See you next election cycle!!!!

[John-in-KC]

Good-Bye Rudy (I was there on 9-11) Guiliani!!!!

 

Good-Bye John (my hair is pretty) Edwards!!!

 

Dems look like it's down to Hillary and Barack.

 

Reps look like it's down to John, Mitt, and Mike.

 

None of them excite me. All of them have policy flaws.

 

Sigh.

[Lisabob]

Well if it is any consolation at all John, although Rudy could have been considered "exciting," I'd make the case that it was in a negative sense (as in, "I've been excited to actively campaign against the fellow," or as in, "I'd sooner move to Canada than suffer four years of his presidency!" or as in, "Thank goodness I am not a New Yawker!" or maybe even as in, "Now where did I put those plans for that underground bunker in my back yard?" - all, or at least most, said firmly tongue in cheek of course) Yep, sometimes plain and dull can be a plus...

[scoutldr]

Ron Paul's only flaw is he believes we should do what the Constitution says. UNfortunately he's unelectable because he won't provide handouts to the teeming masses, like Hillary promises to do. Obama has promised "change"...if that's what we want?

 

I like McCain, but just can't get past his arrogant, rude demeanor. I saw it first hand after one of the debates when he said to the commentators, "Well I have to sit here and talk to you jerks, how do you think I'm doing." Not Presidential at all.

[hops_scout]

"Obama has promised "change"...if that's what we want?"

 

Isn't that what all the Democrats are promoting? I've already seen signs and billboards with the "Change. Vote Democrat" and such on them.

 

What I can't figure out is what in the world are they going to change? And how do they plan to do it? Are they going to "change" just like this Democratic Congress has done? Because if you'll remember, that was their mantra to get into the majority in Congress. We were going to see "change" and yet Americans as a whole hate this Congress more than they hate the President!

 

It shall be interesting.

[Hunt]

You know, I often hear this statistic that the public's opinion of Congress is lower than their (very low) opinion of the President. But what does this mean? Does it really mean that their opinion of Congress has declined since the Democrats took over? Or does it just mean that people have generally lost faith in Congress? I would also point out that although people think Congress is awful, they usually think that their own Representative is good. (That's what people think about doctors and lawyers, too, by the way.)

[Lisabob]

And disliking Congress is an equal opportunity sport, applied just as much to Republican-led Congresses as to Democratic-led ones. I think candidates like Obama, Edwards, and Huckabee excite a lot of people because they seem to promise to re-connect government to ordinary citizens, as opposed to others like Romney or McCain or Clinton who may have more mastery of the details and the system but seem to be living in a pretty different world than most of us in terms of understanding day-to-day struggles. (Note I'm not saying that any of this is actually true, but that perceptions seem to fall along these lines - and in politics, perception is everything.)

[GernBlansten]

This really aggravates me. My state votes next Tuesday on Super Tuesday. Already, most of the field has been whittled down by just a few states. Not my idea of a democracy.

 

We need to do away with the current primary system and just have a Super-Duper Tuesday. All states caucus the same day. Assign delegates by % of vote in each state to each candidate. Let candidates negotiate/trade their delegates amongst themselves to get a majority and influence policy. At least my vote my have some weight on the direction of the party.

[TheScout]

Well Gern nobody picked the date of your state's primary other than its elected legislators you helped pick . . .

 

That seems like democracy.

[kraut-60]

Do we get to mark the box that says "None of the above",...oh, wait..we dont (yet) have that option open to us as voters yet, do we?

 

Former Sen. Fred Thompson was rather interesting and refreshingly blunt in stating his views and his given policies on the issues. Too bad he bailed out...he seemed to have the makings of a leader...not just another politician.

 

I will support Sen. McCain in his bid for the presidency of the United States. We are still at war and I prefer the Commander-in Chief to be well grounded in what serving in the armed forces entails...Sen. McCains service to our nation as a serving officer and as a POW will enable him to be a leader...although I'm sure he will be ridiculed for what was posted here as being arrogant and not presidential.

 

I want a leader...not an MBA...not a pretty face...a leader, please.

 

And I sure dont want what the Democrats seem to think I need....Change?

Change from being free to mandated social programs so we can be fair??

What happened to EARNING your benefits?

The mandated socialism the Democratic party wants for us amounts to not much more than what our fathers and grandfathers fought against during the 2nd World War and the Cold War.

History can repeat itself...vote for Hillary and find out.

 

Oh and lets not forget this forum is issues and politics...my views dont need to match anyone elses...if they do...cool...if they dont...lets get along anyway.

[John-in-KC]

You mean I can't tell you you're weak worthless and inexcusable?

 

 

I have my own views of where our forces are... we're riding them hard and putting them away wet, then turning them out for another go before the night is over. The one-year tours are starting to do the same damage they did in Vietnam, the issue is we're doing whole unit replacement vice individual troopers.

 

I'd hate to see the condition of the property books in theater...

[packsaddle]

Yeah, the change thing is troublesome. More than ever, to me it looks like whoever inherits this mess is going to be constrained so many ways that all the election rhetoric will be quickly forgotten as reality dictates terms.

So the question becomes who is to inherit the mess? Bright, young, motivated, interesting and idealistic candidates...or boring, unimaginative, grumpy old white men?

[Gonzo1]

Packsaddle,

Aarrrrgggh!

G

 

 

[Hunt]

I'm reasonably happy with the four remaining leading candidates, because my first test of any candidate is: "How likely is it that this person will wreck the country?" I don't think any of them are likely to wreck the country--they're all smart, not too nutty, reasonably well connected to other leaders, etc.

I thought Giuliani had a greater prospect of wrecking the country, so I was glad to see him drop out. While I thought Edwards himself was OK, it is very likely that his wife will die in the next four years--a trauma the country doesn't need. Paul and Kucinich are too nutty, and Huckabee may also be a bit too nutty. Thompson himself wouldn't wreck the country, but it might wreck itself while he slumbered.

[John-in-KC]

Bye bye Mittt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Anyone betting on Bloomberg being the next Ross Perot (cue Johnnny comes marching home...)???

[gwd-scouter]

News reports say Mitt is suspending his campaign not quitting altogether. It means he keeps his delegates for now. I remember John Edwards said the same thing in his press conference about suspending, but never heard more after that. Did Edwards eventually just quit the campaign? Where did his delegates go?

 

Honestly, I don't know what it means that Mitt keeps his delegates. Do those delegates just vanish at some point? Do they all get turned over to McCain? How about if they'd prefer Huckabee? Ron Paul could use the help...

 

Gotta go, I think CNN is using that amazing telestrater...another new word for Websters.

 

Hello, my name is gwd-scouter and I'm a politics junkie.