Which Candidate In The US Presidental Race Do You Support?

Post Reply New Topic

Dennis Kucinich!! !! !

read up on him, the guy's incredible AND has a hot wife!!

Oh, here's his platform:
On December 11, 2006 in a speech delivered at Cleveland City Hall, Kucinich announced he would seek the nomination of the Democratic Party for President in 2008. His platform[34] for 2008 includes:
Creating a single-payer system of universal health care that provides full coverage for all Americans by passage of the United States National Health Insurance Act.
The immediate, phased withdrawal of all U.S. forces from Iraq; replacing them with an international security force.
Guaranteed quality education for all; including free pre-kindergarten and college for all who want it.
Immediate withdrawal from the World Trade Organization (WTO) and North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).
Repealing the USA PATRIOT Act.
Fostering a world of international cooperation.
Abolishing the death penalty.
Environmental renewal and clean energy.
Preventing the privatization of social security.
Providing full social security benefits at age 65.
Creating a cabinet-level "Department of Peace"
Ratifying the ABM Treaty and the Kyoto Protocol.
Introducing reforms to bring about instant-runoff voting.
Protecting a woman's right to choose while decreasing the number of abortions performed in the U.S.
Ending the war on drugs.
Legalizing same-sex marriage.
Creating a balance between workers and corporations.
Ending the H1B and L1 Visa Programs
Restoring rural communities and family farms.
Strengthening gun control.


here's his wiki page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_kucinich

i like kucinich but not for right now.

Far and away the best that there
is on ideas.

Not sure if he's smart enough though.

if kucinich gets past the primaries, i'd definitely vote for him. there's certain guys i'd go for....but the leading candidates on the dem and republican side both suck.

i'll probably vote third party if it really comes down to something ugly like hillary and fred thompson.

Yeah. I remember kinda liking Thompson,
back as a Senator. His views became that
polarized?

Clinton will probably win, I dunno if Obama will be her running mate or not, there's no telling. I don't really think she'd be a good president though. She's supporting a lot of bad organizations.
Anyone who votes for her **just because** she's a female, or would vote for someone like Al Sharpton **just because** he's black, that would be highly ignorant. I'm not against voting for a female or for a black man but that isn't what I'm looking at in picking a candidate. I'm looking at what they are able to do for my country, and for the people (who the politicians here don't really care about).
We need more parties, parties that aren't restricted to narrow ideologies. The American political spectrum has created sickeningly black and white thinking patterns of ignorance among our populace, which is highly dangerous for us as a nation.
From the candidates that I've seen, if I had to pick one, I'd pick Jesse Ventura, an independent, because he seems the most honest and logical. But I realise if an independent ever gets elected, it will be a long time from now.

he's trying to be ronald reagan. i don't want another nazi in office.

Although I am becoming more Libertarian, I would vote for Bill Richardson because he looks like John Belushi.

Tim

Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama or John Edwards.

Hmmmmm....
Lary Curly or Moe?

I';; go for Moe (Edwards) on that one!

I am not likely to be interested.
I would still push for a private system, a significant number of our current problems in my eyes are because of government interventions(bad development of the insurance industry due to tax loopholes during ww2, overregulation of medicine, wasteful procedures, etc)
Free college is going to tie college to the state even more, this will likely include greater regulation and standardization of it, I also view the collegic system as a sick system where we need to find another alternative.
I worship free trade..... just joking, but free trade and economic growth are shown to be correlated, and free trade increases resource efficiency.
I would prefer a private system as I want people to control their own retirement as it is their money. The current system is paternalistic in my opinion. I also am not a fan of the method he is using to fix the system, I would prefer delaying benefits or cutting back as given the changes in the way things are working, we would be assuming a large tax burden through this measure.

I tend to distrust "balances". Balance is merely a term to mean a large amount of regulation that will likely stiffen the labor market and prevent possible productive trades.

I disagree with these measures, the labor mobility provided by these visas will increase the efficient allocation of this highly skilled labor. I see no reason to get rid of these visas, if anything we should liberalize immigration and other measures rather than cut these things away.
Not my concern, nor do I think it is a necessary goal of the government. If the rural communities aren't doing so well then perhaps they shouldn't exist, I don't see a reason to subsidize people just because they live in a certain location.

In a nutshell, your views are exactly those of the Conservative Liberal/National government under John Howard that we have here. I intend to vote ALP (Australian Labour Party) as I have in every other election, because they were founded by the union movement and there policies are fairer and more oriented toward the people, rather than the rich and greedy. Our election is in about one or two months, and Howard's conservatives are not getting my vote. If I vote anything else, it will be Independent.

Exactly? I tend to doubt it. I am an American libertarian, not a conservative. John Howard however is a conservative. I don't consider my policies driven to pursue the good of the rich and greedy, I do think that they are the best policies in general. I think that the issue is that you consider markets to be tools of the rich and greedy, I see markets as symbolic of freedom and as efficient measures to promote the common welfare. To support the rich and greedy in my mind would be to pursue inefficient regulations, maintain loopholes, and subsidize corporations willy-nilly, things that are being done under the current system. To be honest, I find a certain amount of truth in the fact that the Soviet Union ended up having one of the most inegalitarian distributions of wealth of a relatively modern society.

I already knew you were a lefty though.

Even though I made a vow to never elect a Republican EVER again, I plan on voting for Ron Paul. (However, he's a Libertarian running as a Republican.)

Hillary scares me. Obama has no experience. And Rudy probably will just end up saying "9/11" during his inauguration ceremony if he's elected.

Even though Ron Paul has some political views I don't agree with, I still think he's the best for our country in 2008.

Aside from the fact that he's unelectable of course.

Along with ANYONE I'd be willing to vote for.