Who do you want to be President in 2009?

[Beer and Pizza]

[ QUOTE ]
Wes Clark is easily my choice.

[/ QUOTE ]

The support of Clark by Democrats appears to be due to an inferiority complex. Unable to be behind a strong defense and to stand up to terrorism, they support so-called war heroes to make it seem like they are solid on defense.

It didn't work in 2004, people didn't buy Kerry as war hero. Why do they think it will work in 2008 with Clark?

[CCass]

[ QUOTE ]
I chose other Democrat, I really like Phil Bredeson. He'll never get a sizable campaign going, but it's my ideal pick for '08.

[/ QUOTE ]

You must not live in TN. He is running our state into the ground financially.

[Cumulonimbus]

[ QUOTE ]
Christopher Walken, all the way.

http://www.walken2008.com/index.html

[/ QUOTE ]

Hoax.

[Cumulonimbus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Holy [censored]. Who voted for Condi? Stand up now so I can throw a baseball at your face.

[/ QUOTE ]

While not my pick, she is clearly the best woman on that list. I think many here would agree with me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Best woman does not equal best presidential candidate. Do you think her policies would be any different than Georgie's? Those two just have to be boof-buddies.

In addition, I for one do not want to see her ugly mug every time I turn on the news.




Honestly...wtf is that big hairy thing growing from her neck?

[andyfox]

"Why do they think it will work in 2008 with Clark?"

He didn't say he thought it would work. The question was who do you want to be president.

[quinn]

I chose "Other Republican" (yours truly)

[John Ho]

Cause he was a 4 star General, Rhodes scholar, intellectual heavyweight, was right about needing more troops in Iraq, right about Iraq being a strategic mistake distracting from a war on Al Quaeda; And Americans are tired of a Chicken Hawk President who surrounds himself with Chicken Hawk yesmen (+ Condi) while forcing out Colin Powell, nominates a ridiculous candidate for Associate Justice likely due to her pro-big business background rather than fulfilling the promise he made to his far right wing base because he is either politically crippled due to disaster Katrina or just flat out lied to his base about sharing their values, and who's sucked at almost everything he's done while in office? And that Bush-stink will infect every likely Republican candidate except for John McCain.

That being said, I'm bullish on Gore, Clark, McCain, and Hillary. In that order. If John Edwards is the candidate I will puke.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wes Clark is easily my choice.

[/ QUOTE ]

The support of Clark by Democrats appears to be due to an inferiority complex. Unable to be behind a strong defense and to stand up to terrorism, they support so-called war heroes to make it seem like they are solid on defense.

It didn't work in 2004, people didn't buy Kerry as war hero. Why do they think it will work in 2008 with Clark?

[/ QUOTE ]

[Roybert]

Why do I think it will work this time? It must be my inferiority complex. Hey, at least you haven't called anyone in this thread a bigot (yet).

Clark is a 4-Star General who graduated first in his class from West Point and oversaw a successful nation building operation that cost the lives of exactly ZERO US troops. The funny thing is, if he ever won the nomination (an admitted long shot) I am sure that the RW attack machine would use the same vigor to smear his service that they used to defend G-Dub's lack of service.

Clark is also extremely strong on domestic issues that I value as well, so I feel that he is the best candidate to a) defend this country, and b) help us to prosper.

Do I think it will work 'this time'? I think it could; Kerry and Clark are not the same candidate (although the RW will do everything they can to compare the two).

I do welcome you, though, to continue your apparent unwavering support for this administration and it's monkey-[censored]-a-football policies. To paraphrase the man himself, you're all doin' a hell of a job. To me, the question isn't whether or not Clark will 'work'. The question is how can you possibly think that 4-8 more years of continuing President Retard's policies will lead to any different result than the abject failure that they've produced to this point.

P.S. 'So-called' war heroes? Are you honestly saying that Clark isn't a war hero?

[Autocratic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I chose other Democrat, I really like Phil Bredeson. He'll never get a sizable campaign going, but it's my ideal pick for '08.

[/ QUOTE ]

You must not live in TN. He is running our state into the ground financially.

[/ QUOTE ]

Too much blame on him for that, I think. Probably would be a big issue in the campaign, though.

[primetime32]

[ QUOTE ]
How am I the only person unsure? Everyone who voted knows the ins/outs of every policy of the person they voted for? Bullshit. No wonder our politics suck when you guys are all too full of yourselves to admit any wavier in confidence almost 4 years ahead of time.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you follow politics and read newspaper articles and books on politics you should know these peoples stances on most of the major issues like war in iraq, death penalty, abortion, middle east issues and economics.

I dont need to know what clinton's exact policies on welfare to know that she will or will not make a good president.

I presume you dont read or watch much TV and therefore are uninformed which would explain your complete inability to know each persons policies.

Lets not forget that almost all of these potential nominees have run for office a number of times and have their policies pretty much out there. Do you really make your decisions based upon rehearsed and staged debates 2 weeks before the elections?? i hope not.