Off Topic · general question who would u vote for john mccain or Hillary Clinton? (page 3)

jaydh @ 1/18/2006 7:40 PM
Posted by BasketballJones:

Doesn't matter. Bush will declare martial law and have a third term, and americans will be happy not to have to deal with all those confusing freedoms. Four more decades!


impeach impeach!
Marv @ 1/18/2006 8:54 PM
Posted by Rich:
Posted by fishmike:
Posted by jaydh:
Posted by mikesknicks:

McCain, are we really ready for a woman President.

why not? many countries across the world have had women leaders.. why not us?
because the red states get to vote also. So long as thats the case this country isnt electing a jew, a black man or a woman. If the dems think otherwise they really are blind.

Colin Powell could be elected president, but he will never run.

I dont' think he could, not after he sold his soul to front Bush's lies to the UN. From published accounts, he grieves deeply over that now.
TemujinKnick @ 1/18/2006 9:05 PM
I wouldn't vote for either. Rice is my first choice.

If I had to pick McCain or Hillary, it'd be very tough but I'd probably go Hillary.
NumberTwoPencil @ 1/18/2006 9:32 PM
Straight up? Well, I guess Hillary, though under protest.

After that speech last week, if either one of them included Gore on the ticket I'd vote for VP Gore with whichever pres.

I feel, basically, the same way about Hillary and McCain. They are both interesting people, I'd have a beer with either one. They both started out trying to do things right but at this point they are hopelessly compromised. Neither of them writes good legislation. Neither successfully uses their position as a bully pulpit. And, other than media celebs, they don't have a lot of political power outside their immediate office.

NumberTwoPencil @ 1/18/2006 9:41 PM
>Because it's in the US national interest to do so because they have been the only democracy in the Middle East.

That's not quite true. Iran, before we installed the Shah was pretty close to being a fully Democratic Republic. And, of course Turkey, post-Susurluk, is a democracy. And, depending on how you define democracy, an assortment of ME states have been partially or even mostly democratic, though not since WWII. But, yes, you are right, Israel is, pretty much the only modern Western-style democratic government in the ME. That said, it's unclear to me why, if it's in our national interest to protect democracy we support dictators throughout the 'stans and have a very patchy record of damaging democracies and supporting dictators in Central and South America.

Rich @ 1/18/2006 10:25 PM
Posted by NumberTwoPencil:

>Because it's in the US national interest to do so because they have been the only democracy in the Middle East.

That's not quite true. Iran, before we installed the Shah was pretty close to being a fully Democratic Republic. And, of course Turkey, post-Susurluk, is a democracy. And, depending on how you define democracy, an assortment of ME states have been partially or even mostly democratic, though not since WWII. But, yes, you are right, Israel is, pretty much the only modern Western-style democratic government in the ME. That said, it's unclear to me why, if it's in our national interest to protect democracy we support dictators throughout the 'stans and have a very patchy record of damaging democracies and supporting dictators in Central and South America.

Let's grant your point for the sake of argument, however, Mossadek was toppled in 1953. That's a long time ago.

Turkey is kind of a hybrid country. The western part is in Europe.
Killa4luv @ 1/18/2006 11:27 PM
Posted by fishmike:

whats wrong with international relations?

Fish, I hope you are kidding.

fishmike @ 1/19/2006 7:17 AM
Posted by Killa4luv:
Posted by fishmike:

whats wrong with international relations?

Fish, I hope you are kidding.
not at all. We are closer every day to a democratic Iraq and the people there love america for it. The president said so.

BasketballJones @ 1/19/2006 10:06 AM
Manchurian Candidate McCaine or Stepford Wife Hillary? You decide.
OasisBU @ 1/19/2006 10:52 AM
I think we need another option - a true outsider but not a radical. Someone with charisma and vision. Clinton came out of nowhere and he beat Bush 1 - we need someone else like that from either party. I dont care which one it comes from just please send us someone educated, articulate, likeable, strong, and effective.

This country deserves at least that much. Oh and while I am asking - how about someone who actually represents the people and their best interest...not corporate greed - something that has corrupted the entire US political system.
Marv @ 1/19/2006 10:55 AM
I really like Barack Obama but he needs a lot more experience.
Page 3 of 3