RIP John Edwards Campaign

[galaxie]

DAMNIT.

Now I either root for Hillary on the right side of liberal, or Obama with too much focus on religion and not enough experience. Yeesh.

It's too bad that Edwards got passed over because of all the hype surrounding Clinton and Obama. Yes, we understand that one of you is female and the other is black, but that doesn't matter! What matters is who would make the best president...too bad the best guy dropped out of the race!

[Revolver]

agreed. im sad to see him go too...

i see that juliani is next on the block too...

its allright though.... my man huckabee is going to go the distance anyway

[galaxie]

Giuliani dropped out this morning, too.
Huckabee won't win - if any Republican has a hope in hell at the White House it's McCain.

[Revolver]

Originally Posted by galaxie

Huckabee won't win - if any Republican has a hope in hell at the White House it's McCain.

:cry:

galaxie no.....

no.

noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

[esoter1c]

All these candidates suck, I'd rather see another cia/mossad terror attack, blamed on Iran, draft initiated, marshal law declared, Bush reigns over the military industrial complex worldwide globalized nwo big brother fake ufo/alien hostile takeover a la wells....... I hate politricks.:suspicious:

[galaxie]

NO INVADING IRAN.
NONE.

Seriously. Enough is enough.

[galaxie]

Originally Posted by esoter1c

All these candidates suck

I totally disagree. I think that both Clinton and Obama have some great ideas and some very redeeming qualities, however, I can't seem to decide which one I like better. When I had those two and Edwards to choose from, he was my clear favourite. Now, I'm at a loss. Oh well, it's not like I'll be voting in this election or anything, I just need someone to root for and believe in because I'll be living in the States while they're in office. I guess I'm rooting for Hillary - at least we know team Clinton can do a good job. Obama's lack of experience makes me nervous!

[ebbomega]

Edwards dropping out at this point makes him more likely to end up on a VP ticket. Hence why he hasn't chosen to endorse either candidate.

Giuliani is lucky because it almost seems pretty obvious at this point that McCain is gonna get the republican nom, so he's able to throw his backing behind him and hope to get a nod out of it.

If Obama gets the dem vote he gets to pick between Kucinich - who dropped out much earlier and threw his support behind him - or Edwards, who probably would have been a lot better off if he was headlining that 04 ticket instead of Kerry.

Obama or Clinton's the only real question of this one. I wonder how much the electronic ballots are going to stink. And if they do, uncovering it will mean Obama was supposed to win. Watch this be another calamity like '00.

And fuck you Hillary for trying to get Florida's reps back on the convention. They don't play by the rules, they face the punishment. Stop scrounging.

[SEAN!]

Originally Posted by galaxie

DAMNIT.

Now I either root for Hillary on the right side of liberal, or Obama with too much focus on religion and not enough experience. Yeesh.

It's too bad that Edwards got passed over because of all the hype surrounding Clinton and Obama. Yes, we understand that one of you is female and the other is black, but that doesn't matter! What matters is who would make the best president...too bad the best guy dropped out of the race!

ummm what? do you even understand the positions of any of those candidates?

[Senior]

don't worry it really doesn't matter who gets in anyway! America isn't democratic so no worries it's the same assholes running the show either way.

Originally Posted by galaxie

I totally disagree. I think that both Clinton and Obama have some great ideas and some very redeeming qualities, however, I can't seem to decide which one I like better. When I had those two and Edwards to choose from, he was my clear favourite. Now, I'm at a loss. Oh well, it's not like I'll be voting in this election or anything, I just need someone to root for and believe in because I'll be living in the States while they're in office. I guess I'm rooting for Hillary - at least we know team Clinton can do a good job. Obama's lack of experience makes me nervous!

[galaxie]

Originally Posted by SEAN!

ummm what? do you even understand the positions of any of those candidates?

Ah, yes. Are you saying that there hasn't been a ridiculous amount of hype surrounding Clinton and Obama?

[PwInCeSs]

The only problem i have with Hillary at this point is that her damn husband wont stop talking for her, yes i know he was president and has that experience but this is'nt about him anymore, some speculate hes opened his mouth one to many times at this point.

Aswell just because we know how Bill did in office, doesnt mean Hillary will do the same, it is her running this time. I think alot of people may lean towards her because of Bill (hey i even think at times i do), but who knows what it will be like, can the former president really handle it as the first "first man"?

[decypher]

I knew McCain would the main nominee from the beginning but it's still a bit iffy to decide between Hilary and Obama. My guess is it'll be an Obama vs. McCain 2008 election.

Democratic delegates have to think about how each will fair against McCain in the running. Obama has some of the Kennedy's on his side now which will help convince some of the older more idealistic wings of the democratic party.

There are many areas where Obama and Hilary are similar that's why people are focusing on their signifying qualities. Even if Obama wins, Billary has given the Republicans much ammo to throw at the democrats during the actual presidential campaign. Having Bill flap his jaw and to show more brutal politics has definitely hurt Hilary's campaign. She does have a core connection to the power/money centers of the party though so it'll be interesting to see what happens. Hillary does have the power and experience (especially sitting on the wal-mart executive board) but Obama has the unifying ideology. I don't think another business woman like Hillary is the wide-angled change the US needs right now.

[j3rk]

ALL YOUR CANDIDATES ARE BELONG TO CORPORATE INTERESTS (even obama has oil ties). I prefer to have a candidate who played with pussy his whole life (and i'm not talking about clinton)

Ron Paul in 08. I'm voting republican.

Everyone else is a worthless, spineless tool and will bring no change.


First comedy...then politics.

Comedy:

Ron Paul Courageously Speaks the Truth (blames 9-11 on america foreign policy in a Televised Republican debate)
Ron Paul before the Iraq war. Wise man see. Fools Rush in. I
Ron Paul Calls for End to Drug War
Ron Paul Takes Aim at Big Business
Ron Paul 0wnz the Federal Reserve

[j3rk]

PS. Ron has more federal votes than Giuliani...but why havn't you people heard of him!? Why are you not discussing him!? Media blockage perhaps!?

[ebbomega]

Originally Posted by galaxie

Ah, yes. Are you saying that there hasn't been a ridiculous amount of hype surrounding Clinton and Obama?

I think he's saying that you're paying too much attention to the media hype and not enough to what the candidates are actually endorsing.

Obama is religious? Where'd you get that from? A picture of him going to Church? His campaign has been anything but religion-based, but that's not what the media wants you to believe.

Obama recently got endorsements from the Kennedy family, saying that Obama will continue on the path that JFK set years ago. If you ask me, that's EXACTLY what America needs, considering JFK's assassination was probably the beginning of the end of democracy in the US (especially since we're now finding out - officially - that the CIA orchestrated the whole thing).

Hillary's campaign has been a lot slimier than anybody else's, which means that if precedent means anything she's getting the nomination. Which means we get a McCain ticket winning the election. Fantastic. Just what we need, another republican in the house for 4 years, which means we'll probably be faced with a bunch of covering of Bush/Rove/Cheney's collective asses. Look out for Telecom immunity, Iran-war-mongering rhetoric, continued "War on Terrorism" (We are at war with terrorists. We have always been at war with terrorists), more tax cuts for the rich, less health care focus and further slashing of social services. Basically, the rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and the economy continues to collapse.

I'd also like to see if Gore decides to be someone's running mate. Honestly an Obama/Gore ticket would be a shoe-in, and I'd even try to get my proof of citizenship together and make an absentee vote if that became an option.

[miss.myra]

Originally Posted by galaxie

Ah, yes. Are you saying that there hasn't been a ridiculous amount of hype surrounding Clinton and Obama?

There is a ridicilous amount of hype surrounding the election this year period.

and with good reason!

what's wrong with people actually willing to become involved in politics? I've never seen so many young Americans actually caring about who gets to represent the democratic party. That to me is quite exciting. It's about time!

[ebbomega]

Originally Posted by j3rk

PS. Ron has more federal votes than Giuliani...but why havn't you people heard of him!? Why are you not discussing him!? Media blockage perhaps!?

Because it's painfully obvious that he doesn't have the support within the republican party to actually get elected.

His arguments for why the US is in bad shape are good, but he's too idealistic and I _REALLY_ don't think that fiscal conservatism is what the country needs.

People have been talking about him online ad nauseum. But you'll notice that lately people have been focusing less on him (his big state was supposed to be New Hampshire and he only got 1 elector) and more on Obama (a net-friendly candidate who is actually likely to win if he gets the nomination).

I'm sorry but removal of the IRS? Ending the war on drugs? How the hell does he plan on getting his ideas through congress? If anything he's going to introduce the bills to congress, congress will ammend them to shit (if they even pass them) and then the brilliant revolution RP is talking about will be full of holes and easy to exploit. Then when someone a little less idealistic and a little more sneaky decides to exploit those holes, we end up with a more corrupt system of government than we started out with. Thank you no.

Ron Paul speaks very well, but he doesn't seem to understand too well what the capacity of the president is. This makes him idealistic and sadly we don't live in an ideal world. Ron Paul is the Ralph Nader of this election, just from the opposite side of the board.

[Vitamin-X]

Personally I'd go with Mitt Romney.
I think he has the business skills to bring the economy back up to speed. (although Mormonism will hurt him)

Although, at this point I think the old guard has essentially nominated
Mccain. I honestly wonder if Mccain will survive the election never mind a term in office. He looks like a doddering old man, and I hate the way he goes on endlessly about how he's a "war hero" and a "foot soldier".

I think the Democrats have lost their collective minds believing that their "new coke" idea of a black man or a woman being first in the White House is going to grant them victory.

[ebbomega]

Originally Posted by Vitamin-X

Although, at this point I think the old guard has essentially nominated
Mccain. I honestly wonder if Mccain will survive the election never mind a term in office. He looks like a doddering old man, and I hate the way he goes on endlessly about how he's a "war hero" and a "foot soldier".

If America is planning on staying in Iraq and Afghanistan for any extended period of time, they need a foot soldier in charge. Clinton-the-first was the first president who never served in the military, and he got away with it by not starting any unnecessary wars and keeping America's involvement in war focused on diplomacy. Not to say he didn't order any military action, but when he did he kept it all low-profile and it would usually be either isolated incidents or UN-sanctioned.

Dubya's mistake was going on the warpath without any credible combat experience. He thought he understood the mechanics of war. Hence his "Mission accomplished" speech... what... 5 years ago? And they're still losing troops out there? His idea of war was sold on the Korea/WWII definition, with frontlines and border disputes. If he even paid attention to Vietnam he'd know that that's not how modern wars are fought, but instead he chose to believe all the political rhetoric being spoonfed to him by the government at the time.

Lesson to be learned: If you're going to run on a war campaign, have combat experience.

[j3rk]

Originally Posted by ebbomega

Because it's painfully obvious that he doesn't have the support within the republican party to actually get elected.

His arguments for why the US is in bad shape are good, but he's too idealistic and I _REALLY_ don't think that fiscal conservatism is what the country needs.

People have been talking about him online ad nauseum. But you'll notice that lately people have been focusing less on him (his big state was supposed to be New Hampshire and he only got 1 elector) and more on Obama (a net-friendly candidate who is actually likely to win if he gets the nomination).

I'm sorry but removal of the IRS? Ending the war on drugs? How the hell does he plan on getting his ideas through congress? If anything he's going to introduce the bills to congress, congress will ammend them to shit (if they even pass them) and then the brilliant revolution RP is talking about will be full of holes and easy to exploit. Then when someone a little less idealistic and a little more sneaky decides to exploit those holes, we end up with a more corrupt system of government than we started out with. Thank you no.

Ron Paul speaks very well, but he doesn't seem to understand too well what the capacity of the president is. This makes him idealistic and sadly we don't live in an ideal world. Ron Paul is the Ralph Nader of this election, just from the opposite side of the board.

Ron is still the only person i want to see in office. be it in the US or in Canada. I'd love to vote for him, if i could.

You're analysis of his situation are correct....and providing he doesn't win the nomination. I'd vote Obama.

My vote would go Paul for the same reason I vote green every election...do I want them to win? No (i'd like ron paul to win though). Do i want other parties to shift debate and platforms to take up their issues and steal votes away from the greens? Yes.

Ron Paul has managed to force other candidates to talk about his issues and for this he has won and was a great player in this election win or lose.

[ebbomega]

Originally Posted by j3rk

Ron is still the only person i want to see in office. be it in the US or in Canada. I'd love to vote for him, if i could.

You're analysis of his situation are correct....and providing he doesn't win the nomination. I'd vote Obama.

My vote would go Paul for the same reason I vote green every election...do I want them to win? No (i'd like ron paul to win though). Do i want other parties to shift debate and platforms to take up their issues and steal votes away from the greens? Yes.

Ron Paul has managed to force other candidates to talk about his issues and for this he has won and was a great player in this election win or lose.

Finally. A Ron Paul supporter who can deliver a rational explanation concisely, clearly, and without use of a youtube link. =)

[pstylez]

I voted on Ron Paul for the Washington state primary. If you live in the US you should too. Ron paul for president!

[Vitamin-X]

Originally Posted by ebbomega

If America is planning on staying in Iraq and Afghanistan for any extended period of time, they need a foot soldier in charge. Clinton-the-first was the first president who never served in the military, and he got away with it by not starting any unnecessary wars and keeping America's involvement in war focused on diplomacy. Not to say he didn't order any military action, but when he did he kept it all low-profile and it would usually be either isolated incidents or UN-sanctioned.

Dubya's mistake was going on the warpath without any credible combat experience. He thought he understood the mechanics of war. Hence his "Mission accomplished" speech... what... 5 years ago? And they're still losing troops out there? His idea of war was sold on the Korea/WWII definition, with frontlines and border disputes. If he even paid attention to Vietnam he'd know that that's not how modern wars are fought, but instead he chose to believe all the political rhetoric being spoonfed to him by the government at the time.

Lesson to be learned: If you're going to run on a war campaign, have combat experience.

War experience or not, I think with Mccain in the White House the US might actually find itself in the position of dealing with the first President to go senile while in office, or he just might drop dead.
Bottom line: he's just too old.

And while war experience would be nice, the U.s has a lot of other issues that need attention. Such as Illegal Immigration, economy, ect ect.

[Vitamin-X]

Originally Posted by pstylez

I voted on Ron Paul for the Washington state primary. If you live in the US you should too. Ron paul for president!

I actually really enjoy Ron Paul's rants.
And he certainly does make some sense too.

His problem is that he comes accross as "crazy as a loon" while he's ranting. All the sense he makes gets eaten up by this crazy image he projects.