Quote Originally Posted by Kokichi View Post
But on the subject of Democrats, Hilary would be a better choice.

First woman president. Bill by her side. If she dies, Bill would become president again. Breaking history by breaking history.

And ah. When was the last time our economy was through prosperity? That's right. When Bill was president.

And if it's her last two terms, he MAY get to run again. But the Constitution wasn't set up for this. Our founding fathers never foresaw a woman or a colored president. <3

Experience > Ideals.
How so? She does well, we're still stuck where we were before in about four to eight years; she doesn't, same problem. Obama screws up, but at least he tried, the new and the experimental is the way to go for a nation of disinterest and utter mistrust of the government. He does well, we become this uber-nation of uber that actually might care. Kick reason to the curb; his potential to do well is far greater than Hillary's and if he screws up, he'll either screw up less, or anger people enough that people will give enough of a damn again. Zero-sum game: go for the one who loses less.

VP becomes President when the President is incapacitated, not the first Lady (Man). After that, it passes on through certain Congressmen, and eventually down to the Cabinet, based on date of creation.

What, the kiss of death, this is all about the economy? We aren't in recession, the FED has already slashed interest rates, twice, and financial reports are effectively one fiscal quarter late, meaning that reports we get now are distorted and from a previous time. They do not necessarily reflect the situation at hand. Furthermore, the growth of the GDP has been over 1% for the past three quarters, so we are, by definition, not in recession. Before you throw me "but the dollar sucks," you wouldn't give a flying smurf about the well-being of the dollar if we were not using it to compare to both other countries and the purchase of foreign oil. You'd only see it in a self-contained perspective. People complain "ohh, we're in recession" and don't know what it means, yet I have yet to hear people complain about the cost of vegetables or milk.

You know that they left it open ended because they would never have imagined that people would re-elect someone for too many times; mutual distrust. Two terms was precedent set by George Washington. It wasn't until FDR that they realized that four terms was too many, so I fail to see how the ascendancy of the president has anything to do with a woman or colored person in the office. If anything, it was foreseen, and it was ignored, because the rights of the people would eventually grow over time. How does being black or female over or under-qualify you to be the president? Ohh, wait, that's right, because we totally choose people based on merit.

She has experience? The whole of roughly the same amount of time as a Senator as Obama, except she got to be there for Bill's presidency? For all the things she did in office, they were at best laughable.

Quote Originally Posted by duckie View Post
I'd rather have someone go into office who actually has some morals.

I really wish we had a more conservative candidate.
I still think that McCain is more like a liberal in a conservative disguise. That's why I wouldn't be voting (if I could). No conservatives.
... and what morals do you speak of? Are you using them in a comparative sense to religion? You can be a good person and not follow religion. Super-uber-conservatives can be equally evil and threatening to the welfare of the state as the mentally compromised terrorist.

Then you (and your good friend Rush Limbaugh) should have supported Mitt Romney while you had the chance. If the hardcore Conservatives complain about McCain getting into office, they only have themselves to blame.