POLL - Who should run in 2008 for President of the USA?

I would like to Alfred E. Neuman run for president, and Al Sharpton his
vice-prez. Howard Dean could make the coffee.

"Chris G" wrote in message
...
DEMOCRATS:

[ ] Hillary Clinton

[ ] John F. Kerry (said he will run again)

[ ] Joe Lieberman

[ ] John Edwards

[ ] Nancy Pelosi

[ ] Howard Dean

[ ] Al Sharpton

[ ] Barak Obama

REPUBLICANS:

[ ] Colin Powell

[ ] Condie Rice

[ ] Jeb Bush

[ ] John McCain

[ ] Rudy Giuliani

[ ] George Pataki

[ ] Bill Frist

[ ] Arnold Schwarzennegger (would require constitutional amendment)

Your may choose one candidate from each party, OR rank all candidates
from 1-8 in the brackets.

On Wed, 22 Nov 2006 14:17:36 -0500, "Johnboy"
wrote:

REPUBLICANS:
[ ] Colin Powell
[ ] Condie Rice
[ ] Jeb Bush
[ ] John McCain
[ ] Rudy Giuliani
[ ] George Pataki
[ ] Bill Frist
[ ] Arnold Schwarzennegger (would require constitutional amendment)

You left out the most important candidate of them all: Newt Gingrich.

Although he has not announced his candidacy, he is spearheading a new
project called "Winning the Future" in an effort to revitalize the GOP
with Ronald Reagan conservatism. The name of the project is is taken
from his book "Winning the Futu A 21st Century Contract with
America."

On his last two efforts (GOPACK and the Contract With America) he was
successful in getting the Republicans to take full control of Congress
for the first time in 40 years with the November 1994 Massacre.

He is more Conservative than Giuliani (who really wants a New York
City liberal for president? Nobody). All the rest are not in the
running although they might put out feelers.


--

Rope, Tree, Journalist - some assembly required.

Chain, Pickup, Politician - some assembly required.

Citizen Bob wrote:
He is more Conservative than Giuliani (who really wants a New York
City liberal for president? Nobody). All the rest are not in the
running although they might put out feelers.


It is my belief that whoever becomes President has to represent the Party
line. It does not matter what the personal beliefs are of the residents of
the Executive Office - I think they are keenly aware of the Party positions
and are expected to adhere to that direction. I think the President is
just the front man for that set of positions. As such, Gingrich and
Guliani would make a good front line to the people. On the Democrat side,
I expect to see Senator Clinton and someone else such as Senator Dodd.

I do not want to see Obama as President; as he was raised Muslim and I
would expect to see an end to our friendship with Israel; which would make
her the target for concerted all out war with Syria, Iran, Iraq, Jordan,
Lebanon, Egypt, and Libya. I would expect those radical Muslim countries
to make a pact such as occurred in the Six Days War and the Yom Kippur War.


--
__________________________________________________ _________
A strong body makes the mind strong. As to the species of exercises,
I advise the gun. While this gives moderate exercise to the body, it
gives boldness, enterprise and independence to the mind. -- Thomas
Jefferson

On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 12:36:05 -0500, "Head Shot"
wrote:

It is my belief that whoever becomes President has to represent the Party
line.

Some of the biggest achievements are when the President is a leader
rather than a follower.

Sort of "Only Nixon could go to China".

On Thu, 23 Nov 2006 12:36:05 -0500, "Head Shot"
wrote:

He is more Conservative than Giuliani (who really wants a New York
City liberal for president? Nobody). All the rest are not in the
running although they might put out feelers.

It is my belief that whoever becomes President has to represent the Party
line. It does not matter what the personal beliefs are of the residents of
the Executive Office - I think they are keenly aware of the Party positions
and are expected to adhere to that direction. I think the President is
just the front man for that set of positions. As such, Gingrich and
Guliani would make a good front line to the people. On the Democrat side,
I expect to see Senator Clinton and someone else such as Senator Dodd.

Watch Lieberman carefully. Although he won't get the presidential nod,
he may get the VP nod again, this time with Republicans. It was
Republcans who saved his ass in Connecticut. when the Demoncraps
abandoned him.

If he defects and joins the Republican Party, that would upset the
Senate balance. There are precedents for defecting - for example, Sen.
Phil Gramm of Texas defected to the Republicans.

Even if Lieberman only defects to Independent, it will still upset the
Demoncrap majority.


--

Rope, Tree, Journalist - some assembly required.

Chain, Pickup, Politician - some assembly required.

Citizen Bob wrote:
Watch Lieberman carefully. Although he won't get the presidential nod,
he may get the VP nod again, this time with Republicans. It was
Republcans who saved his ass in Connecticut. when the Demoncraps
abandoned him.

Although Lieberman went indy; he said he was to be considered a Democrat.


If he defects and joins the Republican Party, that would upset the
Senate balance. There are precedents for defecting - for example, Sen.
Phil Gramm of Texas defected to the Republicans.

Didn't Nixon defect?


Even if Lieberman only defects to Independent, it will still upset the
Demoncrap majority.

There is no difference between Democrats and Republicans. They both want to
grow the government and they both want to spend more than they have. They
also both seem to groove on pork barrel spending.

On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 22:44:52 -0500, "Head Shot"
wrote:

Watch Lieberman carefully. Although he won't get the presidential nod,
he may get the VP nod again, this time with Republicans. It was
Republcans who saved his ass in Connecticut. when the Demoncraps
abandoned him.

Although Lieberman went indy; he said he was to be considered a Democrat.

Yes, he did. But now that he has been re-elected it's a new ball game.

If he defects and joins the Republican Party, that would upset the
Senate balance. There are precedents for defecting - for example, Sen.
Phil Gramm of Texas defected to the Republicans.

Didn't Nixon defect?

He was the Republican VP with Eisenhower in 1956-1960. I do not know
what he was prior to that. I assumed he was always a Republican - at
least for the significant part of his political career.

Even if Lieberman only defects to Independent, it will still upset the
Demoncrap majority.

There is no difference between Democrats and Republicans. They both want to
grow the government and they both want to spend more than they have. They
also both seem to groove on pork barrel spending.

Indeed, we have OPWTN. But there are the special interests to take
into consideration, and they are different for each party, despite a
lot of overlap. These special interests hide behind ideology, but
that's just a smoke screen to fool the public. They each have their
own selfish agenda that can be traced directly to govt funding.

Follow the money.




--

Rope, Tree, Journalist - some assembly required.

Chain, Pickup, Politician - some assembly required.

Could we please move on to religious topics. These political discussions on
this *******VIDEO******* newsgroup are getting a bit stale.......


Smarty



"Citizen Bob" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 22:44:52 -0500, "Head Shot"
wrote:

Watch Lieberman carefully. Although he won't get the presidential nod,
he may get the VP nod again, this time with Republicans. It was
Republcans who saved his ass in Connecticut. when the Demoncraps
abandoned him.

Although Lieberman went indy; he said he was to be considered a Democrat.

Yes, he did. But now that he has been re-elected it's a new ball game.

If he defects and joins the Republican Party, that would upset the
Senate balance. There are precedents for defecting - for example, Sen.
Phil Gramm of Texas defected to the Republicans.

Didn't Nixon defect?

He was the Republican VP with Eisenhower in 1956-1960. I do not know
what he was prior to that. I assumed he was always a Republican - at
least for the significant part of his political career.

Even if Lieberman only defects to Independent, it will still upset the
Demoncrap majority.

There is no difference between Democrats and Republicans. They both want
to
grow the government and they both want to spend more than they have.
They
also both seem to groove on pork barrel spending.

Indeed, we have OPWTN. But there are the special interests to take
into consideration, and they are different for each party, despite a
lot of overlap. These special interests hide behind ideology, but
that's just a smoke screen to fool the public. They each have their
own selfish agenda that can be traced directly to govt funding.

Follow the money.




--

Rope, Tree, Journalist - some assembly required.

Chain, Pickup, Politician - some assembly required.

On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 11:49:57 -0500, "Smarty"
wrote:

Could we please move on to religious topics. These political discussions on
this *******VIDEO******* newsgroup are getting a bit stale.......

Don't top post.

Learn how to use the DEL key.


--

Rope, Tree, Journalist - some assembly required.

Chain, Pickup, Politician - some assembly required.

Why is top posting bad?


Citizen Bob wrote:
On Sat, 25 Nov 2006 11:49:57 -0500, "Smarty"
wrote:

Could we please move on to religious topics. These political discussions on
this *******VIDEO******* newsgroup are getting a bit stale.......

Don't top post.

Learn how to use the DEL key.


--

Rope, Tree, Journalist - some assembly required.

Chain, Pickup, Politician - some assembly required.