<p>Obama has next to no national experience. He's a first-term senator out of the Windy City. He's probably only been out of the Windy City twice- once to be installed in the Senate and once to go to Africa. Illinois politicians don't leave Chicago! Next, he's a muslim who is lying on his website by claiming to be a Christian.</p>
<p>Clinton already served her 8 years while her husband "was President" in the 90's. She's a politician thinking about herself first. She's from freaking Arkansas and thinks she needs to be a Senator from New York.</p>
<p>Don't know much about the rest of them for me to make a valid choice.</p>
<p>I got bad news for all your liberals-- if Obama or Clinton get the nomination, we'll have another Republican CiC. We need to find somebody that falls in the middle.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Obama has next to no national experience. He's a first-term senator out of the Windy City. He's probably only been out of the Windy City twice- once to be installed in the Senate and once to go to Africa. Illinois politicians don't leave Chicago! Next, he's a muslim who is lying on his website by claiming to be a Christian.
[/quote]
Actually, Obama was born in Hawaii and went to Catholic school in Indonesia. I don't see how Obama could have possibly been out of Chicago only twice if he had to go to the 109th and 110th Congress, plus all the speeches he's done across the nation to garner the publicity that he has.
His mother was an atheist and his father was raised a muslim but became atheist, and he himself was atheist for much of his young adult life until he converted to Christianity. Obama is a member of the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. Sure, it's easy to lie about your religion, but it's not quite so easy to claim that you are an active member of a church when in fact you are not.</p>
<p>McCain, Giuliani, Mike Huckabee, or Newt Gingrich (long shot!).</p>
<p>I guess whichever gets the nomination, but I'd like to see a CONSERVATIVE Republican get the nomination, although Giuliani would be a strong leader.</p>
<p>Al Gore, if he runs. Otherwise I'm leaning towards Obama, although I'd definitely consider voting for Hillary, Edwards, McCain, and Romney based on how the next year and a half goes. </p>
<p>Obama - 17
Hillary- 6
Richardson
Edwards</p>
<p>McCain-1
Romney - 1
Giuliani - 3</p>
<p>I think it's interesting that so many of us have our minds so made up already...there's a long time until the elections and a lot of events could occur. People will drop out. Debates will occur. Platforms will be clarified. Candidates will make fools of themselves (Howard Dean, anyone?).</p>
<p>Clearly, I am supportive of the O-man.
NOT to assume that I don't doubt his readiness, but then again, how much time does our nation have to seek out the candidate of our dreams when Obama could be it?</p>
<p>I find it strange how many conservatives (well...republicans) on this thread state that they wouldn't vote for Obama because he doesn't have a lot of experience. This is weird, because that is the exact reason they voted for Reagan (and why he won): reagan was an actor and didn't have a lot of experience as a politicean, therefore wasn't tainted and slurred by political motives, financial bribery, etc. </p>
<p>So is love, yet you always hear people saying "I love (insert anything remotely interesting here)." I include myself in this. When I really like something, I don't say "I LIKE it." I say "I LOVE it." That doesn't mean I want to marry what I'm talking about. The same things goes for hate. Eugenia may really dislike Hillary, so he/she used the word "hate" rather than "not like" to emphasize emotion. Things are not always meant to be taken literally.</p>