who is everyone...

[oracle's child]

i used to be excited about Obama but now i'm not sure. hillery lies so much, i don't trust her AT ALL. and mccain, hmmm i like him but he's a military man (like bush) and he won't bring home the troops. sad to say, i just may not vote at all.

[SugarCharmz]

I can't vote yet, but if I could, I'd probably go Hillary. I think Obama is all talk. As for McCain, he annoys me.

I would have voted for either Guliani or Fred Thompson. They BOTH looked like they would have been able to do a good job!!!

I think the presidency should be a team rather than just one guy and his vice president and cabinet. I was thinking that when I was watching the debates. I might be a good idea. :\ Nobody'd do it though, lol.

[watershield]

I think the presidency should be a team rather than just one guy and his vice president and cabinet
Sounds like a teams to me

[Orion]

I'd prefer to just write in 'Ron Paul' on my ballot. It would be less of a waste than to vote for any of the others. If I were actually going to put a vote, McCain would actually be the likely one. I know 'eww republician'. But Hilary is Hilary and Obama (who I was preferring of the current pool) has been losing faith from me.

We need to have a more Canadian styling and have more people run... I know there are usually 8-10 people on the US ballot, but it is almost a joke. Even independent senators and representatives that are elected have to choose which of the big two parties to side with so they can determine majority. Such silly nonsense.

[SugarCharmz]

"I think the presidency should be a team rather than just one guy and his vice president and cabinet
Sounds like a teams to me"

I know that sounds like a team already, but what i mean is like.. maybe 4 presidents and they'd debate everything over and they'd ALL have to be in agreement before they could pass or veto anything. From what I understand and heard, and I'm probably wrong, it looks to me like the Vice and Cabinet don't get much of a say whether or not a new law that the House suggests gets passed or vetoed. Then again, I don't know much about the process of government, so I'm probably just babbling like an idiot, lol.

But yeah, that way, if we get a nutcase, there would be three other guys/girls who have brains to not let anything he does get passed. Then again, we could get 4 nutcases in and the whole country would be doomed.

.............

Am i SO glad that the weight of establishing the new government wasn't placed on MY shoulders..... I don't know if the United States would have survived this long, lol.

[Eireayne]

First point - VOTE! That is the only way your voice will be heard.
Just because you don't like any of the candidates doesn't mean you get to bitch and not participate.
If you don't vote, then you have no business complaining about the results. *whines-"but I can't decide! It's too hard to choose! This sucks."*
Make a choice. Sure it's hard, but as a citizen, it's a responsibility! Think of how long women and minorities fought to get the opportunity to vote! Don't turn your nose up at something that valuable (People risked life and limb! Would you be willing to?). Do the brainwork, and make a choice. It's not as if you are being tasked with cleaning up after the Bush legacy.

Point Two- If you aren't part of the solution, you are part of the problem. If you think we're f*cked now, imagine what would happen if everyone thought that way. If it's bad now, it would get a lot worse. What if no one wanted to take on the job?

Point three - A lot of people blamed Hillary for having too much involvement in Bill's presidency. I doubt that she would settle for being bill's puppet. If anything, she is a strong female. And as for experience, she's got it. She knows the process, and how to "grease the wheels" in the process.
You may not like how things get done on capitol hill, but there is a process, and she knows it well. The first clinton presidency was strong diplomatically, and what do we need now if not better diplomacy?

Point four - Obama would certainly be a change, and that is what a lot of americans are craving right now. He has less experience, sure... but if you are one who doesn't like the current system, then Obama would be attractive. He does have a record of sidestepping bureaucratic bull@%&! and getting things done on his terms. He seems to say what he means even if he know's it's not popular. Gotta respect that, even if you don't like his politics. And what a message it would send to the world, in the face of 911 and it's ignorant aftermath. Other countries fuel their fires by talking about "white america" and our intolerance of minorities (not just black, but asian, middle-eastern, latino). While some Americans burned mosques, not all of us did.

Doubtful I will vote for McCain, though I appreciate his candor and ability to piss of fundamental right-winging christian types. He also doesn't fear doing the unpopular thing.
He opposed GWBush before it was the cool thing to do.

Undecided here, but those are my current thoughts.

[oracle's child]

Eireayne- weellllll, this is where we can agree to disagree then. i'll tell you why: just like anyone else i have opinions. some will be in agreement, some will not. if i find that for some reason i don't feel comfortable voting for any candidate, i WILL NOT vote for them. there isn't a thing you or anyone else can do about it. not one is holding a gun to my head saying VOTE. if i'm not confident in anyone in particular, i don't have to vote for them. that is another freedom i have. and yes, just like i find things to dislike now about certain ones, if i decide not to vote at all, i will continue to complain and bitch. it's a free country. one thing i don't understand is why certain people feel that i Have to pick one even if i don't care for any? who says i do? so, if no matter who i vote for, if they turn out to be a poor leader, at least i'll be part of the group and bear some of the burden of having helped put them in right? wrong. and on the other hand if a good leader gets in and i didn't vote, then the worst i'm guilty of is not voting.

[Eireayne]

If our system had a choice on the ballot of "no confidence" - that is, a way to give quantifiable voice to the folks who are not happy with their offered options, it would be a powerful tool.

However, in This election, there really is no way to give a voice to those feelings. There are other world governments that actually can be disbanded and reformed based on a vote of no confidence by their citizens. We don't have that in place right now. A choice not to vote right now is seen by our government as apathy or disregard. The message they take from non-voter stats is that those folks don't care, or don't have strong enough feelings about the issue. Not voting sends the message that you don't care. Abstaining in this case is not read/will not be interpreted the way you intend, as a vote against all of the candidates.

I think a lot of folks would agree that there is no perfect candidate. Indeed, the last few elections have had an element of "picking the lesser of two evils". How did Bush get re-elected? Take a look at voter turnout. More people turned out on election day to vote for him. I'm not saying Kerry was an inspiring option, but if people didn't vote against Bush, didn't cast a ballot at all... then they silently gave Bush the opening he needed to win. You didn't have to vote for Bush to help him win. I'm using this as an example.

If perfection is needed to win an election, then there a very few supportable candidates. Remember, candidates are human... not superhuman picture-perfect, no mistakes, no skeletons entities. President is a tough job, particularly following the current regime. I wouldn't be willing to do the job, but I know we need someone in there. Like it or not, one of those candidates will be leading the country and I vote to give weight to the one who I would feel most comfortable having. No one is perfect. Why do we expect our politicians to be? Howard Dean was brought down by one enthusiastic yell, over scrutinized by the media (a totally different issue altogether). Bottom line, Politicians are not perfect But they are willing to do the job. Which takes more guts than a lot of us have.

[oracle's child]

i agree with you about most of what you said. and i know no one is perfect. but i still stand by what i've said, although of course things could change. you know, that thing about picking the lesser of two evils? that's what exactly occurred to me during the last election. i found myself asking,"why do i have to pick at all?". i ended up writing in someone who wasn't even on the ticket. (sigh) we'll just have to see i guess. well, no matter who gets in, surely they have to be better then who we have now. thanks Eireayne for a nice discussion. i'm glad it didn't disolve into something ugly and hysterical between us. politics, as you know can be a volatile subject.

[Eireayne]

Boy do I know what you mean. I come from a loud Irish family that loves to argue! So I guess listening to them growing up I found that better results came (not consensus, but good point making) when it didn't boil down to the basic "oh yeah? you don't agree with ME?? Well you look funny" type argument. Plus, less regret. I figure too, that restraint ties into the "treat others the way you would like to be treated"/rule of threes thing. Respect, man. Respect.

I basically grew up on Capitol Hill and was a poly/sci major for a while. I even worked in the senate for a few years. Voter participation is one of those old hot buttons for me, but man do I feel your frustration!

I enjoyed it too! Still buddies?? We agree on one thing at least... Boo on the Bush admin!!

[oracle's child]

(chuckle) i KNEW there was some kind of political influence in there somewhere!