Your candidate: A civil discourse

[Mr. Flopnuts]

I understand this is going to probably turn into a fire fight. They always seem to here. For whatever reason, the discussion of politics, and religion seem to bring out child like temper tantrums in people.

That said, what I'd really like to know, is who you are supporting to this point, and why? More so, what are the negatives relating to your candidate? Obviously no one is perfect, if you're voting for them, I'm confident you know enough about their indescretions.

Hopefully people can argue each candidates evilness in other threads and allow this thread to be one for people to state their opinions, unjudged. I'm really not interested in why you think candidate x sucks, that's been stated repeatedly. Thanks in advance for your input.

[Sully]

Obama
#1) Leadership/Charisma/Inspiration
#2) Message of inclusiveness
#3) Policies, in addition to not toeing a company line on all accounts


Negatives?
#1) Lack of experience
- Doesn't bother me. Actually, I think it may be a good thing. What I like is his willingness to surround himself with smart people to give him info that helps him make policy decision, even if those smart people aren't necessarily on his "side."
#2) While I like the whole "Not taking money from lobbyist" thing, especially symbolically, the fact that he has found loopholes around this go against the spirit of what he's saying. Not a huge problem for me, and I understand the need to get all the money he can. but it seems a little slimy from a guy who I see as anything but.

[Hydrae]

I support Ron Paul because he is simply the first one in my lifetime that wants to actually change things in Washington back towards what made this country great in the first place.

That said, I do not think he is electable in the long run. The reason is that most people do not understand a lot of his points, they are way too used to things being the way they have been for the last century.

From my personal veiwpoint, I disagree with his border policy but I am in a very small minority who think the border is not an issue. I know my ancestors came here to make a better life for thier families and I think it is highly hypocritical of us to tell others they can not do the same thing. I know there are "legal" ways to get in the country but you can not tell me that we would be letting in very many uneducated laborers, we are much more intersted in letting in techies from India.

The one thing I appreciate more than any other about Dr Paul is that this will at least get some discussion going on these issues. Even though I doubt he will make it to the White House I am hopeful that his "rEVOLution" has staying power in the years ahead.

[Mr. Flopnuts]

I appreciate your input fellas. Thank you.

[Adam]

Ron Paul

Positives: He is the champion of the Constitution.

Negatives: Has a high pitched voice so he suffers in debate despite the wisdom of his ideas. Also, at 72 he's getting a little old for this. It's difficult to picture him beating Obama. I also think his views on the Federal Reserve are a little extreme. I think we should keep the Fed, but outlaw deficit spending as well as return to a gold standard to stabilize currency values. There should probably be some adjusted regulation of the Fed to as well so that they are more accountable for inflation.

=============================

I hope that if nothing else Ron Paul can make his views popular enough to be parrotted by other Republicans looking for an edge. He has already altered the dialogue, so that's something. Maybe he will pave the way for a true conservative to be nominated in 2012. It's just too bad we have to lose elections for four more years first.

[patteeu]

Mitt Romney

Positives: He's one of only 3 across the board, mainstream conservatives, IMO. The other two are Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter. I think Mitt Romney is more electable than those two although I could support any of them. By "across the board, mainstream conservative", I mean someone who is socially conservative (traditional values), economically conservative (pro-growth tax policy and limited government or market-based approach to governing), and foreign policy conservative (favors a strong-America foreign policy, ie peace through strength and diplomacy backed by the credible threat of force). He has a history of achievement, executive experience in both the public and private sectors, and by all accounts he's a good man.

Weaknesses: He's been branded as a flipflopper. I don't personally think he's got more flip-flop baggage than some of his competitors who seem to be able to skate by, but IMO the brand has been established. I also question his toughness. Will he be tough enough to stand up to his campaign opponents as a candidate, will he be tough enough to stand up to a democrat Congress if he's elected, and will he be tough enough to prosecute the GWoT in the face of domestic criticism?

[banyon]

Also, at 72 he's getting a little old for this. It's difficult to picture him beating Obama.

I hadn't considered that. The visual contrast between Obama and Paul (or McCain or Thompson for that matter) would be dramatic on TV. It might be worse than Kennedy/Nixon. You can't really see this contrast in the Dem debates (primarily because the contest isn't pared down to two yet, but also because they are a bit younger).

I think Romney or Giuliani would come off well enough though to negat the effect a bit.

[Mr. Flopnuts]

I appreciate the input from those of you who have responded. I also appreciate this thread not turning into a shit storm. I genuinely appreciate it. I'm just trying to gain some insight from people on what characteristics are most important to them in regards to a Presidential candidate. Thank you all again.

While I think I know who I'm voting for, we have a long ways to go until the election, and I'll be doing my homework. So thank you for contributing to some of that as well.

[banyon]

John Edwards:

Pros:

1) will swing the pendulum away from corporate profits and back to middle class prosperity

2) Will reinvigorate unions and progressive tax policies

3) more than any other democrat will secure the border and create serious employer sanctions on illegal immigration

4) will get us out of iraq almost as fast as Ron Paul.

Cons:

1) had a $400 haircut

[Direckshun]

I support an Obama ticket.

The biggest issue for me is the ballooned power of the executive branch. I want the candidate who's most likely to scale back the extraconstitutional abilities that the executive has empowered itself with throughout the past two administrations. I believe Romney and Clinton will sustain it, and I believe Giuliani would continue to expand it.

I believe Obama, who has both the rhetoric supporting this idea and the resume to follow through as a former law professor at the U of Chi, is the most capable.

I also believe that his stances regarding Iraq have been the most consistent of all running candidates. No one has been more consistent than him, with the possible exceptions of McCain, Paul, and Kucinich, and that's because all four have been entirely consistent to my liking.

I support universal health care and while he still needs to dot some i's and cross some t's regarding his plan, it's miles ahead of the Hillary Clinton plan and it's been endorsed by Howard Dean, who I respect as a former Presidential candidate and a physician.

I thoroughly enjoy the starry-eyed mystique of his brilliantly conducted campaign, and the fact that he has eventually derailed one of the strongest political machines in the modern United States speaks volumes to his electability. He is a uniter and in the words of Andrew Sullivan, he can end the stalling ideology debates from the Baby Boomer generation.

The negatives are that he may be open to some sharp attacks from the religious right. He absolutely refuses to pander with overt patriotism or religiousity. He is not experienced and has never run a government. Has said things regarding the war on terror that may come back to bite him -- I didn't like that he said he'd go into Pakistan to find Bin Laden whether Pakistan wanted us to or not.

[Mr. Kotter]

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=159740

[penchief]

Biden (moot point now):

1. Superior logic.

2. Most pragmatic

3. Independent minded and outspoken.

4. The most well-rounded in terms of in-depth experience.

5. Fundamentally honest.

6. Long history of faithful and dedicated public service.

[Cochise]

Thompson:

Most closely espouses conservative ideals. Is a mainstream conservative and near as I can tell always has been.