PDA

View Full Version : My evaluations on the candidates....some of them


micfranklin
10-19-2007, 12:13 AM
Clinton:
-What I like about Hilary, aside from her having experience in the WH, is that from her record she said she wants to keep non-violent drug offenders out of prisons, voted against drilling in Alaska, against Military Commissions Act,
against a Federal Marriage Amendment and against the Patriot Act's wiretapping extension. But my problem with her is that she still voted for the original Patriot Act in 2001 and reauthorizing it. She also voted for the Iraq War, which we are still in, she has and still is advocating socialist policies, signed on the Assault Weapons Ban, and voted against an amendment that prevented confiscation of legally owned firearms during disasters. Also, she is the only Democratic candidate who sees video games as an issue.

I can't say that her wanting a no-fly zone in Darfur is a problem because her problem is that she doesn't know Sudan has no air force and if aid were to go that might hurt them.

Obama:
-His being black (or "not black enough") has nothing to do with my feelings. One of the first things I like about Obama is the fact that he opposes the Iraq War and all "dumb wars," and in my POV he has that over Hilary. He, like Clinton, also voted against drilling in Alaska, voted for preserving habeas corpus for detainees, is against torturing detainees, Military Commissions Act, and is also against the Federal Marriage Amendment. I want to vote for him but he's got some things I'm against, like how he's a gun control supporter and in favor of another Assault Weapons Ban. He also made the same decision as Clinton on the Patriot Act: for reauthorizing it but against extending the wiretapping provision.

Obama also thinks we should have a no-fly zone in Darfur, but again Sudan doesn’t have an air force and that might hurt any aid sent there.

Giuliani:
-Being former mayor of America’s biggest city is good and fine, but that is not all the criteria needed to be president. But aside from that, I’ll say his ability to reduce crime in NYC by half and helping the city get through the events of September the 11th were some of the best things that have happened to the city. I think it’s also good that he accepts that global warming is an issue and energy independence needs to be achieved. But I still hold the fact that he supports the Iraq War against him, as I would any candidate who does. His support of torture, specifically waterboarding, is not something I like, and I also don’t like his support for warrantless wiretapping, the Patriot Act, and he keeps changing his views on gun control, not to mention his support for the Assault Weapons Ban. And I’m still disappointed that he didn’t show up to the debate at Baltimore a few weeks ago, but oh well….

Paul:
-I like him too much to describe with words, but let me get on with it. The first thing is that the Constitution is like the Bible to him, and that he was one of the few who voted against going to Iraq. I also admire his willingness to end the War on Drugs (he actually used history as an example), voted against the Patriot Act, warrantless wiretapping, would not abuse habeas corpus, and is pretty much for smaller, less-involved government that abides by the Constitution i.e. Supreme Law of the Land. My only problem with him is he voted for drilling in Alaska and seems pretty anti-environment to me.

micfranklin
10-19-2007, 09:03 PM
What, almost 24 hours later and no one's got any feedback on this?

Buck Laser
10-19-2007, 11:15 PM
What, almost 24 hours later and no one's got any feedback on this?

Mic, a thoughtful post like yours takes longer to reply to than a lot of others. I have some thoughts about your comments, but it takes time to frame them. I think you're one of the most mature posters on DF: it wouldn't be nearly so good without you.
Buck

micfranklin
10-22-2007, 11:39 PM
Yay me!!!!

AlanC
10-27-2007, 08:03 AM
Hillary's EXPERIENCE in the White House?

So you are saying the wife of any CEO in the country is therefor qualified to take over her husband's job for what? being home at nights?

Sorry but that statement strikes me as odd every time I hear it. She has no more experience that would qualify her for this job than say... Barrack Obama.

preservanation
10-27-2007, 05:03 PM
I have an experienced plumber who I call when I need some complicated work done.
I called him the other day, but he was busy... so I asked his wife, A devoted mate, a good mother and who can bake cookies, to come over instead and reroute my storm drain.
After all, she is uniquely qualified.

AlonzoMourning23
10-27-2007, 07:35 PM
I have an experienced plumber who I call when I need some complicated work done.
I called him the other day, but he was busy... so I asked his wife, A devoted mate, a good mother and who can bake cookies, to come over instead and reroute my storm drain.
After all, she is uniquely qualified.


Are you comparing hillary to a common housewife? Someone who is a politician, and not only played a role in decision making during bills presidency but spearheaded certain aspects of policy, such as healthcare, with a woman who cleans house and bakes cookies? Someone who seemingly has absolutely no experience with anything plumbing related?

It's funny, those who complained endlessly about her having too prominent of a role during his presidency now claim she has no more experience with being president than the likes of Obama.

micfranklin
10-30-2007, 01:32 PM
Hillary's EXPERIENCE in the White House?

So you are saying the wife of any CEO in the country is therefor qualified to take over her husband's job for what? being home at nights?

Sorry but that statement strikes me as odd every time I hear it. She has no more experience that would qualify her for this job than say... Barrack Obama.


Huh?

I never said her having prior experience means she automatically deserves the job more than anyone else. I only said that I admired her because of that, and then I listed other good and bad things about her and other candidates.

AlanC
10-31-2007, 12:35 AM
Hillary has never run anything, never managed anything, (strike that one, she was in charge of the shredder at the Rose Law Firm), she has never met a payroll much less managed budget, made Judicial and administrative appointments (aside from firing the travel office staff that is), nor has she made any decisions that she has had to accept responibility for.

She did develope a health care plan and left it up to her husband to sell it to congress. I noticed he didn't let her do that type of thing again. That makes him smart, but I don't see that as qualifying experience for her.

micfranklin, I never said that I thought you were saying she was automatically qualified. I was just putting the notion that she has been in the WH in some perspective.

Frankly I don't see being a Senator as being experience either, which is what led to the Obama comparison. The same applies to all the other senators and ex-senators who are running including McCain, Paul, Biden, and Thompson, et al.

preservanation
10-31-2007, 12:52 AM
I have an experienced plumber who I call when I need some complicated work done.
I called him the other day, but he was busy... so I asked his wife, A devoted mate, a good mother and who can bake cookies, to come over instead and reroute my storm drain.
After all, she is uniquely qualified.


Are you comparing hillary to a common housewife? Someone who is a politician, and not only played a role in decision making during bills presidency but spearheaded certain aspects of policy, such as healthcare, with a woman who cleans house and bakes cookies? Someone who seemingly has absolutely no experience with anything plumbing related?

It's funny, those who complained endlessly about her having too prominent of a role during his presidency now claim she has no more experience with being president than the likes of Obama.

What has Hillary actually "accomplished?" You know, done?
In the Senate, (which she rode in on her husband's coattails) and defeated Lazio through playing the gender card and intimidation?
You Dems really can't think having her and Willy back in the White House is a good idea, do yo?
Gore is a better candidate than Hillary.
Hell, Dean was better for the dems than Kerry.....someday they will learn.

tony mitra
10-31-2007, 05:28 AM
micfranklin,

That is a very nice post you created. The reason I did not respond is that it takes time to respond diligently, and that I have been busy last few days. Also, not being an American citizen, I do not know if I should get too involved in the candidates and their qualification.

I share your admiration of Ron Paul, along with a few others, such as Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel and also a bit about Bill Richardson. I realize that these gentlemen have a lot of differences in the way they would like to run a country, but I maintain that the differences are less important than the similarities. The similarities are as follows, in my own judgement :

They would each stop the meaningless war drums being played out by the current administration, who seem to be bent on bringing in an age of relentless warfare and possible re-introduction of the unilateral first strike use of nuclear weapons on other nations.

They would each fix the American economy, albeit at a standard of living that will likely be lower than what America is aiming for, but same time it would be sustainable, and without bankrupting the nation.

That they would all promote the human rights of individuals, within the USA and without.

That they would pull USA to a position of leadership whereas the rest of the free world would actually look up to USA again.

That they would try their best to bring an era of peace and cooperation across the globe, which the world would sorely need, in order to cope with the challenges of the new century, both economically, and ecologically.

Here is my assessment of the others, or rather, your comment on others:

Obama:
To you, and indeed the rest of the USA as far as I can see - Mr. Obama is a black man.
To me, he is a mix blood, 50 percent white and 50 percent black. I can never think of him as simply “black” denying his white half. But I have come of realize that America thinks of race differently than I do.

While I am unable to judge his character enough, I suspect he, while coming from outside the system, will conform to the system, and will be just like any other President, and will not be successful in taking USA to a new direction. I also do not believe it is his time yet, to be the president of the US. Perhaps in a few more years.

Hillary:
I believe she showed signs of being a strong liberal in her youth, but her political acumen is so strong that she is likely quite willing to shift her position as required, to gain political leverage. By that token, I do not believe she is either too liberal, or conservative, or anything specific in her core belief. She is what she needs to be, in order to get to her goals. In a rather unkind adjective, one could think of her as a supreme opportunist. On another level, one can consider her as supremely ambitious, which I believe is an admirable trait in America. I do not believe she will be as effective as Paul, Kucinich or Gravel in fixing America’s problems, because I do not believe she will be willing to confront the very forces that puts her on the throne. That, I believe, is not in her genes.

having said that, I also believe she is extremely well focussed and talented. In a one to one debate, I feel certain that she can take any Republican challenger and eat him alive. I do believe she will be the first woman president of USA.

Going by the history of women democratic leaders of recent past, Golda Mier of Israel, Maggy Thatcher of England and Indira Gandhi of India, I believe they are a lot tougher an an average male, and perhaps a touch ruthless in their pursuit of their goals. Hillary will be just as tough dealing with outsiders, but not at all tough to fix internal problems. Like them, she too will likely try to find external solutions to internal problems.

Giuliani:
I take your comments on him fixing the crime problem in New York. He should get very high marks for that. Other than that, I do not believe he capable of grasping the much wider issues of national and international issues, and gives impression of being just another candidate in the pocket of the system. I also do not believe he has a chance in hell of beating HIllary.

Cheers and take care. Great post.
:)