<p>Haha, that is funny. If Hillary were a man, she wouldn't have Bill Clinton and therefore the "experience" debate would be more leveled. It would be a totally different election.
But if Hillary were herself and Obama were white, I think Hillary would get votes for being different than the average candidate in some way (Plus the vote of black women wouldn't be as split, though I doubt this is a crucial demographic to win over). I guess in the end it depends on the press coverage of her and the way that spins the public opinion.
Personally, I dislike McCain (though I can see why he would appeal to some) but I don't really support either Hillary or Obama. Both preach change but both are politicians and corrupt by modern definition. Though the executive branch has gained a lot of power, Congress still has to be involved in many important decisions the president makes. Promising something is one thing but going through the administrative actions and actually getting it passed is another. I'm not sure why I'm now expected to believe that any of these candidates will have higher success rates than past candidates elected to office.
There's also that whole issue of money...</p>
<p>Its all about the economy.
If McCain wins the presidency, the economy will be further hurt.
If Obama wins, our economy will enter a boom in the long-run.
If Clinton wins, our economy will leave recession, and enter growth in the short-run.</p>
<p>Obama has had more experience in Econ, than Clinton. </p>
<p>EVERYTHING has to do with the economy, trust me.</p>
<p>Yea, if McCain wins then we can see the doom of America coming in the next few decades. All these people blindly following McCain without understanding his policies at all truly scare me. He will destroy America and then the world.</p>
<p>Optimization, the country is not ready for a woman president because of all the derogatory names and insults she has taken throughout this whole election. A reporter was interviewing a candidate (I think it was Edwards) and asked, "So Hillary...what are you going to do about that *****?" And then she was said to have "pimped out" her daughter for the election, etc. If you go on Youtube and look at everyday comments, you will see random posters insulting women. Racism is no longer accepted in our society, but unfortunately being sexist is still fine.</p>
<p>You honestly think Obama and Clinton will HELP the economy? Obama wants a complete redistribution of wealth. Sorry we are a capitalist country, not a bunch of crazy socialists. Lower taxes brings in more revenue and creates more jobs. Higher taxes chase away businesses (the people who create jobs and tax revenue) and make the US a less attractive place to do business.</p>
<p>What are businesses going to do with lower taxes? Hire more employees, purchase capital equipment, invest it, etc. All of which stimulate the economy and create jobs! Even my liberal economics professors will admit to that, but the Democrats continue to babble on about the rich paying their fair share. Sorry, but I think 40% of someone's income is already more than their fair share, wouldn't you?</p>
<p>McCain wants to raise taxes as well.</p>
<p>"No matter who we elect out of those three, taxes are going up" - Ann Coulter</p>
<p>Obama's biggest Achilles heel may be Michelle. George W. Bush is probably delighted to see & hear someone on the national political scene with less oratorical skills & common sense than he. Why does the word "monster" come to mind. P.S. This is off the record.</p>
<p>Obama is weak in foreign policy though, and when the US has to have relationships I would rather have someone more like with McCain's experience in there...
The Economy is a problem but the president doesn't have a whole bunch control over it...The president get blamed for things that aren't even his/her fault...that goes for every president...which is unfair but true.
Obama's fault is his inexperience and he really might not know what he is getting into...and while no candidate might, he probably knows the least.
Obama preaches an awesome message but his naive-ness really turns me off.
and I agree with the guy @ UC Irvine...
and if you think the country is bad now, or will be bad if the 'wrong guy' takes office...some of you need to get out and see the world...like really..</p>
<p>Just popping in quickly to say...
ChaiMex, you say you, and I quote, "would never ever trust a lawyer..."
Besides the obvious (well, what would you do if you were in legal trouble, needed to be defended in a court of law, etc.) I'd just like to point out that Hillary (and she spells her name with two l's, fyi) Clinton was not only a lwyer but also taught law for a time. I personally think having a president who understands the laws of the nation and actually respects them would be a breath of fresh air.</p>
<p>Obama went to Harvard Law...then taught constitutional law at UChicago...</p>
<p>Obama and Clinton are too damn evenly matched. both have slipups and qualifications, both have redeeming qualities and faults! </p>
<p>Screw this, I'm voting for Nader.</p>
<p>Hillary is my fourth choice for a presidential candidate (after Richardson, Kucinich, and Edwards dropped out). Although Clinton and Obama are ideologically the same, my problem with Obama is that he's all talk and no substance. I admire him for his skills as an inspirational orator, but I don't think he has the right plan for America. The Obama hype has taken over my school (we had a mock primary in which 86% of students voted for him), but I'm staying out of it, in spite of the countless students who belittle myself and my fellow Clinton supporters while we, ourselves, try to remain respectful. I think Clinton has the sharp intellect, strength, and concrete plans to lead our nation.</p>
<p>BUT, I must add, I'll be satisfied as long as we have a Democrat in the White House. I don't dislike Obama; I just prefer Hillary.</p>
<p>Obama does have substance: It's those that just fall for sound bites that think he does not. Just because he is good looking and pleasant to listen to doesn't mean he is empty-hey he graduated from Columbia and was top in his class at Harvard Law School. His answers are thougtful and nuanced. As a voter in NH I had the great chance to see all the candidates numerous times. I also did my homework and have read up on their policies and life stories. What gets me are those that just throw the same cliches around-I don't think they have really done their homework.<br>
And yes we really need change! We have had 8 years of Clintons (I supported Bill) and 12 years of Bush-we need to move forward not back- I am so tired of politicians splitting us apart-dividing and conquering. It weakens the country for sure. It's time to put a stop to the nastiness and work more cooperatively-Obama believes this-ofcourse when put on defense-he has no choice but to fight back.</p>
<p>@ Shortie...
well... Lawyers control you, for all you know your lawyer could be talking the the other person's lawyer and planing on how they can drag on the case...what do they care? they get paid...
When you're a lawyer you have to hurt someone to get ahead, you have to lie to get ahead...and while not all lawyers are bad...most will take the money and defend a criminal...many lawyers do not have dignity... My mom got sued the other day, and then the case got dropped...the person who sued her said that the lawyer manipulated something or what not...I don't remember...I don't know if what she states is true...But my parents get sued a lot, most of it is BS...and most people can see that...but yet the lawyers still take on the case...</p>
<p>anyways...I actually liked Bill Richardson too. experienced...but he didn't preach to get votes like Obama...shame he dropped out...</p>
<p>My 17 year old son who will vote in November had the great opportunity to work alongside Obama and his staff in November at the annual food drive here in NH. Obama spent at least an hour unloading cans from the truck to the shelves at the local food bank. He got marginal publicity for this, but clearly impressed the kids that were participating.</p>
<p>If you guys really want "change" you should have looked into Ron Paul. He and Kucinich are really the only honest and caring politicians we have left.</p>
<p>ChaiMex: You want MCCAIN talking to people in other countries? They all think he's completely insane, especially in Europe, where our main allies are. Plus, he likes to argue with people, for completely unnecessary reasons (like he did with that reporter the other day). I think Obama, while he doesn't necessarily have "experience" will be accepted by many people around the world because of his mixed heritage and name, in addition to his ability to win people over.
Also, just because the democratic candidates support universal health care, doesn't mean they all want total redistribution of wealth. As someone who, for a while, was uninsured because I couldn't afford it, I fully support a healthcare system that would allow me to go to a doctor without having to pay $130 a visit+ $100 for medicine, or either $900 for 8 months when I might not even go to the doctor but two or three times. Britain's health care system is "universal" and yet it is well run and their economy is not in the toilet like ours (in fact their currency is about twice worth what the US dollar is). I believe we'd have plenty of money to run a universal health care system if we quit spending billions of dollars a month on a worthless war.</p>
<p>oh, and shanekennedy, I did look into Ron Paul. He is still far too conservative for me, and I don't support someone who isn't pro-choice.</p>
<p>We can't afford universal health care until we get a handle on illegal immigration.And there lies the true crux of the problem. As for Senator Obama I just saw the old movie version entitled "All the King's Men" funny how many lines from this movie resembles the rhetoric he 's been spouting "hope" , "change" . I seem to recall that we were only guaranteed the pursuit of happiness no where did it say that it included health care for all.</p>
<p>TerpDad: But doesn't "the pursuit of happiness" include having the means and resources to pursue that happiness? Someone who is sick in bed and can't afford proper health care to get better is in no condition to go out and pursue his/her happiness, and a person who is in a constant state of worry should they get sick is not going to want or be able to take the risks they might need to acieve their dreams.</p>
<p>McCain is not going to raise taxes. While he's not as conservative as many (like myself) would like he has vowed to cut taxes (make the Bush tax cuts permanent). Who thinks Mccain is completely insane? I doubt you have an answer to that because no one does. Hell the Europeans probably don't even know who he is. And even if they did why would it matter? Should we choose our president based on what other people around the world think about him? </p>
<p>Does anyone think the government is efficient enough to provide healthcare to three hundred million Americans? Hell no! The government is a useless bureaucratic mess. Do you like going to the DMV? Probably not, but get used to it because that's what the doctors office will be like under Clinton or Obama. Finally, it's not the governments job to give everyone healthcare. The less government the better.</p>
<p>the europeans liked clinton first. now they swoon for obama. there are no promises by the time the general election comes around as to who they'll like next.</p>
<p>opinions are as divided there as they are here.</p>