Obama on top of Clinton

I would like to see more of the other candidates. I consider myself an independent, and not married to any party.

Right now I don't trust Clinton or Obama. I'm looking for other options. Let's see how the others fair out.

 

no

yes, but most that i speak to felt more comfortable with the peace and prosperity of clinton than either bush's

doubtful, but the religion card isnt going to play well this time, and hopefully neither will the fear tactics of the neo cons

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Nov 20 2007, 09:22 AM) [snapback]541926[/snapback]</div>

i had problems with the quote feature. i think bloomfield is a good candidate, neither dem or rep, i was referring to the current admin. neo-con is not derogatory. its simply referring to a former liberal espousing political conservatism. is calling someone a "liberal" derogatory?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Nov 20 2007, 08:22 AM) [snapback]541926[/snapback]</div>

Since when was neocon banned? I just did a quick search, and it turned up over 200 threads where the word "neocon" was used - that doesn't even take into account times when people put spaces in there or dashes or whatever. Seriously dude... it's a widely accepted term for extreme republicans. the only thing that made it derogatory was the abuse by the neocon in the white house.

To your original q's: I think it's really up in the air right now. There are so many things that can happen in the next year that will influence the national vote. Either way the democratic nomination goes, though, i don't think the republicans stand a chance - the nation is sick and tired of the war in Iraq, and really all we've heard from the republicans is more war-mongering. They want to keep us in Iraq, and even expand the fight into Iran. I don't think the people will go for it, and they'll opt to go in a different direction for leadership.

 

I am fine with any of the democratic candidates. In my dream world Kucinich would be a viable candidate and we could have some rational discourse back into US politics. The republican candidates frankly scare me. Most of all, "I live in the 18th century" Huckabee.

 

A neocon by any other name will never smell like a rose. Stinking rose, perhaps.

 

the war is the war, no war goes well! thats like saying she almost got pregnant. and of course no american or any other civilized nation wants a nucular iran, but georgie boy keeps missing the target...its not iraq, its not iran....its pakistan and the taliban and alquida and afganistan

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Nov 20 2007, 10:14 AM) [snapback]541939[/snapback]</div>

The majority also don't want war with Iran.

http://www.pollingreport.com/iran.htm

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Nov 20 2007, 06:22 AM) [snapback]541926[/snapback]</div>

"Neocon" is merely short for neo-conservative, just as we sometimes shorten "democratic" to "dem" or "republican" to "repub."

A neocon (or neo-conservative) is a person adhering to a certain political philosophy which grew out of conservativism, but differs from it in several significant ways, including the abandonment of fiscal responsibility. A conservative advocates a balanced budget, whereas a neo-con believes in shifting government funding from taxation to borrowing, leading to large deficits and a growing national debt.

Curiously, in the rest of the world, the philosophy we call neo-conservative or neocon is called neo-liberal, growing out of their very different use of the word "liberal," which means something very different elsewhere than it means here.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Nov 20 2007, 09:14 AM) [snapback]541939[/snapback]</div>

And yet, as long as we're bringing home body bags the people will be against it. As someone who has lost someone close to my family over there, i look at the war and say "what did we gain? Why did he die?" You know the answers to those questions? because i sure don't. There weren't terrorists there. There weren't WMD's. There was no threat what-so-ever from that country to us or our way of life. This was a war of aggression launched by someone who wanted to be just like his daddy, but didn't have the intelligence to realize what he was doing. And his party is backing him up. believe it or not, most Americans recognize this, and they'll take the proper action to ensure that the mess gets cleaned up. Iraq won't be "stabilized" in a year. We won't stop shipping home body bags in a year. And the way the administration and the rest of the republicans are talking, they want to start another war in the region, using the same excuses they used for this one.

The country is sick and tired of war. We're sick and tired of thinking of the people we know and worrying if they'll be recalled, or if they'll be killed. Simply put, the person that is elected will be dedicated to ending the war and bringing our people back to safety. From what i've seen and read, the republican candidates don't fall into that category.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Nov 20 2007, 09:22 AM) [snapback]541926[/snapback]</div>

I agree that all Neocons should be banned.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(mojo @ Nov 20 2007, 09:40 AM) [snapback]542032[/snapback]</div>

Not banned. Just voted out of public office.