Upcoming US Presedential Election - Who would you vote for?

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by ghost_us, Jul 18, 2007.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. There are too many to list in a poll so I'll just ask.

    If you could, who would you vote for? I would prefer someone that had putting the US back on the worlds good side.


    Sorry Sergey, Putins not in the list.


    Here's a listing for your reference if you need to know who's announced:

    http://www.vote-smart.org/election_president_search.php?type=alpha
     
  2. Warren Roderick Ashe (Democrat)

    Only because he would have been great in The Life of Brian.

    Or

    Jackson Kirk Grimes (United Fascist Union)

    Can't be as extreme as the current occupier of the White House.




    Quack
     
  3. Tony Blair. Your lot seem so fond of him, they can have him for a bit. :lol:

    Seriously, I can't think of a major player I'd vote for. The differences between the two main parties are pretty minute, and I think the West does need a radical change in direction. We can't compete economically with the East for much longer (they have lower operating costs, more raw materials, more people) and the knowledge economy idea only works for so long as we can either stay smarter and better educated than them, or buy up their best talent. The indicators are that those days are numbered.

    I think a less combative and more cooperative approach is needed. We'll have to accept sooner or later that our days of running the show are over; it would be best if we could convince the newly emerging powers of the joys of co-operation before that time came. Sadly, modern US politics in particular is just too inward looking to produce another Eisenhower or Roosevelt. If it did, I'd vote for them like a shot, Republican or no.
     
  4. Ghost, from my point of view Bush father would be an excellent president. Experienced politician, true American patriot. Yes, he is not so young but his son (not George of course) could be a vice-president.

    Other Republican politicians look bleak (even ms.Rice).

    As for the democrats then I don't see even one bright figure.
     
  5. The monkey isnt on the list. Is he not running?
     
  6. He can't run... term limits and all that. Only two chances to ruin one's legacy. ;)

    Far as my vote... meh... I am seriously hoping that a decent candidate comes out of the woodwork come next year. :x
     
  7. Boris Johnson - who else?
     
  8. Or Davie boy Camoron
     
  9. Hilary Clinton
     
  10. With mr.Clinton as the first Lad.

    Btw, is there American version of Putin among the candidates?
     
  11. That was Bush senior... ;)
     
  12. It's not a very attractive field. Hope to Christ that Hillary doesn't even get the Dem nomination.
    Obama seems to be saying most of the right things, but if he tries to run a 50-state strategy as a nominee he'll be toast. There are questions about his level of experience- but he's arguably just as experienced as JFK was, or the current fcukwit. But in contrast to Monkeyboy, at least Obama seems capable of some sort of higher cognitive function.

    Edwards is a lightwieght and a bit of a campaign moron. How you can proclaim to be a champion of the poor at the same time spend $400 on a haircut (for a bloke!) is beyond me.

    Gov. Bill Richardson looks promising, but a friend of mine who used to work for Sen Jeff Bingaman (also from New Mexico) is worried about skeletons in the closet. Don't know what they are, but it doesn't sound good.

    As for the Republicans-

    Looking at the candidate debates, I cannot help but think that if somebody asked me to come up with a parody of a Republican line-up I don't think even I'd have the temerity to dream up the collection of ass-clowns that are running for the GOP spot. We can rule out McCain. The way his fundraising is going he looks to be out of the race before the first primary vote. Romney's not getting the support he wants either. His books are being balanced by cheques he's righting himself.

    Giuliani, Mr 9/11 himself, is starting to take heat (excuse the pun) from Firefighters unions over underfunding and mismanagement while he was Mayor of NYC (deciding to put the crisis mgt center under the WTC instead of in a bunker in Brookyn like the FDNY and NYPD wanted was one thing). If they can change the frame in which Americans think about Rudi on 9/11, he's pretty fcuked too.

    As for most of the others, knuckle-dragging mouth-breathers that can perhaps shore up support from the American-Taleban, but are as attractive as a cat turd on a dinner plate to anyone who doesn't think that The Rapture is imminent.

    There are two would-be stalking horses. Fred Thompson on the right, and Al Gore on the left. Gore is smart enough to know that he had his chance and blew it. Americans don't like a loser, Dems don't want to be reminded of how they fcuked up in 2000 and his base and organization has already been taken over by the Clintonistas.

    Thompson is the guy the Republicans are praying for, but he really needs to get himself organised. Right now it seems like he only ever opens his mouth to change feet. About 3-4 weeks ago, a reporter asked him what he thought his greatest accomplishments in the Senate (where he served 2 x 6year terms) were. He couldn't name anything. More recently, he decided to take a swipe at Michael Moore's decision to take 9/11 rescue and recovery workers to Cuba for treatment. He said this was supporting Castro's regime. At the same time, there was a magazine article floating around referring to Thompson's love for smoking Cuban cigars. Look at any interview with him and you'll see that right now he pushing all the right GOP buttons on things like abortion, gay, marriage, gun control etc. but when he is asked (even by Fox News) to explain his position, he can't give a good reason- especially when his record and previous statements contradict his current position.

    Right now the Dems are getting a lot more campaign money coming in. Don't expect this to last. Republicans are waiting to see someone they like, or at least a front-runner, before they'll commit their cash.
     
  13. The next presidential election is in the Democrat's court to win or lose... if they insist on nominating a liberal rather than middle of the road candidate, they will regret it. Take a gander at the seats gained by the Dems in Congress last election cycle... the bulk of them are fairly conservative or centerist in nature. Outside a couple of enclaves (New England and California) Americans tend to be conservative and will vote that way.

    For the record, our political parties contained both liberals and conservatives until they started to polarize during the late Reagen years. Bill Clinton was smart by running a middle of the road campaign and not letting his parties more left leaning members do the talking for him.
     
  14. Jack Bauer gets my vote. All the USA's problems solved in 24 hours..... 8)