Presidential primary

[Josh Bassett]

Howdy folks. Just wanted to see who was supporting who in the presidential primaries. I, for one, am throwing my support behind Barack Obama and John Edwards. Unfortunately, I am in a state has little very little say in the primary, being in Oregon where our primary isn't until May. I think if the democrats elect Hilary Clinton, it will be the best chance the republicans have for winning the general election. What do you guys and girls think? Whether you are a democrat, republican or independent, tell me who you want and who you don't want.
I want the democrats to elect Obama or Edwards and do not want them to elect Clinton or Richardson.
I want the republicans to elect Mitt Romney or Fred Thompson because they both have no chance of winning. The best chance the republicans have of winning, is to elect Guilliani or Huckabee.
The Democrats will also pick up more seats in the house and senate.
IMPEACH BUSH AND CHENEY!

[412CNME]

Ron Paul is who I am voting for, if for no other reason, because the mass mdeia and mainstream government want no part of him! He stands for real change, not false promises.

[Miranda [TerraFire]]

You might want to look into Kucinich unless you're a devout Republican. He stands for a lot of the same issues that people base their support of RP on, but without a lot of the negatives that come with voting for RP. Just a suggestion. If you really must vote for a Republican, he is the best option, so I won't hound you about it, just trying to get the word out. XD

[gretchen]

hi, i have to say i was extremely excited to hear there was a vegan canidate. i agree with kucinich on many issues, unfortunatly there are many i also disagree with. this brings up an important issue for me. i stand for life. every life is important to me and i believe that humans shouldn't get to decide when and how things die. i am vegan for the life of the animals, i am against the death penalty and i am also very pro-life. i always have a hard time understanding how so many people can care so much about the lifes of animals but so little about the lifes of human babies. i am for life in every circumstance, i think it is always better than death....always, and don't see how it can ever be the wrong choice. i am very interested in hearing other points of view so please share,

[Josh Bassett]

Thank you for your post. I must say, however, that just because a candidate is pro-choice, like Kucinich, it does not mean he is in favor of killing babies. I think it is a republican talking point to make democrats seem in favor of death. The term pro-life (and pro-choice) are unfair. Democrats want abortion legal and safe. To take a position that abortion should be illegal would only cause more death in this country due to unsafe procedures. Legal, safe and minimal is most democrats position on abortion. I agree that is awful that some people would take abortion as an act of birth control, however, you have women out there unfit to be parents. You have women who have been raped. You have girls who are 14.

I realize we, as in the whole world, can and will debate abortion until we all die, but in the political context, having abortion illegal would have the opposite affect on saving lives. Kucinich, if he had a chance in hell, would probably the best president this country has ever seen.

I also completley agree with you on the death penalty. I think you can be pro-choice and pro-life all at the same time.

oh, and I am so glad so many people are talking on this website about politics!

[Alex]

Yeah it sucks that here in Oregon, by the time we vote, it will already be decided. In that case, I'll just go Kucinich because he is the one who most represents my beliefs and values. But if the primary mattered, I'd go Edwards all the way. He out of the "big three" is the one who sounds most right on to me.

As for Hilary, I don't know that she'd have the worst chance against the Republicans. I think she has such a massive political machine behind her that she'd probably crush her opponent. I just don't think she'd be the best president of the available options. She'd be better than Bush, true. But that's not saying much. Arnold Schartzeneger would be better than Bush. Hell. Sylvester Stallone would be better than Bush. But for my tastes, Hillary's position on Iraq and Iran are way too close to Bush's for my comfort. Edwards I think is the one who would work hardest for a real change of direction from the Bush policies.

On the Republican side, I really don't think any of them have a good chance of winning because none of them excite the Christian Evangelical Right. Least of all Gulianni. They're the ones who got Bush close enough in the elections where he could steal them without it being too blatantly obvious. Without their support, they've got no chance against any dem. And I think Edwards would CRUSH any of them because he could probably snag a state or two from the South.

Well, that's my two cents.

[Miranda [TerraFire]]

Yay! another Kucinich supporter! Rock on!

Oh, and thanks for joining my group!

I agree with you on what you said about Hillary. I don't like her at all because she changes her political positions drastically depending on who she's talking to. She'll say anything to please a crowd. I hate Giuliani worst of all, he's like
Bush on steroids. If it were between Clinton and Giuliani, I'd probably move to Canada.

[Cari]

Well, while my vote is still for Hillary thus far, I will certainly look more into Kucinich thanks to you! I guess the major factor that influences me to vote for her is simply becaue she is a woman, which means she's had to work twice, maybe thrice as hard to get where she is. I would like to see a woman in office simply to break the ice, to open the doors. Forgive me for being somewhat sexist on this, but we DO live in a world where women are the underdogs and I'm sick of it! :)
And just because other candidates might repeat themselves more often, it certainly doesn't mean when they get in office they are going to put their money where their mouth is...

[Alex]

Well, I won't deny the fact that her being a woman makes it harder for her than any of the other candidates. However, I wouldn't say she's had to work twice as hard to get where she is either. You'll probably hate me for saying this, but let's be honest, would she be where she was if she wasn't Bill's wife? No way in hell. My theory is, she had known about and tolerated Bill's affairs for years and years before Monica, because she wanted to advance her own career. And Bill probably knew that too. They had kind of a little arrangement. He'd help her advance her career and she would look the other way at his affairs.

[Tracy]

Cari, I couldn't agree with you more!

[Miranda [TerraFire]]

I am behind Kucinich all the way, and I'm surprised that most vegans and vegetarians aren't, as he's the only candidate even considering animal rights as a key issue. I hope more people learn about him. Lots of Ron Paul supporters find out they're actually Kucinich supporters once they really start to learn about the issues and gain and in-depth knowledge of the candidates.

See my Kucinich group on this site [the 3rd or 4th most popular one if you're looking for an easy search], my page, or my myspace for why.

He's vegan, for animal rights, for environmental and green issues, for human rights, and I could go on and on and on. He's just an amazing person, it's hard to believe he's in politics! AND he's the one who is making the most effort to get Bush and Cheney impeached!

I will not be happy if he doesn't win. I will support no other candidate and I'm still struggling with whether or not I'll even vote at all if he doesn't get the primary. I really just do not like any other candidate at all. Especially not Clinton or any Republican [yes that includes that idiot Ron Paul *gag*]

[Damiana]

I will be attending a fundraising event tonight for Ron Paul.

Dr. Paul is not an idiot, he's actually an extremely well-educated individual and a former medical professional who is now standing up against the very oversized pharmaceutical industry. He also stands firmly against the NAU, NAFTA Superhighway, Codex Alimentarius, Real ID and other forms of tactics being used in the raping/pillaging of the U.S. Constitution which has been underway for the past 7+ years.

Dr. Paul is getting NO corporate backing whatsoever, and he's making a great deal of headway in gaining publicity and supporters by word-of-mouth on his own merit!

I've paid a fair amount of attention to all of the candidates, came up with Paul, Gravel and Kucinich as closest to my own ideals and the general public's best interests. However, only Ron Paul has managed to maintain a solid stance on anything and seem to have a single clue in relation to beginning toward any sort of change. When it comes down to where we stand now and how much is at stake, I really don't think we can afford to pick favourites based upon dietary choices.

Kucinich has no chance against the corporately funded CFR globalist whores Clinton, Obama and Edwards, so I see no point in wasting any time or effort when energy is better spent supporting someone whose ideals clearly match mine in so many other ways. Ron Paul supports FREEDOM OF CHOICE based upon research and educated decision, and he is working in opposition to the epidemic growth of big business (here and elsewhere) which has been buying it's way into government, taking over the country and ruining the quality of everyday life for anyone who isn't part of a giant conglomerate.

Supporting Kucinich at this point is merely giving the opposition more momentum. I liken it to voting for Ralph Nader in some past elections, actually. Ralph Nader is a very intelligent man with some brilliant ideas, but throwing votes his way is simply taking them away from someone who happens to have more than a whisper of a chance and cares for very similar issues.

Candidates related to the CFR are corrupt and thoroughly untrustworthy. The fact that they hide any affiliations whatsoever is a red flag indicator of such! Forget about Obama being a "lesser evil" (which he is not) and try to forget about how warped the definition of the label "Republican" has become over the years (thanks to our resident evil Neo-Conservative wolves in sheeps' clothing). Instead, please try to remember something about our founding fathers and what the term meant back in their day. If you take the time to consider the ideals exhibited by members of each party during the formative years of this country, perhaps then you may gain a bit of new insight and a better idea of what Dr. Ron Paul is all about.

[Cari]

I'm not really sure how anyone could compare the Clintons to the Bushs.
I don't remember Bill doing anything to piss off the ENTIRE world...