If you were American who would you vote for?

[Aeneas]

Just watched quite alot of the CNN You Tube debate, must have been a re broadcast or something. After this, I don't really trust Edwards. Just something about him bothers me. Clinton has bothered me ever since right after 9/11 when Bush (whether you hate him is irrelevant) gave a great moving speech to congress or senate (or both)? and she was visible giving a desultory, rather phony clap. Just bugged me then. I felt if there was anytime to ever put aside your differences, it was then. A couple of the others I certainly would not vote for, but after this info and reading Obama's book...I would vote for him.

ps Also I really liked him in the movie, "Rundown"

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

It takes a sitting President to deploy troops into combat. Motives aside Kennedy is responsible for America entering Vietnam. Wasn't it Truman who said "the buck stops here". Carter and Reagan are examples of other Presidents who change course on foreign policy during their tenor in the White house. If Kennedy can be excused from Vietnam, the Bay of Pigs, and the deployment of nukes in Turkey because he was just following previous policy then that very same arguement can be used to demonstrate his poor leadership as President.

I guess I'm playing the devil's advocate a little here. I don't think Kennedy
was a terrible President. I just get tired of hearing about his presumed greatness. The world was lucky to survive his Presidency.

I think you misunderstood the tone of my post. It wasn't meant to be apologetic to Kennedy, but rather to point out that it wasn't just JFK who decided Vietnam was a threat and worthy of invasion.

Pinning the Vietnam War on Kennedy would be like pinning the Iraq War on George W. Bush. Sure, you could say that 'the buck stops here', and when it comes down to it, he did order the troops in, but really, this war had been coming for a long time just as Vietnam had been prior to the overt aggression, just like World War II (and America's involvement in it) had been coming as well.

I think 'American Liberalism' is fortunate that Kennedy was assassinated, it only served to cement the 'Camelot' obtuseness into the political psyche. If he had been allowed to continue on administering policy the way he had been, I think American Liberalism would've been killed, or wounded stunningly.

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I think 'American Liberalism' is fortunate that Kennedy was assassinated, it only served to cement the 'Camelot' obtuseness into the political psyche. If he had been allowed to continue on administering policy the way he had been, I think American Liberalism would've been killed, or wounded stunningly.

That's a lot of conjecture on your part. We young people at the time had a lot of faith in Kennedy and the course he was on, especially on dealing with human rights. There was a sense in the air that the world was in for some big changes and Kennedy was a part of it. His assassination was a blow to forward thinking people. His replacement, Johnson had some good motives but didn't really know what was going on.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

That's a lot of conjecture on your part. We young people at the time had a lot of faith in Kennedy and the course he was on, especially on dealing with human rights. There was a sense in the air that the world was in for some big changes and Kennedy was a part of it. His assassination was a blow to forward thinking people. His replacement, Johnson had some good motives but didn't really know what was going on.

That's a fair statement. I meant to edit my post stating that was wholly my own opinion, but forgot.

I think it all depends on how you view some of his policies. The work of the Kennedys (bobby, then attorney general is included in cases like brazil) in Latin America is appalling.

[oldschoolcalgary]

if i had a vote, right now it would be for Obama...the hope being that he hasn't been corrupted by the political machine yet. The downside is experience of course, but he is a very bright guy, so that always helps.

The notion of voting for someone *cough*GWB*cough* because he is "folksy" or speaks like a 'regular guy' is completely frustrating to me...personally, I want my PM, or in this case President, to be much, much smarter that I am...

the truth is, the democrats would be better off losing the election because of what the republicans have done to the economy - it is in shambles and the democrats are going to be vilified by the GOP for raising taxes, cutting defense spending etc...but there is a financial crisis looming and i'd prefer the GOP to be in office when the sht hits the fan...

[Cowperson]

I couldn't resist adding to this thread this beautiful job of character assassination of Rudi's wife in the gossip column of the New York Post this morning, originating in Vanity Fair:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/07302007...ix/pagesix.htm

Cowperson

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

You're right, all those silly jews who fled Germany should've tried to stick around and fix things, or the aristocratic cubans who fled before the revolution, or the Americans who fled to escape the meat grinder of vietnam, or the former politburo members who fled russia prior to the collapse of the soviet union or the russian aristocrats who fled 70 years earlier following the February Revolution.

I can tell you right now, if I were american, I'd try to leave too.

Can you please provide some facts as to the American government executing citizen minorities in large pizza ovens and gas chambers. I am sure there is a news story from Oberman or NY Times that indicates people are being dragged off the street and killed.

Amazingly I havent heard of such. Thanks for possibly IMO the most bloated holier than though full of BS post on CP.

MYK

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by Cowperson

I couldn't resist adding to this thread this beautiful job of character assassination of Rudi's wife in the gossip column of the New York Post this morning, originating in Vanity Fair:

http://www.nypost.com/seven/07302007...ix/pagesix.htm

Cowperson

Not surprising, the owners of Vanity Fair were big Clinton financial backers for his second term.

MYK

[KAI]

Originally Posted by Azure

Yes, a good way to run from your problems...

Run from your problems??? I would leave because the "problem"
is americains not america. After all Bush did they still voted him in for a secound term. So i guess ya i would run, because if i am surrounded by Bush supporters i feel no shame in running.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by KAI

Run from your problems??? I would leave because the "problem"
is americains not america. After all Bush did they still voted him in for a secound term. So i guess ya i would run, because if i am surrounded by Bush supporters i feel no shame in running.

I think the only reason Bush got a second term is because Kerry was just a horrible candidate... people opted for the devil they know, rather than the devil they don't. The problem is the candidates who win these primaries tend to appeal to the fringes way too much, since those people tend to come out in highest number.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by FireFly

Yes and no. In regards to equal representation, the US lags behind a lot of other nations. In the almost 300 years it's been around, the US has only ever had old white dudes running the country. If they were to elect a female or a black man, and that person were then to be considered a good president, you might see more equality in other areas.

You're right, people should be looking at a person's stance on isses and not their skin colour or sex. However, the fact is, they aren't. That alone should tell you the state of equality in the US.

Either one of Obama or Clinton would make an excellent president. The question is which barrier do they want to break first? The colour barrier or the sex barrier? Or are they too afraid of change to do either and will stick with what they know?

Until Canada actually votes in a female candidate, or someone who isn't French, English, Irish, Scottish or Welsh in ancestry, I don't think we're much different.

I think people are listening to Clinton and Obama's ideas... I just don't think a lot of people like them... they are a little too liberal for the average American. I think the fact that a woman and a black man are the front runners for the Democrats speaks to how far that country has progressed in the past 50 years. Lets be honest... even if those two are a little too liberal, if they get to run against someone as right wing as Tancredo, Romney or Huckabee... they'll be the first elected woman and/or minority in North America (if they run together).

[flames_1987]

Obama without a doubt. Was a huge fan of this guy before he even announced his candidcy. He's one of the few polticans left who actually has an authentic personality. I don't want to come off as painting America as a racist country, but sadly I just can't see at this time America electing a black president.

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Until Canada actually votes in a female candidate, or someone who isn't French, English, Irish, Scottish or Welsh in ancestry, I don't think we're much different.

I think people are listening to Clinton and Obama's ideas... I just don't think a lot of people like them... they are a little too liberal for the average American. I think the fact that a woman and a black man are the front runners for the Democrats speaks to how far that country has progressed in the past 50 years. Lets be honest... even if those two are a little too liberal, if they get to run against someone as right wing as Tancredo, Romney or Huckabee... they'll be the first elected woman and/or minority in North America (if they run together).

Not saying we aren't, although we have had a female party leader before and as such, a female candidate for Prime Minister. She lost the vote because of her party, not because of her sex.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by KAI

Run from your problems??? I would leave because the "problem"
is americains not america. After all Bush did they still voted him in for a secound term. So i guess ya i would run, because if i am surrounded by Bush supporters i feel no shame in running.

Oh please...cut the crap. Less than 30% of the country still supports Bush...and there is this little clause in the US constitution that says George W. Bush cannot be President one more term. Your excuse is weak.