Americans, and others if you care (country, offspring, effect, shows)

anticipation · 08-17-2007, 09:17 AM

My favorite part of this thread is that it assumes all Americans actually care about who is president.

drainxthexframe · 08-17-2007, 03:52 PM

Carlos Mencia. duh

~~CAPTAIN CAVEMAN~~ · 08-17-2007, 04:04 PM

Don't you mean Ned Holnes?

drainxthexframe · 08-17-2007, 04:07 PM

both.

TheBig3 · 08-17-2007, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gentleman Johnny

My favorite part of this thread is that it assumes all Americans actually care about who is president.

they all care, just never enough to vote...or discuss it to any degree.

Raine · 08-18-2007, 02:42 PM

My vote's for Guiliani.
I seriously doubt he could win since obviously the democrat will.
But the two really democratic contenders are Hilary and Obama. And just because Hilary's a woman doesn't mean I'll do the liberal thing and vote for her.
She started and help sposnor a ton of programs geared towards protecting the rights of abused children and women but I found it t disgraceful and a tad hypocritical that when her husband cheated on her she didn't leave him. I also think that part of the reason she stayed with Bill was because she didn't think she could make into the presidency on her own which shows a certain amount of doubt on her part. She doesn't seem deserving of the presidency.
And Barack always comes off as a softy in his television appearances. I think right now what this country needs is someone who will rule with a little bit of an edge to them. Barack just doesn't have the edge I'm looking for in a candidate.

Out of all the republican candidates, Guiliani seems to be the most humane, focused, and certainly the most leveled. If his reaction to 9/11 is anything to go by. He was mayor during that crisis and handled it pretty well if you ask me. I seriously doubt most of other cities in the US would be as prepared for an emergency of that nature as New York was. And I think part of it had to do with Guiliani's response and the way he communicatedto the people via the media.
And besides He was voted into the mayoral position I think twice so already he has a good deal of votes given the population of New York City.

~~i get high sometimes~~ · 08-18-2007, 02:51 PM

Rudy Guliani didn't handle 9/11 well at all. I don't know what America you're living in.
He refused to let professional cleanup handle the ground zero cleanup efforts and as a result, hundreds of 9/11 rescue workers are suffering severe respiratory problems, and, if I'm not mistaken several have even died as a result of them. Guliani then has the audacity to claim that he was at ground zero "As much as, if not more than many of the rescue workers" when his mayoral logs clearly show that he spent a total of 29 hours at ground zero in the THREE MONTHS following 9/11. Most rescue workers were at ground zero for 29 hours in the first few days following.

I also think your stance that Hilary Clinton NOT leaving Bill makes makes her a hypocritical candidate. You can't be serious. She decided to forgive her husband, and that makes her a bad choice for president? Also, you discrediting Hilary for family issues and then praising Guliani is equally laughable. You do realize that Guliani has an estranged daughter, among other family problems right?

And now onto Barack. He seems too weak? Barack has been drawing critism lately because of his threats to invade Pakistan without Pakistani government consent. This makes him weak how? If anything that makes him seem like a Republican.

Looks like you were 0 for 3 on points.

Raine · 08-18-2007, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by i get high sometimes

Rudy Guliani didn't handle 9/11 well at all. I don't know what America you're living in.
He refused to let professional cleanup handle the ground zero cleanup efforts and as a result, thousands of 9/11 rescue workers are suffering severe respiratory problems, and, if I'm not mistaken several have even died as a result of them. Guliani then has the audacity to claim that he was at ground zero "As much as, if not more than many of the rescue workers" when his mayoral logs clearly show that he spent a total of 29 hours at ground zero in the THREE MONTHS following 9/11. Most rescue workers were at ground zero for 29 hours in the first few days following.

I also think your stance that Hilary Clinton NOT leaving Bill makes makes her a hypocritical candidate. You can't be serious. She decided to forgive her husband, and that makes her a bad choice for president? Also, you discrediting Hilary for family issues and then praising Guliani is equally laughable. You do realize that Guliani has an estranged daughter, among other family problems right?

And now onto Barack. He seems to weak. Barack has been drawing critism lately because of his threats to invade Pakistan without Pakistani government consent. This makes him weak how? If anything that makes him seem like a Republican.

Looks like you were 0 for 3 on points.

If anything i expected you to say something about how Guiliani's been married a buttload of times. Not mention his estranged offspring.

I won't defend my reasons for not voting for hilary. All I know is it's because of her actions that I don't feel comfortable voting for her.

As for Barack, entering a country without approval is neither weakness or strength. It's stupidity. I'm not sure where you've been the last eight years but I don't think America needs to replace an *sshole with an *sshole.

~~i get high sometimes~~ · 08-18-2007, 02:59 PM

Well, his invasion of Pakistan is to capture al-Queda terrorists, whom all military intelligence tells us are hinding in the hills between Afganistan and Pakistan.
He doesn't want to invade Pakistan, merely send US troops into Pakistan to capture the men who were the original focus of the war we are in now.

I don't neccessarily agree, but it isn't stupidity, and it isn't weakness.

TheBig3 · 08-19-2007, 08:16 PM

Actually, in this stance I think Obama stands a massive chance of beating out Clinton. Its highly reminiscent of a 1960 Jack Kennedy, who took an overly tough stance to refrain from being a "republican punching bag" which dropped addeli stevenson (i've probably spelled his name wrong) in the previous elections. Kennedy favored diplomacy over force but realized that it doesn't play well in elections. Obama has been extra careful to the point of showing his hand in this election about being not just another namby-pamby liberal.

He stands to rough the same territory as we've seen since '92 however, in that he has not served in the military. His only saving grace is that no other front runner has either. No, McCain is not a front runner. I know the former campaign coordinator and she said hes in this for the money with staff hemorrhaging left and right.

Obama is the candidate the democrats want. We'll see what they get.

View Poll Results: Who are you p ulling for?
Sam Brownback-R	0	0%
Rudy Guiliani-R	1	3.70%
Mike Huckabee-R	1	3.70%
Duncan Hunter-R	0	0%
John McCain-R	2	7.41%
Ron Paul-R	1	3.70%
Mit Romney-R	1	3.70%
Tom Tancredo-R	0	0%
Tommy Thompson-R	0	0%
Joe Biden-D	0	0%
Hilary Clinton-D	2	7.41%
Christopher Dodd-D	0	0%
John Edwards-D	2	7.41%
Mike Gravel-D	1	3.70%
Dennis Kucinich-D	6	22.22%
Barack Obama-D	8	29.63%
Bill Richardson-D	0	0%
Al Gore-D	2	7.41%
Newt Gingrich-R	0	0%
Fred Thomson-R	0	0%
Voters: 27. You may not vote on this poll

08-18-2007, 02:42 PM	#56 (permalink)
Raine Full-Time Hellion Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: PA Posts: 1,531	My vote's for Guiliani. I seriously doubt he could win since obviously the democrat will. But the two really democratic contenders are Hilary and Obama. And just because Hilary's a woman doesn't mean I'll do the liberal thing and vote for her. She started and help sposnor a ton of programs geared towards protecting the rights of abused children and women but I found it t disgraceful and a tad hypocritical that when her husband cheated on her she didn't leave him. I also think that part of the reason she stayed with Bill was because she didn't think she could make into the presidency on her own which shows a certain amount of doubt on her part. She doesn't seem deserving of the presidency. And Barack always comes off as a softy in his television appearances. I think right now what this country needs is someone who will rule with a little bit of an edge to them. Barack just doesn't have the edge I'm looking for in a candidate. Out of all the republican candidates, Guiliani seems to be the most humane, focused, and certainly the most leveled. If his reaction to 9/11 is anything to go by. He was mayor during that crisis and handled it pretty well if you ask me. I seriously doubt most of other cities in the US would be as prepared for an emergency of that nature as New York was. And I think part of it had to do with Guiliani's response and the way he communicatedto the people via the media. And besides He was voted into the mayoral position I think twice so already he has a good deal of votes given the population of New York City. __________________ A pair of powerful spectacles has sometimes sufficed to cure a person in love. ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

08-19-2007, 08:16 PM	#60 (permalink)
TheBig3 killedmyraindog Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Boston, Massachusetts Posts: 11,172	Actually, in this stance I think Obama stands a massive chance of beating out Clinton. Its highly reminiscent of a 1960 Jack Kennedy, who took an overly tough stance to refrain from being a "republican punching bag" which dropped addeli stevenson (i've probably spelled his name wrong) in the previous elections. Kennedy favored diplomacy over force but realized that it doesn't play well in elections. Obama has been extra careful to the point of showing his hand in this election about being not just another namby-pamby liberal. He stands to rough the same territory as we've seen since '92 however, in that he has not served in the military. His only saving grace is that no other front runner has either. No, McCain is not a front runner. I know the former campaign coordinator and she said hes in this for the money with staff hemorrhaging left and right. Obama is the candidate the democrats want. We'll see what they get. __________________ I've moved to a new address

08-17-2007, 09:17 AM	#51 (permalink)
anticipation Music Addict Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 3,565	My favorite part of this thread is that it assumes all Americans actually care about who is president.

08-17-2007, 03:52 PM	#52 (permalink)
drainxthexframe Music Addict Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 57	Carlos Mencia. duh

08-17-2007, 04:04 PM	#53 (permalink)
~~CAPTAIN CAVEMAN~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: VAN Posts: 2,530	Don't you mean Ned Holnes?

08-17-2007, 04:07 PM	#54 (permalink)
drainxthexframe Music Addict Join Date: Apr 2007 Posts: 57	both.

08-18-2007, 02:51 PM	#57 (permalink)
~~i get high sometimes~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 240	Rudy Guliani didn't handle 9/11 well at all. I don't know what America you're living in. He refused to let professional cleanup handle the ground zero cleanup efforts and as a result, hundreds of 9/11 rescue workers are suffering severe respiratory problems, and, if I'm not mistaken several have even died as a result of them. Guliani then has the audacity to claim that he was at ground zero "As much as, if not more than many of the rescue workers" when his mayoral logs clearly show that he spent a total of 29 hours at ground zero in the THREE MONTHS following 9/11. Most rescue workers were at ground zero for 29 hours in the first few days following. I also think your stance that Hilary Clinton NOT leaving Bill makes makes her a hypocritical candidate. You can't be serious. She decided to forgive her husband, and that makes her a bad choice for president? Also, you discrediting Hilary for family issues and then praising Guliani is equally laughable. You do realize that Guliani has an estranged daughter, among other family problems right? And now onto Barack. He seems too weak? Barack has been drawing critism lately because of his threats to invade Pakistan without Pakistani government consent. This makes him weak how? If anything that makes him seem like a Republican. Looks like you were 0 for 3 on points.

08-18-2007, 02:59 PM	#59 (permalink)
~~i get high sometimes~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 240	Well, his invasion of Pakistan is to capture al-Queda terrorists, whom all military intelligence tells us are hinding in the hills between Afganistan and Pakistan. He doesn't want to invade Pakistan, merely send US troops into Pakistan to capture the men who were the original focus of the war we are in now. I don't neccessarily agree, but it isn't stupidity, and it isn't weakness.