The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux)

Nephythys · 11-13-2006, 06:08 PM

Damn sight better than McCain.

wendybeth · 11-13-2006, 06:13 PM

I thik he's probably one of the more viable candidates- he could probably attract a lot of Dems with his stance on some of the larger issues.

Motorboat Cruiser · 11-13-2006, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nephythys

Damn sight better than McCain.

It will be interesting to see how many other republicans see it that way, being that the guy is pro gun control, pro gay marriage, pro choice, and has admitted to infidelity.

Alex · 11-13-2006, 11:59 PM

At this point and for at least a couple more terms I don't see it mattering much who is actually president, just what the letter after their name is. If it is the wrong one they will be evil spawn to 49.9% of the population. The level of discourse is just too hate filled.

Personally, I'll never vote for McCain. He's a decent enough guy but he doesn't strike me as sincere, just playing "straight talking" as a political gambit. He'll go where he needs to in order win. Plus, he is just too old. He'd be 72 when he took office, two years older than Reagan, who was laughed at for being too old. One year younger than Bob Dole who faced serious questions about his age in '96.

Guiliani is intresting (and more honestly a "straight talker," in my opinion) but I doubt he could get through primary which is always the problem on both sides killing the more appealing candidates on either side. That said, Guiliani would be a big lightning rod for the viotriol if he's elected and he has shown problems cowing his temper.

How about Guiliani/Rice against Clinton/Obama in '08? (I wonder if all the people who condemned the Bush "dynasty" as a reason not to vote for him will have a similar problem with a Clinton "dynasty."

Moonliner · 11-14-2006, 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

How about Guiliani/Rice against Clinton/Obama in '08?

What's wrong with a president that gets pissed off from time to time? It's a job that needs an propensity to kick a little ass now and then and if Guiliani's the only one standing between Hillary and the presidency he could also be a womanizing, coke snorting, gay bashing, commie loving, alzheimer's patient and still get my vote.

Alex · 11-14-2006, 10:28 PM

It depends on how they get pissed off. And Guiliani has a record of getting pissed off in bad ways and for bad reasons (especially when his dictatorial authority over New York was challenged). Don't know if that would be tempered by the office of the president or not.

I'm certainly interested in examining him more, I just have some reservations based on what I picked up as only a faintly casual observer of New York politics. Yes, he was impressive after 9/11, but then for quite a while so was a Bush. Before that, he was more of a mixed bag. If 9/11 hadn't happened I don't think there would have been any serious talk of him for president. That isn't a disqualifier, just something that I think may be telling.

As for Hillary, the only reason I probably will vote against her is that we disagree on many major issues. But I'll have to see who she is up against. I have nothing against her personally.

€uroMeinke · 11-14-2006, 10:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

It depends on how they get pissed off. And Guiliani has a record of getting pissed off in bad ways and for bad reasons (especially when his dictatorial authority over New York was challenged). Don't know if that would be tempered by the office of the president or not.

Perhaps we should have some sort of dual presidency so we could play good cop bad cop with our adversaries...

"Man, I don't know how much longer I can keep Guiliana from launching a nuclear assualt on your grandmother - he's one f'd up dude, but if you maybe open your own arsenal up to inspection, I might be able to calm him down."

sleepyjeff · 11-14-2006, 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex Stroup

How about Guiliani/Rice against Clinton/Obama in '08? (I wonder if all the people who condemned the Bush "dynasty" as a reason not to vote for him will have a similar problem with a Clinton "dynasty."

My problem with Guiliani against Hillary is I fear he might pull out at the last miniute and let Hillary win by default.

It would be interesting to see if Hillary could one up Gore by losing in two home States though...something really only possible if Giuliani were to be the candidate for the Reps.

Nephythys · 11-14-2006, 07:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Motorboat Cruiser

It will be interesting to see how many other republicans see it that way, being that the guy is pro gun control, pro gay marriage, pro choice, and has admitted to infidelity.

No argument there.

He won't get the Nom anyway-I doubt it anyway.

11-13-2006, 06:08 PM	#1
Nephythys Yeah, that's about it- Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: In a state of constant crap to get done Posts: 2,688	Damn sight better than McCain.
	Submit to Quotes

11-13-2006, 06:13 PM	#2
wendybeth Nevermind Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 7,847	I thik he's probably one of the more viable candidates- he could probably attract a lot of Dems with his stance on some of the larger issues. __________________
	Submit to Quotes

11-13-2006, 11:59 PM	#4
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	At this point and for at least a couple more terms I don't see it mattering much who is actually president, just what the letter after their name is. If it is the wrong one they will be evil spawn to 49.9% of the population. The level of discourse is just too hate filled. Personally, I'll never vote for McCain. He's a decent enough guy but he doesn't strike me as sincere, just playing "straight talking" as a political gambit. He'll go where he needs to in order win. Plus, he is just too old. He'd be 72 when he took office, two years older than Reagan, who was laughed at for being too old. One year younger than Bob Dole who faced serious questions about his age in '96. Guiliani is intresting (and more honestly a "straight talker," in my opinion) but I doubt he could get through primary which is always the problem on both sides killing the more appealing candidates on either side. That said, Guiliani would be a big lightning rod for the viotriol if he's elected and he has shown problems cowing his temper. How about Guiliani/Rice against Clinton/Obama in '08? (I wonder if all the people who condemned the Bush "dynasty" as a reason not to vote for him will have a similar problem with a Clinton "dynasty."
	Submit to Quotes

11-14-2006, 10:28 PM	#6
Alex . Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 13,354	It depends on how they get pissed off. And Guiliani has a record of getting pissed off in bad ways and for bad reasons (especially when his dictatorial authority over New York was challenged). Don't know if that would be tempered by the office of the president or not. I'm certainly interested in examining him more, I just have some reservations based on what I picked up as only a faintly casual observer of New York politics. Yes, he was impressive after 9/11, but then for quite a while so was a Bush. Before that, he was more of a mixed bag. If 9/11 hadn't happened I don't think there would have been any serious talk of him for president. That isn't a disqualifier, just something that I think may be telling. As for Hillary, the only reason I probably will vote against her is that we disagree on many major issues. But I'll have to see who she is up against. I have nothing against her personally.
	Submit to Quotes