Who has right stuff?

[The Leaper]

At this point, I'll take Romney. He's one of the few guys actually qualified for the position among all of the front runners. He has tangible evidence that he can get things done in a crunch (SLC Olympics) and that he is capable of compromise (moderate to conservative guy as a governor in MASS) and has a track record of getting things done across the board.

Obama has potential, but I think he is still too young and inexperienced on the international stage at this point. Another 4 years, and he'll be the Dems front runner.

Giuliani did OK in NYC, but he doesn't really have much else to fall back on...and he's probably too moderate to energize the Republican base, unless Clinton gets the nod from the Dems.

Clinton has too many skeletons and no credible experience to point to for being POTUS. She tried to do things her way the first 2 years of Bill's presidency...and America hated her so much they put Newt Gingrich into power in Congress. Bill told her to shut the hell up, and the country did pretty well for the remainder of his presidency. Polls show that 50% of the country is heavily opposed to voting for her right now...that will make it tough for her to be elected. If the Democrats decide to put her out front, they will get beat. The GOP is weak and likely to not have a huge voter turnout in 08 otherwise, so why put a lightning rod like her out there to charge up the conservatives?

Edwards probably is the best Democrat at this point to me. Like Romney, he's bright and polished...and doesn't lean so far to the wacko side of the party that he's a liability.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Hillary is a self-serving opportunistic weasel ... I agree that Ron Paul's candor is just a reflection of the fact that he has nothing to lose.

I can't argue with your impression of Mrs. Clinton, but aren't they all weasels? The process FORCES them to be this way. Hilliary started out blunt, now she is evasive. And as far as oportunistic: good lord, they are ALL by definition FIERCELY opportunistic. Even laid-back Huckabee, he just has a better regulated nervous system and can hide it.

I always thought Bill Richardson was about as straight-shooting as they come. And maybe he is more real than most, but he too dipped into the baloney bag last summer.

Ummm, Ron Paul & Kusinich are the most genuine. And you answered why.

Leaper: I was just thinking that the only two candidates in the race too weasely for me to vote for are Edwards and Romney! They both make my skin crawl - see Hoosier's description of Hilliary. I think it goes to show that we form impressions about these people as to their character and sincerity, and stick by our gut feeling. But maybe they just have us fooled. I'm voting Hilliary!

Freak Out: How can you be calling for Kusinich? You got Steve Colbert in your SIG. Maybe a Kusinich/Colbert ticket?

[Freak Out]

I think they all stink. Every single one of the candidates that have a legitimate shot at winning will, or have already sold us down the fucking river. Rudy is an evil fuck so he makes a perfect republican front runner and Clinton...well the swift boaters will do her in. I could live with an Obama/Richardson ticket..or a Clinton/Richardson one.....neither of them will try and enact the changes I would like to see but I'll take what I can get.

[Kiwon]

Where is Kucinich?

He's a few laps behind at the moment, but at least he's making news:

Kucinich Questions Bush's Mental Health
2 days ago

PHILADELPHIA (AP) — Democratic presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich questioned President Bush's mental health in light of comments he made about a nuclear Iran precipitating World War III.

"I seriously believe we have to start asking questions about his mental health," Kucinich, an Ohio congressman, said in an interview with The Philadelphia Inquirer's editorial board on Tuesday. "There's something wrong. He does not seem to understand his words have real impact."

I just looked up his wife's name and discovered that she's half his age. Maybe he's putting politics on the back burner....

She's worn a tongue ring for 10 years. Now, that would be a first......a First Lady with a tongue piercing.

[Kiwon]

....neither of them will try and enact the changes I would like to see....

<Gulp>.....Dare I ask what those might be??

[Merlin]

I see that the higher vote is for the liberal with zero experience with no accomplishments in his first term as senator and the rich neo-con with no sense of reality.

I am really scared that some people are allowed to vote even though they have no idea WTF is going on...

[hoosier]

I see that the higher vote is for the liberal with zero experience with no accomplishments in his first term as senator and the rich neo-con with no sense of reality.

I am really scared that some people are allowed to vote even though they have no idea WTF is going on...

Just because we didn't realize Tauscher and Driver were "reaches" as 7th round draft picks doesn't mean we don't have a clue when it comes to politics. :P

[hoosier]

I can't argue with your impression of Mrs. Clinton, but aren't they all weasels? The process FORCES them to be this way. Hilliary started out blunt, now she is evasive. And as far as oportunistic: good lord, they are ALL by definition FIERCELY opportunistic. Even laid-back Huckabee, he just has a better regulated nervous system and can hide it.

I always thought Bill Richardson was about as straight-shooting as they come. And maybe he is more real than most, but he too dipped into the baloney bag last summer.

Ummm, Ron Paul & Kusinich are the most genuine. And you answered why.

I see your point and don't disagree entirely about the "process made me do it" sentiment. But still, there are exceptions, even if they are a very rare animal. Hillary in 1992--who was no longer a political virigin back then--seemed to be an exception to pure opportunism on health care. But then she got burned and turned into what she is now. You imply Huckaby isn't an exception--I have no idea. Is Obama an exception?

[Joemailman]

I see that the higher vote is for the liberal with zero experience with no accomplishments in his first term as senator and the rich neo-con with no sense of reality.

I am really scared that some people are allowed to vote even though they have no idea WTF is going on...

But we'll let you vote anyway. :P

[Harlan Huckleby]

You imply Huckaby isn't an exception--I have no idea. Is Obama an exception?

Hard to say what we're talking about. but I think we're looking for politicians who are honest, who don't take positions just for political strategy.

There really are no such exceptions. Every politician MUST continually make political calculations or they perish. McCain, Obama seem *relatively* solid to me, but they both choose their words oh so carefully. One of the most genuine politician on the scene now is George Bush. And where did he get us? Huckabee seems relatively genuine.

I give up on trying to understand politicians. Bill Clinton was a walking contradiciton, he was BOTH sincere and calculating. I look for candidates who are wise and smart, like Joe Biden, and they lose every time. Fuck it. Just give me a break from bad republican presidents, I'll vote for OJ if he can win.

[digitaldean]

You imply Huckaby isn't an exception--I have no idea. Is Obama an exception?

I watched a lengthy interview of Huckabee on Glenn Beck's show on CNN Headline News. He seems the most down to earth and real person out there. Huckabee took over Ark. in a tumultuous time and turned the state around. He has the balance of conservatism and progressive thinking that I believe is needed in this country.

I detest Billary. Somehow being a First Lady and a senator known more for grandstanding than accomplishments doesn't spice up the old resume for President. Plus I think the country is smart enough to avoid another Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton trend. She appears as the anointed one, but her negatives outweigh her positives.

Romney has the experience but man he just comes across as just too darn slick and polished (not to mention some of the policy reversals).

Edwards is promising to get college for everybody and acts like he's done so much in the Senate, which is anything but the truth.

Ron Paul does make sense in the abolition of the IRS and modifying health care.

Government scope must be limited while still protecting the people from some corporations that are trying to make a fast buck regardless of the consequences. It also must be cognizant of those who wish to destroy us via any means possible.

Obama was a backbench State Senator from Illinois that won a controversial IL senate campaign. He has not done anything of significance in the Senate to merit attention. He may be a breath of fresh air, but I see a 21st century Jimmy Carter in the making.

I have voted Republican and 3rd party, but never Democrat. If I can find a Democrat that is pro-life, for limited government and is aggressive in the fight vs. Islamofacism, then I will vote for them.

[Harlan Huckleby]

I watched Huckabee for an hour and half on C-SPAN. I think I could actually vote for him. This is a shocking development, I've never voted for a republican in my life.

He's very conservative, socially, a Baptist preacher. But I don't think he'd put any of my gay friends in prision. If the country survived Jimmy Carter, I suppose they can endure another bible thumper. He seems like a guy who can command respect and work with a democratic congress.

I just don't think the Repubs will nominate Huckabee. They seem to prefer beady-eyed corporate types like Bush and Romney. Alpha males.

[Freak Out]

There are a bunch of sites like this out there plus some interactive questionnaires....

http://www.2decide.com/table.htm

[Harlan Huckleby]

I think the country is smart enough to avoid another Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton trend.

Who would you vote for in an election between Jeb Bush and Barrak Obama?

[Harlan Huckleby]

I think the country is smart enough to avoid another Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton trend.

Who would you vote for in an election between Jeb Bush and Barrak Obama?

A telling silence from Double D.

When Baby Bush first ran back in 2000, I heard little concern that Papa Bush was enough Bush for one country. But now that we are likely to get a second Clinton, we hear of the perils of family dynasty. And the sins of the two Bushes somehow become points against Hilliary Clinton.

You hear the "Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton" line from both liberals and conservatives who are simply opposed to Hilliary Clinton. It's a bogus argument.