton had against him.

Seems to me, they are using the death of our heros as fodder for votes and it is a sad day.

More interesting, why is no one attacking Clinton, BErger, and others for what they said BEFORE Bush even was in the White House?

"One way of the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line"..President Clinton, 2-4-98

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's Weapsons of Mass Destruction program." President Clinton 2-14-98

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he had 10 times since 1983" Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Advisor 2-18-98

I could go on and on, but the point is....Bush, Congress, Clinton (both of them) had the same information that Clinton had when he was making threats and so on.

Information was bad, we know that now. But Saddam had used them before and would have again.

I think it is funny the double standard that is being laid here and Bush is being called a liar for using the information and then some from the Clinton Camp and the CIA, etc. Remember, Clinton appointed the man that Bush got most of the informatio nfrom.

Was this a conspriacy on Clintons part?? Hell no.

This has turned into a bunch of no good people using the death of our soilders to a political advantage, rather sad in the end, rather sad.