Choose between HillDog, Romney, and Nader...

[Nowisnotthetime]

These could very well be the three main candidates for 2008. Who would you choose?

[katcherbball]

Nader

[Nowisnotthetime]

Hahahaha you are obviously living in a fantasy world if you think Ralph Nader is one of "the three main candidates for 2008."

I'll just say we'll see. People are getting pretty fed up with the nonsense between the Dems and Repubs. Vermont is at 13% in favor of secedding from the US. I think there's something new brewing in the US that is going to blindside a lot of people caught up only in the mainstream culture.

[open mind]

none would have the power to do a damn thing to improve the current state of affairs.......although i like what comes out of nader's mouth most.

[Justin_stacy]

Nader is one of the big three, when hell did that happen? Bloombergs got a better shot then he does. Besides that i'm not sold on Romney getting the RNC nod, i still think Rudy's got a better shot so the poll is kind of hard to answer.

I don't like any of the three, but i guess romney is the safest bet.

[Brianfarg]

Of those three, Nader.

[thatwasamoment]

I'd be fine with Hilldog or Nader as president.

[Nowisnotthetime]

hahaha...it clearly never did happen. and i agree with you on your other points as well.

this poll is very innacurate since romney is not the front-runner for the rnc, and nader is clearly a non-factor in terms of winning the presidency

Primaries come down to support for the base. McCain and Guiliani have both at many times strayed too far from the Republican base to get back in its good graces. Romney is all they have.

Also, Nader may be a factor especially if he runs Green Party, he'll be on a ton of ballots.

[Ambulance X]

Nader, then Hillary just for the chance to vote against Romney. I would never vote for Romney, and I consider myself more of a republican. It would be a cold day in hell that I vote for a Mormon. I mean seriously, think about some of the bullshit that this guy actually believes and then tell me how he is competent enough to run this country. To quote Christopher Hitchens, "People like that should be out in the street shouting and hollering with a cardboard sign, selling pencils from a cup!" It's amazing what offenses to reason and truth that you can get away with if you'll just hide under the guise of religious belief.

[senatorlamb]

Clinton. Romney comes across as phony. In fact, I think he would be a disaster as president.

[Ambulance X]

So what is it? (the bs that he believes which makes him incompetent to run the country)

Have you read the book of Mormon?

[open mind]

So what is it? (the bs that he believes which makes him incompetent to run the country)

well if you're dumb enough to believe that some dude had a dream where he went to a cave, found a book he couldn't read, but then an angel apeared and gave him magic eyeglasses so he could read it, then read the entire book and memorized it, then woke up and wrote the whole book down, maybe you shouldn't be president.
throw in the fact that mormons believe jesus was god, but really just the god of this universe, and if your a really good mormon you get your own universe to be god of when you die. it was founded by a bunch of people who fled persecution only to persecute and annihilate the people whose lands they fled to..........and just the general wierdness of not being allowed into thier temples unless you are already one of them and that whole polygamy thing and the belief (until the 1960's) that black people were just demons and not really humans................and you've got a fucked up, wierd, and totally out there religion...........and since religions to begin with are pretty far out there that's saying alot.

[open mind]

That is amazing, fucking hell what idiots.

And to be fair they aren't polygamists anymore.

well officially they aren't........but that's not saying that there aren't mormons out there that are and justify it through thier faith...........every few years some big story about some really bizarre shit going down in utah comes out and wouldn't you know it the people involved are mormons.

[open mind]

Utah is basically where the worlds mentally retarded go to live in a fundamnetalist paradise.

to be fair salt lake city isn't a city with a mormon majority........the further you get from there though the more likely your going to run into some crazy shit.

[open mind]

It's really weird. We don't have cults/extreme evangelicalism in the UK.

it's definately a brand of bullshit i'm not buying, most people don't know how wierd they are though because they have all these commercials that make no mention of thier kookier beliefs, instead they center on feel good family oriented stuff.
the really big line is.........Family isn't it about....time? they've got tons of these commercials running all the time.
another sneaky thing about them is instead of the commercials saying a message from the mormon church, they say "a message from the church of latter day saints"
there's gotta be some wierd shit going on over there though, crazy people in need of finding meaning to life are everywhere.
by the way i'm not anti-religion at all, i'm set in my beliefs and haven't seen reason to change them......but those mormons.......

[open mind]

there are religous groups in america that aren't about that either.........they just tend not to get much press.

[Ambulance X]

Mormonism = Scientology of the 1800's

[justanotherface]

Mitt Romney.
I usually vote for the underdogs, but this guy has earned it.
:stickout:

[trindaddy]

Mitt Romney.
I usually vote for the underdogs, but this guy has earned it.
:stickout:

i dont see how he's earned it. what did he do, not drink the koolaid during one of his mormon cult meetings?
he's flipped back and forth on social issues such as gay rights, stem cell, gun control, and abortion. he is also for the doubling of guantanamo bay so "they can't use our lawyers". his health care provisions are also shameful.

of those three, nader is the only worthy candidate. he would have my vote. those who have said it's a "waste of vote" to vote for him and would much rather support romney are ignorant for falling for a clear biased two party system, and really have no intentions on doing anything but voting for the party they identify with; even though it's already fucked this country bad enough for so long.

[thatwasamoment]

A Mormon won't be president for some time. Same goes with a Jew.

[trindaddy]

i don't think it is a waste of a vote, because if people truly believe he is the best candidate, then they should vote for him. he knows he does not have a chance of winning, but in gaining any votes, he is bringing his platform to the forefront and allowing more people to become aware of him and his party. it is unrealistic to consider him a "top 3 candidate" though.

i think the creator of this thread meant the top 3 that will actually be running. not so much as the top three vote getters in primaries and such. he is just stated the three names that will be on ballots come the election in 08

if everybody who wanted to vote for him, and did, it would get the green party as a nationally recognized political party, and get national funds/spotlight which would help them tremendously. dont quote me but i believe they need to receive around seven to ten percent of the total votes to do this. once this happened, following elections will give them more and more media attention, national spotlight, and a growing popularity. by all means im not saying that i think nadar will win, because it's not feasible. but i do think he, and others like him who do not conform to major party politics need the support to eventually make america a better place by giving the average american the feeling that thy have more than just 2 basic choices they dont always see eye to eye with.

im not saying everybody wastes their vote on republican and democratic candidates, if thats what they believe in. you're dead on with that. its stupid to vote for things that you dont believe in. i just wish the american perspective of the third party candidate would change.

[trindaddy]

No they are.

Name one major religion that doesn't propose "Far Out" things.


the only one that comes to mind for me, which is more of a non-theist religion, is Buddhism. it's based mostly on practices and rituals that makes them feel as if their souls refreshed and to be at peace with their selves and others while on earth (heaven on earth philosophy i suppose). but i dont know if you would even really presuppose that it is an actual religion

[trindaddy]

Firstly it's not a religion but a philosophy like exitensialism, satanism etc..

and secondly even it proposes you can enter some kind of higher state of being through meditation which i find highly dubious scientifically.


true, i dont find it to be a religion, but many people do. (it is actually still taught in american schools as being "one of the 5 major world religions" and is widely called a dharmic religion). i wasn't attempting to prove you wrong, more of trying to give an example of something that was about the closest "religion" in which many find more practical because of the absence of supernatural beings.

and, as far as i know, i could be wrong so feel free to correct me if i am. i haven't looked this up much since high school and have only talked to my one buddhist friend about the subjects. but, the higher state of being is much more of a mental compacity and mental enlightenment as opposed to any physical change. and that the original buddhas never actually gave any clear cut philosophy to what happens to a person after death (if there was a finite or infinite world, nirvana, whether a soul leaves the body, etc)

[trindaddy]

That's what i think too but does anyone really achieve any mental epiphany by sitting still for a long time? Surely you would be better served reading books?


im not buddhist, but do actively practice kung fu and kung fu philosophy, which are closely tied in with many buddhist philosophies. we do some times meditate after training and such, and i don't know if im exactly "mentally enlightened" per se, but i do find resting for about 5-10 minutes with a clear mind free from thought does ease tension and feel extremely peaceful. i definitely dont go to the extent of monks, or rivers cuomo from weezer (locked himself in a closet for days meditating) though. i can't say from my experience that it makes me smarter, or have a better outlook on the world, but it does make me feel at peace if that counts for anything. obviously reading a book, or studying some type of material would make me a lot smarter than sitting there for 20 hours at a time though.

[Sleepaway]

I like what I've seen of Mitt Romney.

[Sleepaway]

I don't really know what his policies are. I just like the way he talks and his general image.

I can say the same thing about Obama.

[thejetstolehome]

yea, he is. and he's probably right. the left here is the right there. i'd venture to say that many of us who post here and are considered liberals would be a) considered too radical to be elected in the US and/or b) too conservative to be elected in Europe.

[Justin_stacy]

Primaries come down to support for the base. McCain and Guiliani have both at many times strayed too far from the Republican base to get back in its good graces. Romney is all they have.

Also, Nader may be a factor especially if he runs Green Party, he'll be on a ton of ballots.

1. Romney has a history just as "liberal" as the one portrayed on Rudy. So that point is nonsense. Also the nomination will eventually come down to who has the best shot of keeping Hilary out of office, and although the press (a real balanced group) favors Romney because they know he'll lose in a presidential race, I'm not so sure primary voters are willing to concede the race so easily.

2. Nader will only be a factor in hurting the DNC by taking away coastal and college votes. But he has no reasonable chance of winning, and therefore shouldn’t, in a realistic poll, be placed in the “top three”.

[Nowisnotthetime]

1. Romney has a history just as "liberal" as the one portrayed on Rudy. So that point is nonsense. Also the nomination will eventually come down to who has the best shot of keeping Hilary out of office, and although the press (a real balanced group) favors Romney because they know he'll lose in a presidential race, I'm not so sure primary voters are willing to concede the race so easily.

2. Nader will only be a factor in hurting the DNC by taking away coastal and college votes. But he has no reasonable chance of winning, and therefore shouldn’t, in a realistic poll, be placed in the “top three”.

1. Romney is the only one actually willing to pull a 180 and try to pretend he was never a liberal. Guiliani won't win because he won't fully concede things like abortion, and just say he personally dislikes it. McCain won't win because he has allied himself with Bush too much and even a lot of conservatives are over Bush. Romney is all they have and a TON of experts are saying that right now. If Fred Thomson gets in, he may have a shot but I still think he's too inexperienced and hasn't joined the race yet for a reason.

2. Nader doesn't take votes away from anyone. The Democrats should have to earn their votes by sticking to their principles. Also, if you do your research an extremely high percentage of Nader voters are voters who either wouldn't vote or would just vote another third party candidate instead. Please do your research before making nonsense claims.

[Aiwendillie]

Nader? lol, since when did Nader ever have a chance at presidency? I think if anything, Giuliani has the best chance at presidency..

Frankly, I don't like the Hilldog.. As a person, I'm sure she's wonderful, but as a political candidate, there's no way I'm voting for her. She's a hell of a waffler.. As for Romney, I don't really know much about him.

I was going to vote for Obama, but every time I watched his speeches, he never discussed anything. Instead, he rambled on about some inspiring but vague crap.. He's well-educated, though.

On a random note.. What affect do you think Bush's presidency has on the republicans? Like, the ones who voted for him initially? Do you think the majority of the people still support him, or do you think it'll make them slightly more liberal (at least towards warfare)?

[Nowisnotthetime]

That is not nonsense - he clearly takes votes away from the Democratic candidates.

I'm saying I disagree with the view that it is taking away votes. If we have that view, the system will always remain the same. The Democrats are responsible for their views and if they want more liberal votes than they need to reflect those views. If they don't, which is the case with the main candidates, especially Hilary, then they never had those votes to begin with. Thus, Nader or the Greens didn't take votes away, the Democrats alienated them.

[thatwasamoment]

Time for a parliamentary system.

[Ambulance X]

I'm hoping Guiliani wins the Republicn nomination.

I wonder who would win NY with Hillary vs. Guiliani

[open mind]

pretty dumb blanket statement

no, it's a realistic one, every major religion has some pretty big ideas that defy logic. even a person of faith (of which i am) has to admit that.

[senatorlamb]

This Hillary hate is a damn joke. Pssh Nader. And Romney is a pandering disaster. At least you can tell Kerry had some core beliefs but couldn't articulate right it right in a sound bite society. Romney flip flops for political power solely. He can't fix Iraq, he can't fix healthcare, he can't fix anything.

[Justin_stacy]

1. Romney is the only one actually willing to pull a 180 and try to pretend he was never a liberal. .

That is exactly why i don’t think he’ll get the nod. All politicians are opportunist, but most aren’t so obvious about it.

it. McCain won't win because he has allied himself with Bush too much and even a lot of conservatives are over Bush. Romney is all they have and a TON of experts are saying that right now. If Fred Thomson gets in, he may have a shot but I still think he's too inexperienced and hasn't joined the race yet for a reason..

This is still Rudy’s race to lose. Romney only seems strong because of the push he’s recieving from the Democrat favoring media. Romney can’t beat Hilary, he can’t beat Obama, and therefore the “media” is going out of its way to push him and destroy Rudy.

Romney is not the heir apparent to Regan that “some experts” are trying to make him out to be, and my guess is that the same primary voters that nominated Bush (clearly not a traditional conservative) are going to go after the individual that has the best shot at winning and keeping out a threatening liberal democrat (Hilary), before they take a chance on a questionable conservative who doesn’t stand a chance at winning on a national level.

And I’ll agree McCain is out of it, age can fail an otherwise qualified individual.


Nader doesn't take votes away from anyone. The Democrats should have to earn their votes by sticking to their principles. Also, if you do your research an extremely high percentage of Nader voters are voters who either wouldn't vote or would just vote another third party candidate instead. Please do your research before making nonsense claims.

Voters willing to vote on a green are more likely to side with the Democrat‘s view point rather then the Republican one, so therefore these are seen as potential DNC voters where as the RNC has already written them off. So Democrats stands to lose where Republicans see no, or very little, effect.

And to your nonsense.....Exit polls in 2000 showed that over half of all Nader voters would have gone after the DNC nomination had Nader not been on the ticket. With much less then half of Nader's votes Gore would have won Florida, Oregon and New Hampshire easily giving him the Presidency. So yes Democrats lose when Nader is on the ticket, and its nonsense to say otherwise.

[Justin_stacy]

I wonder who would win NY with Hillary vs. Guiliani

NY doesn't matter in a national race. Its a given hilary will carry the state.

[aminorthreat55]

Nader.

[Nowisnotthetime]

That is exactly why i don’t think he’ll get the nod. All politicians are opportunist, but most aren’t so obvious about it.



This is still Rudy’s race to lose. Romney only seems strong because of the push he’s recieving from the Democrat favoring media. Romney can’t beat Hilary, he can’t beat Obama, and therefore the “media” is going out of its way to push him and destroy Rudy.

Romney is not the heir apparent to Regan that “some experts” are trying to make him out to be, and my guess is that the same primary voters that nominated Bush (clearly not a traditional conservative) are going to go after the individual that has the best shot at winning and keeping out a threatening liberal democrat (Hilary), before they take a chance on a questionable conservative who doesn’t stand a chance at winning on a national level.

And I’ll agree McCain is out of it, age can fail an otherwise qualified individual.

Voters willing to vote on a green are more likely to side with the Democrat‘s view point rather then the Republican one, so therefore these are seen as potential DNC voters where as the RNC has already written them off. So Democrats stands to lose where Republicans see no, or very little, effect.

And to your nonsense.....Exit polls in 2000 showed that over half of all Nader voters would have gone after the DNC nomination had Nader not been on the ticket. With much less then half of Nader's votes Gore would have won Florida, Oregon and New Hampshire easily giving him the Presidency. So yes Democrats lose when Nader is on the ticket, and its nonsense to say otherwise.

Once again, get your facts straight, the Hardvard in depth study, proves that Nader did not cost Gore the election in Florida in 2000. Aside from that, read again what I'm saying. I'm saying Democrats have to earn votes. If they didn't get Green or independent votes it's their fault for alienating liberals, it's not the fault of the Greens or others running.

[Love As Arson]

I have said it once, and I will say it again, if Guiliani had four more years in his term after 9-11, he would not have the luster that he currently does. As such, I highly doubt, upon inspection, he will receive the republican nomination.

[Love As Arson]

Well then who an earth will?
McCain or Romney.

[Justin_stacy]

It really comes down to whether Republicans care more about stem cells and abortion or about actually winning the next election.


Substitute "primary voting republicans" for republicans and i couldn't agree more.

[Justin_stacy]

Once again, get your facts straight, the Hardvard in depth study, proves that Nader did not cost Gore the election in Florida in 2000. Aside from that, read again what I'm saying. I'm saying Democrats have to earn votes. If they didn't get Green or independent votes it's their fault for alienating liberals, it's not the fault of the Greens or others running.

The first point is futile then.....the Washington Post showed that exit polls presented a different out come to the race had Nader not run. But like you said nothing could ever prove Nader cost Gore the election.

And with reading again what you said.....I quoted and commented on “Nader could be a factor.” Which by its self is completely untrue if you disregard that he has any effect on the DNC. Outside of that he is no factor.

[fallout1819]

I haven't heard anything from Nader and I despise Romney.. so as much as it pains me to do this, I have to say Clinton.

[DaGaR]

mitt romney cuz he's mormon. and mormons have the best values.

[DaGaR]

Like thinking black people are demons...


no we don't think that, but good try bucko.

[DaGaR]

40 years isn't a long time.

where the hell do you get your "information?"

[Love As Arson]

Romney stated that, upon hearing the change in the church's doctrine, he pulled to the side of the road and started crying with joy, or somerthing that effect.

[Yes. And?]

idealist choice: ralph nader

realist choice: hillary clinton

[Yes. And?]

romney's not gonna be the republican candidate.

[Ambulance X]

romney's not gonna be the republican candidate.

I really hope you're right

[Rock'N'Roll]

I Had To Go With Romney...But I Don't Particularly Like Him Or Any Of The Other Candidates For That Matter...I'm Pulling For McCain But The Immigration Bill Has Hurt Him Quite Alot So His Future At This Point Is Unsure...

[Broken Parachute]

Naderrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr