<p>I am wondering who everyone thinks should become president and why. personally i am undecided... let me know what you think!</p>
<p>hghjjSjhgbvvfiuoEashasakAnbhsagsfbRksjhdbadsCsaiopkf,kmjnH</p>
<p>FshuidhasidUsdjakfabgsdnopqNfjiauCkljanTIsfadasdhOsuafdaN</p>
<p>The two candidates are rather polarized. McCain is an all-out conservative and, for the most part, agrees with Bush's policies. Obama is quite liberal and would favor increasing government spending and taxes for the higher income brackets.</p>
<p>One of the biggest differences is that Obama favors universal healthcare while McCain would keep insurance privatized. McCain would rather privatize and reduce spending in government programs (such as Medicare) while Obama would expand them. The military is one big exception: McCain favors greater military spending, while Obama would decrease spending here.</p>
<p>McCain supports private school vouchers, while Obama supports increasing funding to public schools. I believe Obama supports more adoption of technology into the government entirely: I haven't heard of McCain talk about this, so I don't know if he has a stance or not (my impression is he's not too interested).</p>
<p>Socially, McCain does not support abortions while Obama does. Obama is more inclined to support gay marriage than McCain, though he only truly supports civil unions. Obama favors more gun control than McCain. Obama would decriminalize (not legalize) marijuana while McCain supports further "War on Drugs" tactics.</p>
<p>Those are just a few topics I can think about. Hopefully I didn't skew it one way or the other. I'm personally going for Obama as I agree with his beliefs more as a whole. I find Obama to be much more diplomatic and cooperative with other nations when it comes to foreign policy as well, and McCain more aggressive and into "the US is on top" mentality.</p>
<p>I'd go for the least offensive Democrat, which happens to be McCain.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'd go for the least offensive Democrat, which happens to be McCain.
[/quote]
McCain is not a Democrat by any stretch of the imagination. Any effort on his part to appeal to Democrats is a concerted effort to pander to the left in order to make up for the fact that a significant portion of the neocon movement does not like him. Being disliked by one end of the spectrum does not mean that you are part of the other end. Sorry. All you have to do is to take a look at his voting record (don't listen to what he says during speeches; actually look at the records) to see this is true.</p>
<p>Also McCain is very much a war-time president. His entire career is based off of military service whether it was actually serving or serving on committees with military ties. He actually believes, according to his own speeches, that there will be more wars with other nations during his potential term. A strong likelihood is attacking Iran preemptively. What we need now is not a war-time president... we need a peace-making president and McCain is definitely not that person. </p>
<p>There are a bunch of other issues that I'm sure other people will cover. Oh and McCain is 72 with a history of illness. Those of you who think that age should not be an issue in this election are just kidding yourselves. Memory, mental sharpness, and even just good health are vital to being the leader or such a large entity - all of which McCain is declining or as declined in.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Being disliked by one end of the spectrum does not mean that you are part of the other end.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Haha, great line. Reminds me of Holy Joe Lieberman: despised by both the left and the right!</p>
<p>All the things that once made McCain a "Maverick TM", he has now reversed on. So he's either a turncoat for caving into the right wingers, or he's a liar and just saying whatever he needs to in order to fool conservatives into voting for him. A flip-flopper or a liar. Take your pick.</p>
<p>Sydney (McCain's middle name) and Obama are both saying whatever they have to in order to get elected. Both of them are flip-flopping and lying. Vote for whichever candidate disgusts you less. </p>
<p>I think that Sydney is less of a conservative relative to Obama's liberlism. If you don't want someone from the fringe then Sydney is a better option... I don't think either is a good option.</p>
<p>Lieberman had integrity, which is why he was hated. Personally I liked the guy.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think that Sydney is less of a conservative relative to Obama's liberlism.
[/quote]
I'm not so sure that I agree on that. Like if you compare each candidate to the most right/left (respectively) presidential candidate, Obama is much further from Kucinich than McCain is from some of the more conservative Republican candidates (Tancredo? Hunter?).</p>
<p>In the context of the overall political spectrum, McCain can't go much further right while Obama definitely has room to move to the left. In the context of US politics, though, I'd say they're both equidistant from the US center.</p>
<p>And here the Ron Paul fanatics chime in...</p>
<p>Bob Barr anyone?</p>
<p>Regardless of who is elected, there isn't going to be substantial change where it is needed. We need fiscal responsibility, governmental reform, a significant decrease in the size and power of the federal government, and an end to social welfare programs. Either of the potential presidents will, once elected, continue to spend beyond reason, on health care, social security, anti-drug/ anti-terror/ anti-poverty programs, Iraq, etc. Neither will bring the needed reform.</p>
<p>
You nailed it, Orange. ;)</p>
<p>I will probably vote for Bob Barr, depending on who Ron Paul supports. If Paul supports nobody, Il vote for him then.</p>
<p>I couldn't deal with m,myself knowing I voted for Obama or McCain. They both are just so bloody bad.</p>
<p>
[quote]
and an end to social welfare programs.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The government needs to get on top of their **** before they even thinking about doing this.</p>
<p>
[quote]
so bloody bad
[/quote]
What a coincidence, that's how I feel about Ron Paul. ^_^</p>
<p>McCain may be moderate on social issues (or at least he used to be), but he's even more belligerent on foreign policy than even the stupidest person in the Bush administration. Remember, Pat Buchanan said something like "McCain will make Cheney look like Gandhi".</p>
<p>...and you think Pat Buchanan is an objective observer?!?!</p>
<p>I agree that the government needs to scale back in a lot of areas. The problem is the market would take care of a lot of government run problems (that don't get better with the government involved).</p>
<p>Obama is VERY liberal. Just look at his voting records (ontheissues.org for example). Obama was pegged as one of the most liberal members of the US Senate. He has also lied to the public and flip-floped. (See his Illinois Senate survey that a "staffer" filled out...with Obama's handwritten notes on it, and his opinion as to the Constitutionality of the DC handgun ban.) Obama is no savior of democracy. He is a lying, pandering politician in classic Illinois style.</p>
<p>McCain isn't good either, IMO.</p>
<p>
[quote]
and his opinion as to the Constitutionality of the DC handgun ban.)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>There's constitutionality to the DC handgun ban!?!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Obama was pegged as one of the most liberal members of the US Senate.
[/quote]
So was John Kerry. It wasn't true in either case. That same argument is trotted out every election cycle in one form or another... tell me, how can every Democratic presidential candidate be "one of the most liberal <insert branch="" of="" government="">"?</insert></p>