<p>^ I don’t get it. Would you feel the same way if Hillary won the nomination?</p>
<p>Her experience is comparable to her democratic opponent, and many would question her ability as commander in chief.</p>
<p>However, I am going to start a new write-in vote campaign. Lara Bush for President!! She now officially has more foreign policy experience than Hillary…:)</p>
<p>I don’t care if you “get it”.</p>
<p>Well, your dissention from the Democratic party will have little to no impact. But if it makes you feel good, vote for McCain. Or Mrs. Bush…
No one really cares. Your rationale makes no sense.</p>
<p>I think if everyone were more willing to vote for a candidate rather than a party we would be in better shape. That would, however, require people read, think and be informed; not lazy, brain-dead and ignorant. I don’t think that with the dumbing down of this society that it is possible any longer. I’m actually happy to have a candidate that has somewhat bucked his party…and I’m not referring to NObama.</p>
<p>^ I don’t disagree. However, throughout the campaign, the Obama supporters were accused of being <em>gasp</em> “well educated”…</p>
<p>I hope they are. I haven’t decided who to vote for yet. The odds are against NObama at this point but I’m willing to listen. If I hear the same junk from him that I heard from the last couple of dem candidates I’ll default to McCain. McCain has been through the wringer and it will be difficult to pull many more skeletons out of his closet. NObama, on the other hand, is a freshly opened up attic. I sincerely hope there are not smoking guns or skeletons in there…I’m not holding my breath however.</p>
<p>pmrlcomm,</p>
<p>Are you saying that one reason you would not choose Obama is the possibility that someone might find a skeleton in his closet?</p>
<p>I’m sure you realize that our goal as individual voters is not to pick the candidate with the best chances of winning (that’s what the primaries were for), but rather the candidate we each prefer (using our own personal criteria.) As long as no skeletons are found, each of us should choose our candidate based on what is known. If/when such a skeleton is found before election day we can review our decision in light of that new information.</p>
<p>Bookies, on the other hand, should consider the probability that some skeletons or smoking guns may derail a candidate’s run for the presidency, and they will likely agree with you that Obama’s chances of being hurt by some new revelation are greater than McCain’s, for the reasons you stated.</p>
<p>Probably true. But it is also true that it is much more likely that McCain will die of natural causes before election day, or even before being nominated.</p>
<p>lol, mini… but seriously, what would happen if he’d die before the election? Would the republicans have to quickly nominate someone else?</p>
<p>Presumably the VEEP would step in. Prior to the convention, would it then be Huckaboom?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No. The election isn’t until November. I’m sure if there are any skeletons they will be found prior to that. That way everyone can make an informed decision. I don’t care who is most electable. I only care about which one I think will do the best job. If my guy loses then oh well…at least I participated in the process.</p>
<p>Wow, people are scared of Obama! Every political thread, even one about whether McCain might pick Rice for VP, has to include the same diatribes about Obama. Personally, I find McCain and Rice a lot more scary.</p>
<p>People always find the unknown disconcerting. NObama is an unknown. He came out of nowhere just a few years ago. He has no track record to speak of (relative to your traditional presidential candidate) and unlike, say a Kennedy, he doesn’t have the political pedigree. If he had another 4 years in the senate it might be different. What will be interesting is that we will almost certainly have a senator as our next president. We haven’t elected too many of those recently. It seems that, in general, they lack the skills of governing. Going back to Carter, Bush Sr. is the only non-governor that has been elected and he was, of course, the incumbent veep. </p>
<p>I do agree however that I don’t like Rice as a vp candidate. I’m ok with McCain but I want a stronger vp for him, given his age and the fact he will only last 1 term.</p>
<p>Mini: “Probably true. But it is also true that it is much more likely that McCain will die of natural causes before election day, or even before being nominated.”</p>
<p>:(</p>
<p>As for Condi Rice - how could anyone not like her? She’s brilliant, eloquent, and probably the most capable person in public office anywhere. No way would she accept the veep job. I think her current assignment is more cerebral than political. She really isn’t a politician. She is more of an academic.</p>
<p>
It seems to me that Hillary Clinton ran her campaign exactly the way that Bush has run the Iraq war:
<p>If she makes such a mess of running a campaign, how is she going to be commander-in-chief? Or was your real hope to have a return of Bill Clinton? </p>
<p>I think we’ve learned a tremendous amount about the candidates’ management style from the campaigns, and it seems obvious that Barack Obama is someone who likes to surround himself with a team of highly-qualified people and that he makes very considered, careful decisions every step of the way, obviously clearly thinking out various ramifications of what he says or does. He also is an extremely intelligent & highly educated person. He’s a listener who will probably look for a lot of input and try to work toward consensus – I think he will be the type of commander in chief who listens to the advice his Generals give him. </p>
<p>Hillary Clinton is out of the race, so it is not really relevant at this point what kind of commander-in-chief she would have been – but my sense of her through the campaign was that she has a close-the-ranks, circle-the-wagons, never admit fault type of personality – which I see as being very similar to Bush’s personal style. </p>
<p>Personally, I don’t want another “decider” - I want someone who is intelligent, well-informed and who will solicit and respect the advice of others with differing viewpoints.</p>
<p>I don’t know what McCain’s leadership style will be, but thus far in the campaign he doesn’t strike me as being all that sharp; however I will admit I wasn’t paying much attention to him until I watched that fiasco of a speech he gave the night of the primaries when Obama cinched the nomination.</p>
<p>If i vote for Obama will I be able to get a sweetheart land deal too!</p>
<p>Calmom:</p>
<p>Hillary Clinton is no longer a candidate so you can stop berating her and her husband in misguided attempt to solicit my vote. I’m glad that Obama makes you swoon.</p>
<p>Idad, I’m supporting Obama, but he doesn’t make me swoon. I was a very strong Edwards supporter, but I can point to a large number of mistakes that the Edwards campaign made, too. But your response pretty much exemplifies what seems to be the Clintons big weakness: all criticism is treated as an attack. </p>
<p>Its pretty obvious to me, as an Edwards supporter that the person with the best organized and best-run campaign won the nomination, and clearly did so because of the superior organization and superior strategy. I’m just saying that I feel fairly comfortable with the safety and security of the country in the hands of [“No</a> Drama Obama”](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdN8XpL36Pk]"No”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdN8XpL36Pk) – he’s not going to let hubris get in the way of sound judgment, as our last president did. And I am have come to that conclusion based on watching the campaign as well as actively participating on a grassroots level for the past 14 months.</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-confidential-cafe/520780-if-character-becomes-issue-election-who-wins.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-confidential-cafe/520780-if-character-becomes-issue-election-who-wins.html</a></p>
<p>McCain has some serious character flaws. Plus – and it pains me to say this – he’s just too old.</p>
<p>Calmom - very interesting analysis (post #35).</p>
<p>(Didn’t like the comment about McCain not seeming too sharp tho’ - haha! Obviously - as you stated - you weren’t paying much attention! 
)</p>
<p>I have lots of reasons to vote for McCain, but I also have reasons NOT to vote for Obama - his inexperience & naievete specifically, as well as his EXTREME liberalism & desire to RAISE TAXES! Yikes! I’m also not too sure about the integrity of some of the people he associates with (Ayers, Rezco).</p>
<p>Politically, McCain is a moderate & to me, that demonstrates pragmatism, level-headedness (McCain levelheaded? Yes, I think so!). He has also SHOWN a willingness to put aside partisanship in order to get something done in gov’t. </p>
<p>We can’t vote on what we THINK Obama MIGHT do - with McCain we have a RECORD that clearly defines who he is as a leader and what his approach to government truly is.</p>
<p>Heard a comment today about Obama being a “post turtle” - y’all ever heard of that?</p>
<p>BTW - I’m not “attacking” Obama - just pointing out differences among the candidates. I’m trying to be logical & rational in these discussions - hope that continues w/ everyone.</p>