- Joined
- Jan 13, 2007
- Messages
- 939
- Reaction score
- 84
- Points
- 28
- Location
- Akron, Ohio
- Your Mac's Specs
- C2D MacBook Pro
This is all politics. I am genuinely interested in why people are supporting specific candidates. Although I am sure debate will happen here, don't flame or degrade this thread. This is a big turning point for our country, regardless of what side of the aisle you are on. I think a mature discussion of the pros and cons of candidates will better all of us. Remember, debate is not about changing other's opinions or beliefs, but about strengthening your own. Keep that it mind when posting...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To start, I am a Hillary supporter. I simply feel as if she is the best qualified candidate in the race, Republican or Democrat.
Truthfully, it was between Clinton, Obama, and Ron Paul. I initially supported Obama. I found his idealism to be refreshing. He is young, smart, funny, and knows how to speak. He could really be a uniting force in our country. However, I simply feel that he is too inexperienced. He will have his time, but that time is not now. Also, the more I considered his idealism, the more I realized how out-of-place it would be right now. We need a strong leader. We need someone who can get results as soon as s/he gets into office. I just don't think Obama can do that yet. Once again, maybe later. He has a long career ahead of him.
Ron Paul was my next choice. He is a lot of what every libertarian dreams of having as president. I was originally turned off by his stance on immigration, but I realized how insignificant that was compared to his drive to minimize government. I really do believe that our government has become too big and expanded in all the wrong areas. When government decides how best to protect ME from MYSELF, I see some serious issues.
But Ron Paul, along with every other second-tier and third-party candidate, simply can NOT get things done if elected. They would not have the political capital to carry through with the changes they want to initiate. Even with a mandate (which is now defined by politicians as any kind of majority, though I think that is really pushing it), it would be incredibly slow to get the smallest changes through congress. Our system was built to resist sudden change, for good reason. These candidates always have and will continue to have an indirect effect on politics, but they will not get elected. The two party system, rightly, will not disappear anytime soon.
This brings me to Hillary. Hillary has so many redeeming qualities, that I tend to forget about some policy matters that I may not exactly agree on. First, she is an experienced politician. She knows how and when to work the system. She has had her failures, and has learned much from them. Further, she has developed vast amounts of political capital. She can get things done. Second, she is a cold, calculating women. She does not make decisions on whims or a change of heart. She may not have much for emotion or personality, but do we really need that now? We need someone to lead us out of a war, not lead us in a prayer service. Third, she is incredibly nonpartisan. She has worked with some 40+ Republican senators in her term. She won over 50% of the vote in traditionally conservative upstate New York. Many former critics are now saying that she is quite enjoyable to work with in congress. In short, she can unite when needed. Lastly, she is smart. Say what you want about Hillary, but her intelligence is undeniable. We are done with practitioners (Bush). We need intelligence in office.
And the other Republican candidates? Ha! They have little by way of virtues. They are frantically trying to keep in their religious right base that is finally sick of being fed empty promises for years, while still trying to keep traditional conservatives, who are sick of being part of the 'moral' party, in line. It is simply not going to work.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So please tell me why YOU are supporting YOUR candidate. I'm looking forward to reading through everyone's huge paragraphs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To start, I am a Hillary supporter. I simply feel as if she is the best qualified candidate in the race, Republican or Democrat.
Truthfully, it was between Clinton, Obama, and Ron Paul. I initially supported Obama. I found his idealism to be refreshing. He is young, smart, funny, and knows how to speak. He could really be a uniting force in our country. However, I simply feel that he is too inexperienced. He will have his time, but that time is not now. Also, the more I considered his idealism, the more I realized how out-of-place it would be right now. We need a strong leader. We need someone who can get results as soon as s/he gets into office. I just don't think Obama can do that yet. Once again, maybe later. He has a long career ahead of him.
Ron Paul was my next choice. He is a lot of what every libertarian dreams of having as president. I was originally turned off by his stance on immigration, but I realized how insignificant that was compared to his drive to minimize government. I really do believe that our government has become too big and expanded in all the wrong areas. When government decides how best to protect ME from MYSELF, I see some serious issues.
But Ron Paul, along with every other second-tier and third-party candidate, simply can NOT get things done if elected. They would not have the political capital to carry through with the changes they want to initiate. Even with a mandate (which is now defined by politicians as any kind of majority, though I think that is really pushing it), it would be incredibly slow to get the smallest changes through congress. Our system was built to resist sudden change, for good reason. These candidates always have and will continue to have an indirect effect on politics, but they will not get elected. The two party system, rightly, will not disappear anytime soon.
This brings me to Hillary. Hillary has so many redeeming qualities, that I tend to forget about some policy matters that I may not exactly agree on. First, she is an experienced politician. She knows how and when to work the system. She has had her failures, and has learned much from them. Further, she has developed vast amounts of political capital. She can get things done. Second, she is a cold, calculating women. She does not make decisions on whims or a change of heart. She may not have much for emotion or personality, but do we really need that now? We need someone to lead us out of a war, not lead us in a prayer service. Third, she is incredibly nonpartisan. She has worked with some 40+ Republican senators in her term. She won over 50% of the vote in traditionally conservative upstate New York. Many former critics are now saying that she is quite enjoyable to work with in congress. In short, she can unite when needed. Lastly, she is smart. Say what you want about Hillary, but her intelligence is undeniable. We are done with practitioners (Bush). We need intelligence in office.
And the other Republican candidates? Ha! They have little by way of virtues. They are frantically trying to keep in their religious right base that is finally sick of being fed empty promises for years, while still trying to keep traditional conservatives, who are sick of being part of the 'moral' party, in line. It is simply not going to work.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So please tell me why YOU are supporting YOUR candidate. I'm looking forward to reading through everyone's huge paragraphs