Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
The Presidential Candidate Ranking Game — Who is Worse?
While sharing cocktails with some delightful Reasonoids at the Happy Hour at The Big Hunt earlier this month, I initiated a little game of ranking presidential candidates. I began by saying that I would have to vote for Hillary Clinton if Mike Huckabee were the Republican presidential candidate. On further reflection, I added that I would have to vote for Mike Huckabee if John Edwards were the Democratic candidate. So my short ranking is that Edwards is worse than Huckabee who is worse than Clinton. On further consideration (and some cocktails later), I began to wonder if reason needs a foreign correspondent for the next four years or so.
I invite Hit & Run readers to play this little dispiriting ranking game among themselves.
Taktix®|1.23.08 @ 11:22AM|#
I think I'd vote Edwards over Huckabee. A religious nutjob would be able to push through more legislation than a socialist nutjob.
Daldude|1.23.08 @ 11:25AM|#
Really!? Edwards worse than Huckabee? So you'd prefer a theocracy to some guy trying to curb corporate overreach? Man, that's one gigantic sacred cow you got there..
robc|1.23.08 @ 11:26AM|#
Hmmmm....
Ron Paul
[gap]
Whoever the LP nominates
[gap]
The recently departed Fred Thompson
[big gap]
the rest
Unless the LP fails to nominate someone or manages to nominate a
supreme loser (and I voted for Badnarik, so the bar isnt being set
high) I dont even have to consider what happens amongst the
rest.
|1.23.08 @ 11:27AM|#
Ron, I don't understand why you wouldn't say "Huck is worse than Clinton, therefore I'll vote third party." You remind me of the crowd in the classic Simpsons where Homer exposes Clinton & Dole to be actual aliens, in response to one man's suggestion that he'd be voting third party.
|1.23.08 @ 11:30AM|#
From worst to best:
Guiliani (he scares the shit out of me)
Huckabee
Edwards
Clinton/McCain (tie to be determined by a coin toss)
Romney
Obama
Paul
|1.23.08 @ 11:30AM|#
Jon: Need to know who the Third Party candidates are. But the
point of the game for me is to figure out who is worse not for whom
I actually plan to vote.
As the little old lady said when she was asked for whom she planned
to vote: "Vote, vote! I never vote! It only encourages them!"
jj|1.23.08 @ 11:34AM|#
I would generally go with the theocrat over the communist
fascist. But in Huckabee's case I think he is both. He'd probably
preside over a far greater expansion of republican government than
George Bush ever dreamed of doing.
Good news is we would all be thin and strumming guitars.
svf|1.23.08 @ 11:34AM|#
of the technically still-in-the race candidates...
Ron Paul > LP Nominee > Mike Gravel > Kucinich > Romney
> write-in > Edwards > Obama > Rudy > McCain >
Clinton > Huckabee
I feel nauseous...
robc|1.23.08 @ 11:34AM|#
Ron,
Then I need help - How do I consider who is worse between two
candidates I would never consider voting for? To me, they are both
equally bad. There is always a 3rd or 4th or 5th or Cynthia
McKinney party option.
Hmmm...I would vote McKinney (for the humor value) before any of
the ones I include in "the rest".
New World Dan|1.23.08 @ 11:34AM|#
robc, I'd put Mitt at the top of "the rest."
In the same vein, I'd probably vote Obama over Huckabee over
Hillary. Of course, it's a moot point as they're all below the
point at which I'd vote "None of the Above" ala Brewster's
Millions.
robc|1.23.08 @ 11:35AM|#
Should I plan on making a "Dont blame me - I voted McKinney" bumper sticker?
Episiarch|1.23.08 @ 11:37AM|#
As the little old lady said when she was asked for whom she
planned to vote: "Vote, vote! I never vote! It only encourages
them!"
This is my strategy. Who is worse, though...Giuliani and Huck are
pretty awful. Clinton is also awful, but not as scary. Obama has
good charisma, but his policies suck. Edwards is awful. Romney is
not too bad, but he would probably keep the war going.
They all suck.
|1.23.08 @ 11:38AM|#
Of the remaining candidates in the field with a chance of
winning their party's nomination (Clinton, Obama, and Edwards for
the Dems, Romney, Huckabee, Giuliani, and McCain for the GOP), I
would rank them as follows:
Romney
McCain
Clinton
Giuliani
Obama
Huckabee
Edwards
Sadly, none are much of a choice, although I consider there to be a
pretty sizable gap between Romney and McCain, and then again
between Huckabee and Edwards.
Other Matt|1.23.08 @ 11:41AM|#
I'd second Mo's list, with Obama quite a bit higher (higher
being more distasteful). However, that has a lot to do with me
owning a number of firearms, most black, not pretty wood
ones.
I just don't trust a guy that presents himself as a hallmark card.
Hillary I trust to be Hillary, at least we know what's coming, and
I believe she's much more of a pragmatist than people give her
credit for.
|1.23.08 @ 11:42AM|#
If Paul is not on the ballot I'll vote for whoever will bring about a major collapse faster.I think Clinton would be that candidate. Major expansion of government programs, a guarenteed Keynsian in the FED, continued war in Iraq and maybye even some humanitarian missions i.e. Darfur. Not to mention socialized medicine etc etc. Let's get it over with and then we can rebuild. Buy Gold.
robc|1.23.08 @ 11:44AM|#
Jackstraw,
I'll vote for whoever will bring about a major collapse
faster
Yet another reason to vote McKinney. I cant think of anything that
would lead to us starting over from scratch any faster.
Rimfax|1.23.08 @ 11:46AM|#
Presidential
Candidate Ranking Game at our
dumb wiki.
My best arbitrary choices as of now:
1 Paul
2 Obama
3 Romney
4 Clinton
5 McCain
6 Guiliani
7 Edwards
8 Huckabee
|1.23.08 @ 11:47AM|#
Ranked favorite to least favorite to most vomit-inducing:
Wayne Root
Ron Paul
Mike Gravel
Dennis Kucinich
Barack Obama
Mitt Romney
John McCain
Hillary Clinton
Huckleberry Hound
Rudy Giuliani
|1.23.08 @ 11:49AM|#
With the exception of Huckabilly, I'd take any of them over the choice I've got: Harper, Dion, & Layton.
The Democratic Republican|1.23.08 @ 11:53AM|#
Hale -- Good point on Wayne Root. Haven't been an LP member for
a long time; live in a state where he probably won't be on the
ballot; but he's the only other person I would vote for besides
Paul. I think he will/would be a good candidate.
Otherwise, I agree with the general consensus that puts Clinton and
Giuliani near the bottom.
|1.23.08 @ 11:55AM|#
Wrost to Best:
Giuliani
Huckabee
Romney
McCain
Clinton
Edwards
Sleeping in on Election Day
Paul
Gravel
Kucinich
Obama
|1.23.08 @ 11:55AM|#
Paul
Dead squirrel
Romney/Obama (between these two, I'd say "whoever's party isn't
controlling Congress" but if you made me pick with a split
Congress, I'd say Romneybot.)
Talk seriously about leaving the country
Clinton
McCain
Actually leave the country
Huckabee
John the Unicorn Bringer
Rudy the Brave
|1.23.08 @ 11:56AM|#
Level 1: could live with
Obama
Level 1.5: would say, "whatever"
Bloomberg
Level 2: unhappy with, possibly a bit frightened at the prospect
of
Clinton
Paul
Rudy G.
Level 3: pants-fillingly terrified might happen; gates of hell
opening; Canada beckons
Edwards
Romney
Huckabee
McCain
|1.23.08 @ 11:59AM|#
Best to worst -
1) Ron Paul
2) Barack Obama
3) John McCain
3) Mitt Romney
3) Hillary Clintom
6) Mike Gravel
7) Dennis Kucinich
23) John Edwards
99) Mike Huckabee
762) Rudy Giuliani
I'm not considering third party this November. Yet. It seems likely
that one of the two major parties will nominate someone I despise,
fear or both, forcing me to vote for someone I just don't really
like or support.
|1.23.08 @ 12:00PM|#
pants-fillingly terrified might happen
Had i the power to grant victory, Ethan would have won the
thread.
Alas, I do not.
Carry on.
|1.23.08 @ 12:03PM|#
I would consider voting for Obama or Romneybot against the
"bowels of hell" bracket, and I'd be thrilled to vote Paul.
Otherwise, we're just biding our time til I vote LP and regret
it.
B|1.23.08 @ 12:04PM|#
Paul >>> Obama >> Romney >
Giuliani/McCain/Clinton > Huckabee/Edwards
/ denotes a tie that I wouldn't consider worth breaking between
Dems and Reps.
I am actively seeking employment in Canada. No joke.
|1.23.08 @ 12:04PM|#
From worst to "first," including a couple no longer with us, and
with the caveat that this is purely academic since I won't be
voting anyway.
Huckabee
Edwards
Kucinich
Clinton
Giuliani
Obama
McCain
Romney
Richardson
Thompson
Paul
|1.23.08 @ 12:05PM|#
Ron Paul
Wayne Allyn Root
(big gap)
Mit Romney
(gap)
Mike Huckabee
Kucinich
John Mccain
Guliani
(gap)
Clinton
Obama Edwards
Mike|1.23.08 @ 12:08PM|#
Here's my ranking (best to worst):
1. Paul
2. Romney
3. LP
Will not vote for anything below here:
4. Huckabee
4. Clinton
5. Rudy
6. Obama
7. Edwards
8. McCain
|1.23.08 @ 12:12PM|#
Oooohh...if Paul doesn't get on the ballot. I'm writting in Dead squirrel. Who cares who wins at that point. But imagine Wolf Blitzer announcing "CNN now can project Hillary Clinton in a land slide victory followed by ..ahhemm..uh..Dead Squirrel..followed by Huckabee."Dead squirrel lawn signs, bumperstickers.
BakedPenguin|1.23.08 @ 12:14PM|#
Best to worst, with gaps for drop offs.
Kubby
Paul * (voted for in primary)
Root / Gravel /Obama
Thompson / Kucinich
Romney
Clinton / McCain
Edwards / Huckabee / Giuliani
Rimfax|1.23.08 @ 12:16PM|#
pants-fillingly terrified might happen
Legate Damar, no reason to be timid. I second your declaration of
Ethan as the thread winner.
Mark|1.23.08 @ 12:17PM|#
Tier 1: Will Remain in the Country
Obama
Paul
Tier 2: Would Think about Leaving, but Stay Anyways
McCain
Tier 3: I Hear Switzerland's Nice....
Huckabee (Wouldn't be able to do much of anything domestically and
would be a modest improvement on foreign policy - not a high bar, I
know)
Edwards (See Huckabee)
Tier 4: They Can't Reach Me On Easter Island, Right?
Hillary (Nixon in a Pantsuit)
Giuliani (Nixon Squared)
Romney (Would make Cheney's view of Executive Power look
quaint)
|1.23.08 @ 12:19PM|#
My ranking from worst to best:
10. Arthur J. Smith (SENSIBLE PARTY)
9. Jethro Q. Walrustitty (SILLY PARTY)
8. Alan Jones (SENSIBLE PARTY)
7. Tarquin Fin-tim-lin-bin-whin-bim-lim-bus-stop-
6. F'tang-F'tang-Olé-Biscuitbarrel (SILLY PARTY)
5. Kevin Phillips-Bong (SLIGHTLY SILLY PARTY)
4. Mr Elsie ZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzOOP (SILLY PARTY)
3. James Walker (SENSIBLE PARTY)
2. Malcolm Peter Brian Telescope Adrian Umbrella Stand Jasper
Wednesday (pops mouth twice) Stoatgobbler John Raw Vegetable (sound
effect of horse whinnying) Arthur Norman Michael (blows squeaker)
Featherstone Smith (blows whistle) Northgot Edwards Harris (fires
pistol, then 'whoop') Mason (chuff-chuff-chuff) Frampton Jones
Fruitbat Gilbert (sings) 'We'll keep a welcome in the' (three
shots, stops singing) Williams If I Could Walk That Way Jenkin
(squeaker) Tiger-drawers Pratt Thompson (sings) 'Raindrops Keep
Falling On My Head' Darcy Carter (horn) Pussycat 'Don't Sleep In
The Subway' Barton Mainwaring (hoot, 'whoop') Smith (VERY SILLY
PARTY)
1. None of the Above
Jozef|1.23.08 @ 12:23PM|#
I will actively pursue emigration if one of the following is
elected (in no particular order):
Hillary Clinton
John Edwards
Rudy Giuliani
Mike Huckabee
Mitt Romney
I'm not going to play the "vote for lesser evil" any longer.
|1.23.08 @ 12:25PM|#
From first preference to last (and only including the 2 major
parties)
1 Paul
2 Romney
3 Obama
4 Clinton
5 McCain
6 Edwards
7 Huckabee/Giuliani
When it comes to actual voting... unless I move to a state where it
won't automatically go to the dem nominee, I'll prefer to sit home
and drink.
|1.23.08 @ 12:26PM|#
I suspect Hillary would very, very much be "like" GW in attempts
to destroy constitutional government. Only with a little leftward
bound spice. Not as much as folks think though. I think she has
more in common Darth Vice president than people think, after the
first assignation attempt, will probably replace the Secret Service
with a blackwater type group, heralding the end of the Roman Senate
(or is that the US senate?).
Ghouliani? Well, populist facism ain't my thing, and we can
definitely expect a round of (non-racially motivated) brown shirts
in a neighborhood near you. Guessing he'll try to make China look
like an open gov compared to the administration he'll run. The only
upside to him is the good relations we will have with Mother
Russia. He will definitely attempt to eliminate any remaining parts
of the bill of rights.
Huck? The difference between Huck and your average Islamofacist is
one of favorite books only. Figure he'll tear down the temple to
bring the prophecies to fruition. Expect the worst sci-fi writers
can imagine.
McCain? Something about him is just scaring the bejesus out of me
lately. Used to think he was harmless. Maybe he's the Manchurian
candidate? It's the only explanation I can come up with.
Edwards? I suspect harmless in the end, a populist without a lot of
populism, I really do suspect congress will spend all it's time
fighting him. Keeping them off of my back.
Obama? Don't know, but I have to admit, I'm not actually afraid of
him. And he smokes. Gawd damn, it's gonna be pitiful if I vote
based on who I can bum a cig off of.
Pitiful in the end, I'll be voting on who wants to destroy liberty
and the pursuit of happiness LEAST.
Pitiful.
|1.23.08 @ 12:27PM|#
1. Obama
2. Kucinich
3. Clinton
4. Edwards
5. McCain
6. Huckabee
7. Romney
--------------------
911. Giuliani
yubi|1.23.08 @ 12:29PM|#
Ecstatic:
Ron Paul
Happy:
Obama
Kucinich (Id just be funny! Maybe he can still pull the MUFON vote.
yuk yuk)
Meh:
Chinsty McChiBot
McCain
Depressed:
Lady President
Hairdo
Suicidal:
Fuckabee
Rudy Soprano
If the last two leave, Im leaving the country, as I did when The
Decider took office.
|1.23.08 @ 12:29PM|#
Level 3: pants-fillingly terrified might happen; gates of
hell opening; Canada beckons
Out of the frying pan, into the fire?
Ali|1.23.08 @ 12:39PM|#
1) Ron Paul
2) Barack Obama
3) John McCain
3) Mitt Romney
3) Hillary Clintom
6) Mike Gravel
7) Dennis Kucinich
23) John Edwards
99) Mike Huckabee
762) Rudy Giuliani
Me too, me too!
|1.23.08 @ 12:41PM|#
If you're like me and the war and civil liberties are the
primary issues to you, the choices are almost clear...
Paul > Kucinich > Obama > Edwards > Clinton > McCain
> Huckabee > Romney > Rudy
|1.23.08 @ 12:41PM|#
Worst to First
Huckabee (I just can't handle any more big spending Republican
Christian evangelists)
Giuliani
McCain (100 fucking years? WTF?!)
Edwards
Romney
Obama
Clinton (I hate her but Republicans deserve the discomfort and I
don't mind armed revolution, so...)
Paul
R C Dean|1.23.08 @ 12:43PM|#
Having a hard time grasping the high ranking Obama is getting
here.
So far as I can tell, he's basically a standard-issue Dem on
policy, peddling a Dem version of Bush's "New Tone."
I can't imagine that he would do anything to advance any
libertarian issue, and could be counted on to do such unlibertarian
things as raise taxes and spending.
Other Matt|1.23.08 @ 12:47PM|#
Serious question, why all the support for Obama? His speeches
are void filled platitudes for the most part, he's pro socialized
medicine, pro-mucking about with corporatations, pro-tax, anti gay
marraige (though pro "civil union", whatever that means), voted in
favor of the patriot act, and is so strongly anti second amendment
he openly espouses outlawing handguns entirely. Finally, Hillary is
right, he does tend to vote "present" on issues he doesn't want to
deal with later. A lot do, I understand, but have some balls.
I understand people want to get out of Iraq, but is this really the
package you want? I don't see McCain as nearly as damaging on the
whole, nor Hillary for that matter (as long as people made her feel
like she's in charge).
|1.23.08 @ 12:48PM|#
I can't imagine that he would do anything to advance any
libertarian issue, and could be counted on to do such unlibertarian
things as raise taxes and spending.
R C Dean -
That can be said about just about every other candidate too. This
is about the LESSER of evils :)
lunchstealer|1.23.08 @ 12:49PM|#
Laughing:
Kucinich (Come on, we'd be out of the war, plus think of all the
fun when he forces all the churches to unionize!)
Resigned:
Paul (I'm pro choice and pro appologize if your name is on stupid
shit, but anti-war)
Obama (Scary with a majority, but the congressional GOP might
actually keep him somewhat in check a la Clinton)
Scared:
McCain
Giuliani
Real scared:
Romney
That pants thing that Ethan said:
Clinton
That pants thing plus drink til I don't know my name:
Edwards
Huckabee
Brandybuck|1.23.08 @ 12:51PM|#
My anti-Dondero ranking:
Paul
Smith
Jingozian
Kubby
NOTA
McCain
Gravel
Phillies
Kucinich
Romney
Obama
Root
Edwards
Root Canal
Hilliani
Cox
BakedPenguin|1.23.08 @ 12:57PM|#
RC Dean/Other Matt - his stances on open government and
executive power are the main reason why I rank him above most of
the Republicans.
Whether or not he would actually keep his word is another
matter.
Sulla|1.23.08 @ 1:01PM|#
Of the top of my head, from least objectionable to most:
Paul
Obama (Not that I love his policies, but maybe it will get some of
the race baiters to lessen the rhetoric. Please note that I am
racially mixed, so the preferred insult would be buji(sp?) sellout,
not paleolib)
Clinton/Romney (I agree that Clinton is more pragmatic than people
give her credit for, but I have a kneejerk reaction against
dynastic politics. Romney seems like a relatively capable
administrator, which would be a nice change).
McCain
Edwards/Huckabee/Guiliani: Too
Populist/Fundamentalist/Authoritarian
But the point is to rank,right, so:
Edwards
Guiliani
Huckabee (As a converted Catholic who was raised in evangelical
churches, I am not anti-christianity per se, but I am generally of
the belief that it has nothing to tell us about politics)
Also:
If Paul is not on the ballot I'll vote for whoever will bring
about a major collapse faster. . .Let's get it over with and then
we can rebuild. Buy Gold.
I express no opinion on gold as an investment option, but if a
collapse is coming, maybe it would be better to buy guns, canned
food, medicine, gasoline, etc. That way when it arrives, you can
sell the truly important things to the people who just have gold
:)
|1.23.08 @ 1:02PM|#
Positives for Obama and why he might be doing well on this
list:
It means Hillary would have lost to him in the Democratic
nominating process. Bonus points for that.
He would get us out of Iraq.
He's read the Constitution at least once. (He might not understand
it yet, but it's a start we can work with.)
It would piss off racists and that's always fun.
He might restore a little respect for the U.S. around the world,
because he's not like Bush personality-wise.
He's not Rudy, Hillary, Huckabee, McCain, or Edwards.
The list was "who sucks less then this asshat" and when they are
all the same except for Paul, personality means something.
|1.23.08 @ 1:16PM|#
Voting preference (1st choice first)
1. McCain
2. Romney
3. Giuliani (hope for a slight Dem majority)
4. Bloomberg (hope for a slight Rep majority)
5. Obama (hope for a slight Rep majority)
6. Clinton (hope for a slight Rep majority)
7. Bloomberg (hope for slight Rep majority)
8. Stay home
9. Move back to the UK
10. Huckabee (hope for a Dem veto proof majority)
11. Become an astronaut and move to Mars
12. Edwards (hope for a Rep veto proof majority)
13. Kucinich (give me a break)
14. Paul (give me a break)
Other Matt|1.23.08 @ 1:24PM|#
He's read the Constitution at least once. (He might not
understand it yet, but it's a start we can work with.)
Voted FOR the "Patriot Act", wants to ban all semi automatics and
handguns, what the hell gives you this idea?
He's not Rudy, Hillary, Huckabee, McCain, or
Edwards.
Of that list, I think Hillary would at least be somewhat more
pragmatic, Rudy is scary, McCain is more moderate IMHO, Huckabee is
marginally less scary than Rudy simply because of the attitude
difference, though he thinks he has god on his side so perhaps
not.
Monkey Of Fear|1.23.08 @ 1:30PM|#
From first to last:
1. Paul
2. Romney
3. Obama
4. Mccain
5. Edwards
6. Clinton
7. Guiliani
8. Huckabee
Paul is an obvious first choice, but being that he has no chance at
securing the Repub nomination . . . Romney makes me want puke, but
the rest, in ascending order, make me want to flee the country
after puking, self-mutilation and a random act of useless
protest.
|1.23.08 @ 1:34PM|#
I also cannot understand why Obama is doing so well on this board, he is a socialist with charisma...that means he will have a better time getting his agenda passed then pretty much anyone else...this scares me sooo much.
|1.23.08 @ 1:37PM|#
If I had to choose among serious candidates who still have a
chance (Paul doesn't, but neither does Edwards), I'd go with
experience governing and reasonable doubt of utter incompetence.
So, from best to worst:
Romney (so-so governor of Mass.)
Guiliani (overrated, authoritarian mayor of NYC)
Huckabee (buffoon governor of Ark. which has fewer people than NYC;
please, no more southern governors!)
McCain (aging senator with hair-trigger temper with no actual
experience in an administration)
Obama (young senator with no actual experience in an
administration)
Clinton (ruined everything she touched in her husband's
administration--and learned nothing from it)
|1.23.08 @ 1:43PM|#
RC,
For me it comes down to this. Everyone is less of a scary fascist
than Rudy. Everyone else is less of scary nanny/theocrat than
Huckabee. All that are left are less of a commie than Edwards.
McCain is a rough and tumble militarist, that destroys those that
oppose him and does not believe in the first amendment. Which is
about equal to Hillary who will enact the worst policies that are
popular at a time and will trample over whoever opposes her. Both
of these options are scarier than an animatronic doll that has no
true beliefs so could be a competent free-marketer or a theocrat
war-monger (who is at least competent). All the above are no worse
than a standard issue Dem that pushes for greater transparency in
government. Nothing too egregious about him. Electing him would
likely improve race and international relations significantly. So
while the man is relatively unimpressive as a candidate, as a
symbol he's got upside. Besides, for once we'd have a prez that was
honest about drug use.
I don't get the love for Hillary here. She's all the bad of Barack,
but worse.
Of course, Ron Paul is much better than them all. That's why he got
my money and will get my primary vote.
|1.23.08 @ 1:49PM|#
I will vote for Obama if the other option is either Romney or
Huckabilly. If Obama gets smart and adds Richardson to his ticket,
I may be able to do it without holding my nose.
If the impossible happens and Guiliani gets the Repub nomination
then I don't care who the Dem is, it could be Edwards even, I will
vote Dem.
If the Dem is Hilary or Edwards and/or the Republican is
McCain/Romney, I'll vote LP.
If the LP candidate turns out to be a Paleo, then I'm leaving the
country.
Nash|1.23.08 @ 1:50PM|#
Best to Worst:
Paul
Romney's Rhetoric
Obama
Romney's Voting Record
McCain
Ghoulianni
Clinton
Huckabee
Edwards
Rimfax|1.23.08 @ 1:50PM|#
Humor me and "immortalize" your choice here.
Then we can look back with uncomfortable clarity at our own folly
in four years or so.
|1.23.08 @ 1:53PM|#
I should probably say that I still support Paul and even gave
him a little $ again on MLK day.
Also, I should admit that I can't actually afford to leave the
country.
dhex|1.23.08 @ 1:55PM|#
For me it comes down to this. Everyone is less of a scary
fascist than Rudy.
yup.
regardless of what happens, at least that pile of shit is getting
nowhere near a seat of power on a national scale. (or ever again, i
hope.)
|1.23.08 @ 1:58PM|#
All of em are worse then what ever the Libertarian party puts up
for their candidate.
If Paul wins the republican nomination i guess i will have to do
some soul searching.
But lets say by some hypothetical that i must vote for someone
other then Ron Paul or the Libertarian candidate.
the list goes something like this:
Joshua Corning
My dad
My mom
My Eldest Brother
My Sister in Law
A guy who works in the office with me
My buddy
My other buddy
My other buddies wife (not even sure she is over 35)
My buddy who lives in seattle
My buddy who lives in seattle's wife
Romney
Anyone of the some 200 million+ eligible population of The US
(Write-ins rock!)
Guilani
joe (the reason commenter not Biden)
Obama
McCain
Huckabee
Hillary
Edwards
|1.23.08 @ 2:02PM|#
If the LP candidate turns out to be a Paleo, then I'm leaving the country.
You would vote for a Democrat holding your nose, but you would
leave the country if the LP merely ran a candidate you don't like?
Wow, you cosmos have really gone off the deep end.
Other Matt|1.23.08 @ 2:06PM|#
You would vote for a Democrat holding your nose, but you
would leave the country if the LP merely ran a candidate you don't
like? Wow, you cosmos have really gone off the deep end.
Probably has a lot to do with the childishness of the whole
cosmo/paleo bullshit.
|1.23.08 @ 2:14PM|#
Probably has a lot to do with the childishness of the whole
cosmo/paleo bullshit.
Or it was a joke making fun of the whole cosmo/paleo bullshit.
Other Matt|1.23.08 @ 2:19PM|#
Or it was a joke making fun of the whole cosmo/paleo
bullshit.
Perhaps I wasn't clear...that's kind of what I meant. Sorry. Like
"Probably has a lot to do with the childishness..." as in spoofing
it.
|1.23.08 @ 2:31PM|#
Reasons why I'm giving Obama some (relative) love:
1. He has a history of desiring transparent governance. Given that
the last two administrations have been 2 of the 3 most secretive
since WW2, that's a positive. Even if he fails here (relatively),
he won't be worse than Bush. And that's more than I can say about
McCain, Egghead, or Hillary.
2. He seems to genuinely believe that he can change things in
Washington. Since we know he can't, at least he'll spend a chunk of
his term being stymied while finding this out. Better gridlock than
a competent deal-cutter getting things done.
3. That's all I got, but that's still more than most of the other
options. This field sucks.
kinnath|1.23.08 @ 2:38PM|#
Given that a lot of republicans have announced they are retiring from congress, it seems highly unlikely that the republicans can take the house or the senate. So my guess it that the least damage will occur if the android fomerly known as Mitt takes the presidency.
|1.23.08 @ 2:48PM|#
Worst to best:
Huckabee
Edwards
Rudy
McCain = Hillary I despise them equally.
Romney
Obama
God, that's depressing.
kinnath|1.23.08 @ 3:04PM|#
Ranking the worst:
Huckabee -- combines the worst aspects of fundmentalist moralizing
with we-know-better-than-you progressive policies
Guiliani -- you will submit!
Edwards -- combines the worst aspects of we-know-better-than-you
progressive policies with southern/hick social moralizing (bizarro
Huckabee)
Clinton -- LBJ without the personality.
The good news is that Huckabee and Edwards seem to be well on the
way to oblivion. And after Florida, Guiliani will be booking his
tickets home.
That leaves us with the very real possibility of HRC ruling the
white house with democrats in control of both the house and the
senate.
I so look forward to seeing the last 20 years of working hard to
achieve a comfortable life get flushed down the toilet.
Other Matt|1.23.08 @ 3:11PM|#
Legate:
I'm no fan of anyone in particular other than RP. I'm just honestly
incredulous with this Obama love. The man's record just doesn't
support much that I feel is right, and what I believe people on
this board espouse as good and just and all that teary eye'd stuff.
Further, people make statements like you did here:
He seems to genuinely believe that he can change things in
Washington. Since we know he can't, at least he'll spend a chunk of
his term being stymied while finding this out. Better gridlock than
a competent deal-cutter getting things done.
How do you arrive at this conclusion that he sincerely wants
change? I see nothing which indicates he wants to change anything
other than votes going against his particular agenda. I've listened
to him speak, he rarely says anything of value, has a bunch of
platitudes about change and feeling good and Rodney King quotes
thinly veiled, and nothing else. Hillary at least has some
substance, not that it's any more palatable. When you get throught
he bullshit frosting on Obama, and actually start reading the stuff
on his website on positions (allowing for what is really being said
as opposed to how it's being said), if I had any hair left it would
be standing on end.
Y'all are fine loving him, I just am quite amazed by this,
seriously. Romney will pander to the middle as that way people will
focus more on his hair, McCain gets hot, true, but he calls people
on bullshit at least 20% of the time with it, but either of the two
I see as much preferable to Obama's agenda.
I really wish we had a black male or female who wasn't as
distasteful, just so we could get all that black/white bullshit
behind us.
|1.23.08 @ 3:12PM|#
He's read the Constitution at least once. (He might not
understand it yet, but it's a start we can work with.)
Voted FOR the "Patriot Act", wants to ban all semi automatics and
handguns, what the hell gives you this idea?
---I said that because he has a background in Constitutional law,
but I threw in the part about not understanding it for the reasons
you gave. Besides, does anyone think he'd be able to ban the guns?
Does anyone think this is a possibility at a national level at all?
Even with a Dem Congress it wouldn't get 60 votes in the Senate and
pass SCOTUS challenges.
The thing I worry about is that the GOP candidates that remain
(save for Paul) all have center/bipartisan tendencies, Huckabee
likes social welfare programs and tax-raising, Romney just wants to
be president and have his picture taken signing bills into law and
is known to compromise, McCain is practically sleeping with
Democrats on all his legislation, and Giuliani will trade social
program approval for more police-state power. If we're gonna end up
with any of those, I'd just as soon see Obama be president because
it would piss off the Republicans who screwed us by not nominating
Paul. It matters very little who is elected if not Paul, so why not
have some fun at the expense of the people I despise the most,
namely Republicans, Hillary, and racists?
|1.23.08 @ 3:16PM|#
I never said I would vote for him. I will vote for Ron Paul, LP if I like the candidate, or write-in someone I respect. Relax.
|1.23.08 @ 3:33PM|#
1. Thompson write-in
2. Paul
3. McCain (hoping that he picks Thompson as VP and, in a "Maverick"
moment, resigns just after taking the oath)
4. Obama
5a. The alien who keeps harrassing Dennis Kucinich
5b. Dennis Kucinich's Wife
5c. Dennis Kucinich
6. "Mr. Fantastic," Mitt Romney
7. Huckabee
8. John from the Mill
9. Goldwater Village Girl
10. Ferret boy
|1.23.08 @ 3:40PM|#
First to worst
1 Ron Paul
2 LP (Root or other)
3 Rudolph Giuliani
4 Mike Gravel
5 Barrack Obama
6 Mitt Romney
7 John McCain
8 George W. Bush
9 Mike Huckabee
10 Hillary Clinton
11 Michael Bloomberg
12 Cinthia McKinney
13 John Edwards
|1.23.08 @ 3:52PM|#
Best to worst:
Paul
Obama
Clinton/Romney Poll Driven Monster Person
McCain
Edwards
Rooody
Huckabee
Lamar
McKinney
Jacob|1.23.08 @ 4:09PM|#
Ron Paul - He might be a racist but he's OUR racist
Obama - End the war, civil liberties, yadda yadda
Gravel - Too kooky to do any damage
McCain - Told the farm interests to suck it, which was
impressive
Giuliani - The tax-cutting war-monger
Hillary - Hey, Bill governed moderately. There's hope.
Kucinich - Hey, at least the war would be over
Romney - Universal health care, auto handouts, farm subsidies, how
is this guy conservative again?
Huckabee.
Did I miss anyone?
Robert|1.23.08 @ 4:12PM|#
I'd like to poll delegates for Ron Paul as to
who their 2nd & 3rd choices are, because that's how they'll
probably be voting at the convention.
As to my badness ranking among likely candidates, nobody else is
really close to Giuliani. Next it would be close between McCain
& Clinton. After them, Edwards. And then none of the remainder
do I see as threatening, not even Huckabee. However, I would prefer
Romney to Huckabee, and I would vote for either of them against
Obama.
Bloomberg, I just don't know. I might vote for him just to get rid
of him as mayor. He might do less damage if he concentrates on
foreign affairs.
Dynamist Dan|1.23.08 @ 4:27PM|#
Paul (He's either a bigot or a bad manager, but he's a
libertarian)
Romney (It's a sad thing when second best is so bad)
McCain (At least I could say the President gave my
commencement)
Obama (Great style, poor substance, that which I can pin
down)
Clinton (Possibly 28 years of rule by 2 families, true
meritocracy)
Huckabee (Socially conservative big government, shoot me)
Edwards (I just absolutely detest everything about this man)
|1.23.08 @ 4:28PM|#
Also note that McCain told Detroit that the jobs ain't coming
back (which anyone with half a brain cell will admit) and got
whacked across the head with a 2 x 4 for truth-telling.
The US will continue to slide downhill until the US populace starts
voting against politicians who promise them ponies and cakewalk
victories and start rewarding those who tell them the truth. I was
hoping this time around that the strong news was acceptable--oh
well.
America: being gullible in our elections since...?
Other Matt|1.23.08 @ 4:32PM|#
Nick-As I said, I'm not arguing, just surprised, and trying to
understand as I really haven't heard Obama say anything of
stubstance. Ever. It's all "We need change, feel good, go forth,
love me" followed by bullshit. Even now, he tries to deflect his
"present" votes which Hillary pounds him on, and still has nothing
of substance to say. On health care, he says he'd start with single
payer if he had to start again, meaning....? He thinks people
should have coverage, meaning....?
What civil liberties is Obama such a champion of? You mentioned the
firearms part, which shows he avoids the 2nd amend (I count that as
a "civil liberty", personally). Regardless of whether he could pull
it off, this shows a blatent disrespect for the Constitution, at
least the Bill of Rights. He is against gay marraige, though I
grant that I'm against all marraige as far as the govt is concerned
so you can probably put me in that hopper myself. I guess he said
something like the people who are facing punishment should have
rights under the constitution, which is no great leap except for
Bush's Atty Gen. Where is the big civil liberties he has over
others? He's "Pro choice" I'm sure, but that's a basic ticket punch
for the Dems, so there's no great civil liberties espousing
there.
I guess what's left is "get us out of Iraq", which we'll probably
declare victory and leave soon anyway just out of financial
practicality.
The US will continue to slide downhill until the US populace
starts voting against politicians who promise them ponies and
cakewalk victories and start rewarding those who tell them the
truth
This I agree with, though I guess that's because I have my own view
of what "the truth" entails, and there are bound to be problems
with what others view as "the truth."
economist|1.23.08 @ 4:34PM|#
Paul(crazy but in a good way)
Romney(maybe he is the callous businessman who doesn't care about
"income inequality" the media pretends he is. We can only
hope.)
McCain(bland, but so was Eisenhower, and he was okay)
Huckabutt(hey, at least he hates the IRS)
Clinton(I don't think she actually believes much of the crap she's
spewing)
Obama(When you've reached the bottom, who cares?
Edwards(Just to show it can always be worse.)
Other Matt|1.23.08 @ 4:34PM|#
Bloomberg, I just don't know. I might vote for him just to
get rid of him as mayor. He might do less damage if he concentrates
on foreign affairs.
Ack! Robert, let's make a deal, you keep your garbage at home, and
don't vote for Bloomberg, and I'll do the same and not vote for
O'Malley four years from now.
|1.23.08 @ 4:53PM|#
Is Calvin Coolidge on the ballot this year? I liked him, he didn't do anything. Good man.
|1.23.08 @ 4:55PM|#
Ron Paul (i can dream)
Fred Thompson (atleast pretends at federalism)
John McCain (enough people hate him that he'd spend most of his
presidency fighting in washington)
Barak Obama (amorphous hope maybe good, maybe bad)
Mitt Romney (Mr. Republican, no soul, but has a brain)
Hillary Clinton (Evil, but a known quantity)
Mike Huckabee (No brain, evil I don't know)
John Edwards (No brain, no soul, pretty much 99% hair)
Rudy Giuliani (Paging Lucifer, one of your minions escaped)
T|1.23.08 @ 5:23PM|#
What a depressing game this is turning out to be. For the first
time in a number of years, I won't actually be working the election
this year. I may stay home and load magazines and drink.
Best to worst
Paul - Only guy trying to slow down the train
LP Candidate - gotta be better than the current crop of D&R
midgets
McKinney - comedy gold, folks
Kucinich - Useless tool who'd be harmless
Romney - pragmatic
Clinton - pragmatic to a fault
Obama - no substance
Edwards - redistribute wealth as long as I keep mine
Huckabeest - too religious to be the guy with the football
McCain - already enamored of gutting my rights, no more power for
you
Giuliani - repulsive fascist
I figure by the time the night's over I'll be chugging bourbon
straight from the bottle and screaming at the TV about voting with
a bullet until the wife clubs me into silence.
|1.23.08 @ 5:35PM|#
Paul
Probably the LP Candidate
Romney
McCain
Guilani
Obama
Huckabee
Clinton
Edwards
The last four on my list are flaming socialists, so there is no way
they get my vote. There is a huge drop off after Paul though and
there would be some nose holding to vote for the rest.
|1.23.08 @ 5:47PM|#
Ack. Hadn't seen Obama's view of gun control. Ban semi
automatics? Ban guns in the inner city? What the hell is
that?
I guess that moves Robo Romney to number 1 ...
|1.23.08 @ 6:24PM|#
When I took the VoteMatch quiz here , I got these amusing
results -- apparently I prefer the candidates widely regarded as
nutcases by the MSM:
Total 45%
Social 31%
Economic 54%
John Cox
Chairman of Cook County (IL) Republican Party
Total 45%
Social 31%
Economic 54%
Alan Keyes
Total 43%
Social 38%
Economic 46%
Ron Paul
Total 40%
Social 44%
Economic 38%
Mike Gravel
Total 38%
Social 50%
Economic 29%
Dennis Kucinich
Total 35%
Social 50%
Economic 25%
Hillary Clinton
Total 35%
Social 38%
Economic 33%
Mike Huckabee
Total 35%
Social 19%
Economic 46%
Mitt Romney
Total 33%
Social 50%
Economic 21%
Cynthia McKinney
Total 30%
Social 13%
Economic 42%
Rudy Giuliani
Total 28%
Social 25%
Economic 29%
John McCain
Total 25%
Social 25%
Economic 25%
Barack Obama
Total 23%
Social 19%
Economic 25%
John Edwards
If you just consider the economic ratings, you get an ordering
closer to my actual voting preferences (with the exception of
Giuliani and Keyes):
Economic 54%
John Cox
Chairman of Cook County (IL) Republican Party
Economic 54%
Alan Keyes
Economic 46%
Ron Paul
Economic 46%
Mitt Romney
Economic 42%
Rudy Giuliani
Economic 38%
Mike Gravel
Economic 33%
Mike Huckabee
Economic 29%
Dennis Kucinich
Economic 29%
John McCain
Economic 25%
Hillary Clinton
Economic 25%
Barack Obama
Economic 25%
John Edwards
Economic 21%
Cynthia McKinney
Other Matt|1.23.08 @ 8:19PM|#
JasonL-You are doing a wonderful job of showing my point. I don't think anyone knows that's his position, because of the platitudes and lack of substance in what he says. That's why I'm mystified with so many people thinking he's great here.
Other Matt|1.23.08 @ 8:25PM|#
Rudy Giuliani (Paging Lucifer, one of your minions
escaped)
Dammit, LIT, have you ever heard the Jeff Foxworthy routine about
the milk that he "USED to be drinking" and how he made it across
the room via the nose...
|1.23.08 @ 8:29PM|#
I'm amazed that Romney is getting so many passes here. Some of
the most profoundly retarded things that have been said at either
party's debates have come out of his mouth.
You think Barack is a socialist? Do you remember what came out of
Romney's mouth after McCain said that some jobs weren't coming back
to Michigan? That was some straight communist shit. Double
Guantanamo? The president keeping us alive is the only civil
liberty that we should be worried about?
|1.23.08 @ 8:48PM|#
apparently I prefer the candidates widely regarded as
nutcases by the MSM
Alan Keyes is considered a nutcase by any right thinking
person.
|1.23.08 @ 9:53PM|#
Romney(maybe he is the callous businessman who doesn't care
about "income inequality" the media pretends he is. We can only
hope.)
I had not thought about it that way.
I might just vote for Romney before I vote for my buddy in
Seattle's wife.
|1.23.08 @ 9:59PM|#
Alan Keyes is considered a nutcase by any right thinking
person.
I think someone who is espousing Hayakian economics being called a
nutcase by the media for 20 years has a greater then 50% chance of
actually becoming a nutcase.
Ya he is a nutcase...but he has an excuse.
|1.23.08 @ 10:17PM|#
From bad to worst.
Paul
LP Candidate
Mike Gravel
Obama
The Great Juju and His Big Ball of Twine
McCain
Giuliani
Clinton
Huckabee
Edwards
Romney
McCain
Kucinich
Romney
When I took the VoteMatch quiz here , I got these amusing results -- apparently I prefer the candidates widely regarded as nutcases by the MSM:
You're on a fucking libertarian blog, mate.
|1.23.08 @ 10:19PM|#
Oops, let me revise my list quickly.
Paul
LP Candidate
Gravel
Obama
The Great Juju and His Big Ball of Twine
McCain
Giuliani
Clinton
Huckabee
Edwards
Romney
Kucinich
Jumbie|1.24.08 @ 1:05AM|#
I think Obama should poll pretty high on the 'I can live with
him' list because he was also one of the sponsors of the bill to
make congresscritters acknowledge their earmarks AND have them in a
searchanble online database.
I remember thinking back then, when his candidacy was just a rumor
'man fuck the presidency, we need to keep his ass in the senate to
do more stuff like that.'
But maybe he could do more stuff like that as president?
|1.24.08 @ 1:58AM|#
If Romney wants to break a little above the others he's grouped
with, he needs to have a plan to leave Iraq and start digging Adam
Smith.
If Obama wants to break above that group, he needs to go beyond
praising Reagan and start praising Hayek.
The Wine Commonsewer|1.24.08 @ 2:06AM|#
RP
LP Candidate
I will not give someone who plans to stab me in back my vote simply
to prevent someone else from shooting me in the gut. So once RP is
out of the race I'll probably vote for the Libertarian Party
candidate (who will lose). I know I'm going to get raped but I'm at
least gonna spray the bastard with mace before he sticks it in.
ace|1.24.08 @ 2:56AM|#
best to worst:
paul
gravel
obama
kucinich
an inanimate carbon rod
edwards
human feces
hillary
animal feces
thompson
mccain
being forced to eat animal feces
romney/rudy
my guiding principle: if the pres doesn't restore civil liberties
and pull out of iraq lickety split, we're up the creek fo
shizzle
romney may be a gifted businessman, but be very, very afraid of the
prospect of his presidency
|1.24.08 @ 7:01AM|#
"I know I'm going to get raped but I'm at least gonna spray the
bastard with mace before he sticks it in."
Not to shit on your riff, CS, but this is like the gnat saying he's
going to mace the elephant before taking in the backside. It may
make the gnat feel better, but it ain't botherin' the
elephant.
As for candidates, HRC is probably my least favorite followed
closely by the other aspiring dictators like Guiliani, McCain,
Huckabee, etc. Romney just creeps me out. While I may sympathize
with some of Paul's positions, he's just too lunatic fringe for me
to take seriously. My current favorite is probably Obama, maybe
just because I like the idea of an America where a "Barrack Obama"
can win the presidency.
|1.24.08 @ 11:57AM|#
Let me offer a libertarian defense of Obama:
1. He wants to close Guantanamo.
2. He opposed the Military Commission Act.
3. He opposed the Iraq war resolution and he wants to
withdraw.
4. He opposes wiretapping and spying on US citizens.
5. In the Illinois state senate he pushed through a bill that
requires all police interrogations be videotaped, to discourage
police brutality and coerced confessions.
6. He sponsored a bill in the Senate to offer citizens total
knowledge of how and where government money is being spent through
an online database.
7. He doesn't want to convert to a socialized health system
overnight.
8. He's never said anything about outlawing all guns; he's just in
favor of banning them in the inner city, where nary a hunter or
rural or suburban gun enthusiast will ever have to worry about
treading.
I realize he doesn't meet anything close to most of the
requirements for a truly libertarian candidate, but, well, so it
goes. The reason he's my top choice is because he's thoughtful,
reasoned, and pragmatic, but because he's an inspiring orator or
makes me Hope for Change. In my opinion, he comes off much stonger
in quiet interviews than during his rollicking speeches.
Other Matt|1.24.08 @ 3:29PM|#
He's never said anything about outlawing all guns; he's just
in favor of banning them in the inner city, where nary a hunter or
rural or suburban gun enthusiast will ever have to worry about
treading.
Actually, yes, see here.
Specifically, the section where it says:
Principles that Obama supports on gun issues:
Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic
weapons.
Increase state restrictions on the purchase and possession of
firearms.
Require manufacturers to provide child-safety locks with
firearms.
Also:
The reason he's my top choice is because he's thoughtful,
reasoned, and pragmatic, but because he's an inspiring orator or
makes me Hope for Change
Only if you ignore the fact that he doesn't say anything but
useless feel good platitudes. I mean, love the guy if you want, but
dont' think he's anything to cheer about. He strikes me as a cult
leader personality, where people don't actually think about what
he's saying, they just like the fact that he's talking.
Other Matt|1.24.08 @ 3:46PM|#
Self correction..You are correct, he does not say "all" guns, which is a canard held out by the Brady crowd. Banning all semi automatics counts to me.
|1.24.08 @ 5:55PM|#
Mortimer Peacock,
Well, Obamaa is lots better than Hillary.
Obama's anti-war/foreign policy positions are better than all the
Dem candidates except for Kucinich, but not nearly as good as Ron
Paul's.
He opposes wiretapping and spying on US citizens.
In the Illinois state senate he pushed through a bill that requires
all police interrogations be videotaped, to discourage police
brutality and coerced confessions.
Very good! And his willingness to say good things about Reagan
MIGHT indicate that be is willing to reject his knee-jerk liberal
reach for bigger government in response to every economic problem.
(The vast majority of which are caused by big government in the
first place.)
However:
He doesn't want to convert to a socialized health system
overnight.
That's cold comfort.
And check ot his NTU ratings for total spending. He's a very big
spender/big government guy. He gets F's:
http://www.ntu.org/main/components/ratescongress/details_all_years.php3?senate_id=180
There is no economic freedom libertarian case to be made for
Obama-only a case in foreign policy and civil liberties.
|1.25.08 @ 5:37AM|#
This is how I rank the candidates from best to worst.
Ron Paul: He is wrong about some very important
things. But he is right in wanting to end: The Drug War, The Income
tax, the federal department of education, many of the pointless and
unconstitutional gun laws. Those four things are of gigantic
importance.
Fred Thompson: I don't really know much about him
other than that he has done less evil or retarded stuff that the
other candidates
Gap
Mike Huckabee: I think he is first cousins with
Bill Clinton. He is a socialist theocrat, but he has vowed to
eliminate the IRS. He also has had Chuck Norris do a campaign
commercial for him, which gives him some down to earthedness. His
socialist programs in Arkansas have been somewhat effective. And
under his dictatitorial rule we would all be thinner and
nonsmokers. OK honestly the one and only thing that merits him
being ranked so high, and not at the bottom of the page is that he
vows to do away with the IRS.
Huge Gap
Obama: He is a gun grabbing socialist, with no
experience governing. He does seem like a likable and honest guy.
He actually might get points in my book for his non experience at
governing thing, because of how wrong he is on so many issues. Not
being effective is going to be a feature, not a bug. Also him
winning will mean that he beat the unstoppable Hillary machine in
the nomination process, that gets him some kudos. He has read the
constitution, but does not understand it.
Huge Gap
Romney: He is a bot with no beliefs, and no
integrity. If he gets elected one can hope that he makes the right
decision by accident, or because it is the popular or convenient
thing to do at the time.
McCain: He is an authoritarian. He voted drafted a
law that is a blatant violation of the 1st Amendment. He probably
has not respect for the 2nd. He has a hair trigger anger problem
(important for a man with his finger on the button). He has
generally made an ass out of himself trying to get government
involved where it has no business. I do respect him as a man
greatly; I disdain him as a polititian.
Gap
Hillary: She is a power hungry fascist who is
wrong about just about everything. She has no experience governing,
and huge amounts of political cunning. She thinks she is royalty,
better than other Americans, and that it is her rightful place to
govern us lesser beings. She has in her political career shown
disdain for the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th and 10th Amendments.
Everything she touched when her rapist husband was in office turned
to crap, and she didn't learn from her mistakes. Well not learning
from her mistakes may be a feature not a bug. My favorite thing
about her is that a Republican congress would fight her tooth and
nail. Also her disdain for average Americans and her disdain for
the constitution, and that the average American dislikes her with a
passion most of them don't even understand, may bring about the 2nd
American Revolution.
Rudy Guliani: A RINO, He is pretty much the same
as Hillary, but he is, if possible, even more corrupt. And worstly
about the cross dressing New Yorker, a Republican congress will not
likely fight him as they would Hillary. He also has the racist
thing going on.
Edwards: Should not be on this list as it is clear he is not really
in the running anymore, and is just running for the VP slot. He
would still be last on the list though, because of his economic
populism.
(Note; Ron Paul is on the list because he does have a chance though
unlikely. And if he doesn't make it on Super Tuesday, he may run
3rd party, in which case I will vote for him, knowing that I will
be handing a victory to the Democrats. Fred Thompson maybe should
not be on the list, because he is done, but I think that he adds to
the list).
More about why Ron Paul is at the top of the list.
The drug war: How many innocent people must be killed to make it
harder for you or your brother to get drugs?
The income tax: Every single working Americans 4th and 5th
Amendments are violated every year to keep up this monstrosity just
to ensure that the Fed has no free market competition.
The Dept of Education: Kids are graduating high school illiterate
and people are denied school choice for what? Because the people in
Tennessee are too ignorant to run their own education? Is the
Federal Govt. really doing a good enough job to prove this true? I
don't think so.
Gun Rights: I believe that if law enforcement is allowed to own
weapons and equipment not available to other citizens, then they
are not a service to their neighborhood, instead they are an
occupying army. Particularly when such rules come from as far away
as Washington DC.
Mr. Anonymous' Honorable Choices, I think are so awesome that they
are worth mentioningagain:
Mr Anonymous | January 23, 2008, 3:33pm | #
1. Thompson write-in
2. Paul
3. McCain (hoping that he picks Thompson as VP and, in a "Maverick"
moment, resigns just after taking the oath)
4. Obama
5a. The alien who keeps harassing Dennis Kucinich
5b. Dennis Kucinich's Wife
5c. Dennis Kucinich
6. "Mr. Fantastic," Mitt Romney
7. Huckabee
8. John from the Mill
9. Goldwater Village Girl
10. Ferret boy
becca|1.30.08 @ 9:11PM|#
clinton scares me like no otherr.
she is just plain wackedd out.
the thought of obama as president is just as scary.
seriously thoughh, someone with Islamic background?
hello. we just got blown up by those guys.
how silly some people can be sometimes.
i personally favor huckabee. think what you will, but he's as good
as we're gonna get.
quite frankly though, every sinlge candidate sucks big time.
|2.1.08 @ 9:43PM|#
Including the recently departed:
13.) Clinton (0%) creepy, socialist, hawkish, populist and
Machiavellian to the core.
12.) Edwards (5%) at least he came around on the war...
11.) Huckabee (7.5%) statist theocrat, who at least wants to get
rid of the IRS and talks about progressivism...? Terrible record
though (F on fiscal responsibility).
10.) Romney (8%) socially conservative, populist on immigration,
doesn't support government restraint. Bad record as governor,
although not as bad as Huckabee's, as far as fiscal conservativism
(C). Why the hell does any libertarian support him???
9.) Giuliani (10%) creepy, elitist and hawkish but at least
socially liberal??
8.) McCain (20%) at least he might get spending under control? And
ban torture? Foreign policy is very bad.
7.) Fred Thompson (45%) - the better of the Republican
baddies.
6.) Kucinich/Gravel/McKinney (50%) - well meaning, but stupid
socialists who have at least the social /political libertarianism,
and anti-war stance. Half-right.
5.) Obama (55%) - at least he doesn't support socializing
healthcare, advocated for spending database, scores well on all the
issues where liberals are libertarian and badly on 70% of the
places where they aren't. Hopefully his presidency will be filled
with fluff and Congress is controlled by the Republicans.
4.) Obama with Richardson as a running mate (60%) - that will keep
Obama's pro-tax, anti-gun policies in check. Heard Dodd was OK,
too.
3.) Richardson (65%) - good record as governor, although statist.
Social liberal that's also pro-gun and cut taxes.
2.) Obama/Richardson with a Republican Congress
1.) Ron Paul (80%) - not progressive enough, too populist on
immigration, needs better environmental stance but other than than,
mostly good.
|2.1.08 @ 9:46PM|#
Make #2 tied with Ron Paul, maybe even above it. That's probably my preferred situation actually.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245