As much as it pains me to say it, I believe I will not be able to vote this election seeing that the most conservative that is running is Hilary and I would rather see an actual jack-*** take the presidency than her. Sen. John McCain to me is the republican equivalent to Kerry, not to mention that he wants to raise taxes and give amnesty to millions of illegal’s. The only one who I might vote for (very small chance) is Obama, but I really don’t see that happening either. Unless I can get some rational reasoning to why I should vote for one of them, I won’t be able to, so I need you guys help. Convince me.

What about Huckabee and Paul? They haven't dropped out of the race (just yet).

Also, if McCain does get the nomination, his running mate might still be a very conservative guy.

Originally Posted by jamestl2

What about Huckabee and Paul? They haven't dropped out of the race (just yet).

Also, if McCain does get the nomination, his running mate might still be a very conservative guy.

Paul is truly statistically impossible to win. Huckabee is very close to statistically impossible (If Romneys delegates go according to his instructions, Huckabee is already walking dead).

You got a point about a conservative running mate though. I think if he chose Romney, I'd feel a lot better about voting for him, and maybe even CC too .

CC, regarding voting for Obama, I know I said the same thing, but it will be interesting to see if people like you and I will be able to pull the trigger if and when the time comes. Obama is ranked the most liberal senator on the hill by independent polling organizations, and would well meaningly do great and long lasting damage to the U.S. if elected. Its easy to say, "A terrorist nuke going off in downtown chicago" would put people back to sensible thinking, but none of us really want to see that happen.

This doesn't surprise me since we basically have a one-party system now. Liberal Republicans and Conservative Democrats and vice versa smear the ballots. Is there really any difference anymore? Is this whole thing a false dichotomy? It's looking more and more so.

Originally Posted by cbwm

would well meaningly do great and long lasting damage to the U.S. if elected.

If America has been able to survive 7 years of George W Bush, there's nothing Obama could possibly do to hurt us.

If America has been able to survive 7 years of George W Bush, there's nothing Obama could possibly do to hurt us.

Amen to that !

Long-lasting damage to the US -- lets see.. .what do you call an unbelievably MASSIVE, MASSIVE debt that keeps growing daily as long as Shrub's war keeps going on--and on-- and on-- and on.....
--what about the US household debts and the mortgage mess that is fueled by Bush's kowtowing and looking the other way and refusing to institute any REAL controls because he can't offend his butt buddies in the banking and credit industries ??

I could go on.. there's lots more in that very deep well of garbage Shrub has piled on the American people - -you don't call that DAMAGE?? I sure do !

Oh.. and his latest nonsense - -thinking that Cuba will 'embrace democracy' now that Castro is stepping down - talk about delusional ! - Cuba will never be democratic as long as a CASTRO is in control - Fidel's brother is worse than he is !!

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

If America has been able to survive 7 years of George W Bush, there's nothing Obama could possibly do to hurt us.

Seriously. If x=0 then y must be > 0? I'm missing the logic there. I think it is safe to say America is in better shape than it would have been with either Gore or Kerry. President Lurch. Please.

Originally Posted by LadynRed

--what about the US household debts and the mortgage mess that is fueled by Bush's kowtowing and looking the other way and refusing to institute any REAL controls because he can't offend his butt buddies in the banking and credit industries ??

Well, while I agree that the responsibility buck needs to stop with the president for things that happen under his watch (Clinton and N.Korean Nukes, JFK and Vietnam/Cuban Missle crisis, etc etc etc.), I think you'd have a hard time producing evidence directly associating responsibility for the sub-prime mess with Shrub.

Originally Posted by LadynRed

I could go on.. there's lots more in that very deep well of garbage Shrub has piled on the American people - -you don't call that DAMAGE?? I sure do !

I don't. I call it damage control. The U.S. gets sh*t on by a series of circumstances not created by Shrub, Shrub hands you a sh*t proof umbrella, and most of America is busy complaining they got some on their shoes.

Originally Posted by LadynRed

Oh.. and his latest nonsense - -thinking that Cuba will 'embrace democracy' now that Castro is stepping down - talk about delusional ! - Cuba will never be democratic as long as a CASTRO is in control - Fidel's brother is worse than he is !!

You mean Fidel light? The Cuban people have already embraced capitalism. It is alive and well, though illegal. The illegality of it all is why they pile onto rafts and risk their lives and those of their children, to get to America. How is it that Learning Newbie argues that the USSR with communism was a system that could not financially last, yet Cuba defies that, as you have pointed out. Oh yeh, it is because Reagan brought them down. Thanks for proving the point. By the way, I agree, Cuba will not change. Those in power don't just give it up. The best shot they have is that Fidel Light looses control and they revolt.

Originally Posted by cbwm

Seriously. If x=0 then y must be > 0? I'm missing the logic there. I think it is safe to say America is in better shape than it would have been with either Gore or Kerry. President Lurch. Please.

I think the Iraqis will greet us as liberators and throw flowers instead of the WMD they hid so well and forgot to use against us when they got invaded. Please.

Speaking of missing logic, do you honestly believe that because you can think of a silly nickname (Pres Lurch) it's worse than Bush bankrupting America fiscally and morally, costing us the respect of most of our allies, and tieing America down in a war we can't win - and have no national interest in winning?

You think the fact that Kerry was at least intelligent disqualifies him, while the fact Junior Bush has never run a successful business in his life is somehow a good thing? Look what he did to every oil company Texans let him get his hands on - he did the same thing to America. Remember those miners in Utah after Bush gutted all the mining (and all other types of) regulation? Thank God we don't have any Republicans running in this election - there's nothing left to steal.

I promise you this. During his 8 years in office, Barak Obama will never do anything half as bad as what Bush allowed with Enron.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

Speaking of missing logic, do you honestly believe that because you can think of a silly nickname (Pres Lurch) it's worse than Bush bankrupting America fiscally and morally, costing us the respect of most of our allies, and tieing America down in a war we can't win - and have no national interest in winning?

I would respond, but the question is factually wrong. War we cant win? Have no national interest in winning? Wrong on both points, though I'm sure you disagree. Here is something we can agree on. True liberals and Barak Obama agree with your statements, true conservatives and John McCain disagree with them. Polling data indicates that the majority of independents side with the conservatives on the subject. Effectively, if John McCain manages to keep the focus of this election on Iraq, Dems loose.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

You think the fact that Kerry was at least intelligent disqualifies him, while the fact Junior Bush has never run a successful business in his life is somehow a good thing?

I'm sorry, what business did Kerry run? They are both silver spoon kids. Regarding intelligence, Kerry scored lower than Bush on his SATs, IQ test, and Yale GPA. I guess the name Lurch fit him in more ways than one.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

I promise you this. During his 8 years in office, Barak Obama will never do anything half as bad as what Bush allowed with Enron.

So you would consider a nuke going off in a U.S. City, which would be the president's fault, to be less a problem than what happened at Enron, which is not the presidents fault. hmmm. If not a nuke, than how many lives would you weigh the equivalent? How bout the economy? If Obama's tax hikes slide us into a depression, would that be worse than what Ken Lay did with Enron? x=0 so Y must be 9. Missing a few steps.

Originally Posted by cbwm

So you would consider a nuke going off in a U.S. City, which would be the president's fault, to be less a problem than what happened at Enron

I don't know where this fantasy of a nuke going off in a major US city comes from? But no, I would consider things that happened in reality to be more of a problem than things that have never happened, but excite conservatives.

Originally Posted by cbwm

which is not the presidents fault

Exactly how many sleep overs did Ken Lay have at George W Bush's house? Enron was allowed to happen by Ken Lay's BFF, GWB.

I can't believe you said that with a straight face - at least I have the consistancy and honesty not to say ridiculous things like "Putting his **** in Monica's mouth wasn't the president's fault." Not that Clinton's oral sex bankrupted tens of thousands of regular people.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

Exactly how many sleep overs did Ken Lay have at George W Bush's house? Enron was allowed to happen by Ken Lay's BFF, GWB.

As I remember, OJ Simpson had quite a few high society friends prior to killing his wife. Are you saying they were complicit by association? Sorry you need better evidence than that.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

I can't believe you said that with a straight face

How do you know what expression I had on my face? I was wearing sunglasses at the time!

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

If America has been able to survive 7 years of George W Bush, there's nothing Obama could possibly do to hurt us.

Let’s see what could he possibly do to hurt us, I’ll take a stab at that.

1. Obama has well stated that as soon as he is elected he will start bringing back troops from Iraq. And in his plan, it states that he will continue to bring back all troops save for a few minor units to protect and train Iraqi police. Now my question is what do you think will happen to those few lonely US troops that were left in such a hostile environment? 1993 Somalia comes to mind, whose term was that by the way?

2. Lets assume that everything goes to plan in Iraq and people shout the name of Obama from the streets of Iraq, there are still a lot of other threats to the US, and say what you want about Bush but he was not afraid to protect the US at all cost and there has not been another terrorist attack on American soil since 9/11. What do you think terrorist will do when the see a leader take office who has condemned Bush on all his dealings with national security.

3. Our country is in financial crisis, which is no secret. What will happen when Obama starts to spend more government money on liberal government programs, which Obama has already said he is going to do.

I could go on but I’ll stop here.

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

I promise you this. During his 8 years in office, Barak Obama will never do anything half as bad as what Bush allowed with Enron.

Do you really think that Enron pulled off one of the biggest business scandals’ in American History at the hand of Bush who had only been in office a few months?

Originally Posted by cbwm

As I remember, OJ Simpson had quite a few high society friends prior to killing his wife. Are you saying they were complicit by association? Sorry you need better evidence than that.

Wow. Let me see if I can quote this guy called cbwm "If you want to have an argument but discount all facts and evidence and statistics, let me find my bong. Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. Ok, yeah, uh, Bush is a really cool guy 'cause he talks funny like I do when I get really really high. I like Bush, he's the best president in history, it says right here on the comedy channel, Fox. My buzz is wearing off, what's this rubbish about Ken Lay not having provided significant fiscal support for Bush's campaigns and helped write energy deregulation legislation?"

Originally Posted by Cheshire_cat

Do you really think that Enron pulled off one of the biggest business scandals’ in American History at the hand of Bush who had only been in office a few months?

Are you admitting that Enron actually happened - and was a business scandle?

Originally Posted by Learning Newbie

Are you admitting that Enron actually happened - and was a business scandle?

yes.

Originally Posted by Cheshire_cat

1993 Somalia comes to mind, whose term was that by the way?

As bad as that was, it doesn't compare to Lebanon 1983 and we know whose term that was.

I agree with the OP that Hillary would be a terrible thing for this Country if she were elected President.

IMHO, she would be one of the most terrible things that has ever happened to the country, but there is one thing that would be much much worse, and that is if Oboma-Hussein won the elections. I just cannot comprehend how anyone in their right mind could vote for a liberal, Bible hating, anti-American nut, who refuses to face or even display our American flag. Where has common sense gone in America??????

McCain is not my favorite guy in the world either. If it comes down to it though, then I believe that he would be much better than either of the two democrat alternatives. Hopefully, if he gets the nomination he will pick a running mate like Mike Huckabee, who has some sense and moral values.

You know, there's a much easier solution to this whole election thing. The perfect candidate has been under everyone's noses the whole time and no one's talking about him.

Christopher Walken.

No one would ever do anything to America on his watch. They'd be too scared because he's legitimately creepy. "You gonna drop a nuke here? Well I know people in your country who'd have no problem hacking your balls off and forcing you to watch as they flush 'em down the toilet. I'm not saying it will happen, but it might, and you probably don't want that to happen."

I hereby endorse Walken in 2008.