20 July 2007

Presidential Election 2008

If you would have asked me a couple years ago who my favorite Republican & Democratic presidential candidates were, I would have probably answered John McCain & Hillary Rodham Clinton. That was a couple years ago. A lot has changed since then. I have watched more debates, as well as more television interviews. Even more importantly to me, I have watched how different candidates have voted on issues. After all, actions do speak much louder than words.

I am registered "no party", and still have not decided for which primary I will register.

Candidates on the Republican side (in alphabetical order):
  1. Sam Brownback
  2. Newt Gingrich
  3. Rudy Giuliani
  4. Chuck Hagel
  5. Mike Huckabee
  6. Duncan Hunter
  7. John McCain
  8. George Pataki
  9. Ron Paul
  10. Mitt Romney
  11. Tom Tancredo
  12. Tommy Thompson
  13. Fred Thompson

Candidates on the Democratic side (in alphabetical order):

  1. Joe Biden
  2. Hillary Rodham Clinton
  3. Chris Dodd
  4. John Edwards
  5. Al Gore
  6. Mike Gravel
  7. Dennis Kucinich
  8. Barack Obama
  9. Bill Richardson
The reason I wrote Republican candidates before Democratic candidates was simply for 2 reasons:
  1. the republican list was longer
  2. the current executive branch is Republican

If the primary presidential election was today:

If I was registered Republican, I would vote for Ron Paul simply because to me, he seems like he has the most sense, does not appear to be a Bush "yes" man, does not give me the impression that he will run this country on paranoia like his predecessor.

I also liked Ron Paul in the debate against Rudy Giulliani. After that televised debate, you could not pay me to vote for Giulliani. It is bad enough that Giulliani sucked as the mayor of New York and was about to be voted out of office on 11 September 2001, and then somehow, Giulliani's political career was saved at the expense of thousands of casualties.

The way Ron Paul voted is also a huge plus to me. You can see for yourself on this website: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2007/02/iraq_debate_by_the_numbers.html

Now, on to the other side of the isle if the election was today:

If I was registered Democrat, I would vote for...shoot...this one is more difficult for me. Let's start with who would not receive my vote:

I would not vote for anyone who voted for the war. This can be seen on the senate website at http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00237

There were 77 yeas and 23 nays.

Those that voted for the war were:

Allard (R-CO)
Allen (R-VA)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bond (R-MO)
Breaux (D-LA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burns (R-MT)
Campbell (R-CO)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Carnahan (D-MO)
Carper (D-DE)
Cleland (D-GA)
Clinton (D-NY)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Craig (R-ID)
Crapo (R-ID)
Daschle (D-SD)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT)
Domenici (R-NM)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Edwards (D-NC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Fitzgerald (R-IL)
Frist (R-TN)
Gramm (R-TX)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagel (R-NE)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Helms (R-NC)
Hollings (D-SC)
Hutchinson (R-AR)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Miller (D-GA)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Nickles (R-OK)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Santorum (R-PA)
Schumer (D-NY)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Smith (R-NH)
Smith (R-OR)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thompson (R-TN)
Thurmond (R-SC)
Torricelli (D-NJ)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (R-VA)

The only ones who voted against the war were:

Akaka (D-HI)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Byrd (D-WV)
Chafee (R-RI)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corzine (D-NJ)
Dayton (D-MN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Graham (D-FL)
Inouye (D-HI)
Jeffords (I-VT)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Reed (D-RI)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Wellstone (D-MN)
Wyden (D-OR)

Notice all the presidential candidates who voted for the war, and not a single presidential candidate is on the "against the war" list. Now, to be far, not all presidential candidates were Senators in 2002, and only Senators in 2002 had the option of voting for or against going to war against Iraq.

So thank goodness the primary election is not today, as I am still undecided.

6 comments:

  1. Please elect any illegal Mexican for 2008 USA President. It will help all legal USA citizens assimulate into Mexico sooner than later. Why wait for another generation to go by for USA to become Mexico.

    Make it happen in 2008!
    Vote Jose Illegal in 2008

    ReplyDelete
  2. LOL

    Anonymous, I love your sarcasm. I see the main presidential election issue with you is probably illegal immigration.

    Personally, I believe illegal immigration is "illegal". And I do not believe the U.S. does not have enough workers to do the job, otherwise we would not have so many people on welfare.

    A lot of companies like to hire illegal immigrants so they do not have to pay into health care, and they do not have to worry about employees going to authorities for illegal activities.

    It is a lose-lose situation for the United States in my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Helen,
    Thank you and I appreciate your support for my candidate Jose Illegal. Your are correct that this is a complicated issue that is a lose-lose for all USA citizens, but with your support and a majority of voters support, Presidential Candidtate Jose Illegal will do something about it.

    Imagine all the money that will be saved with "economy-of-scale" when he truly unites all 50 states into one State known as "New Mexico". He also promises to make it legal for all Mexicans to cross borders "legally" into USA/New Mexico; and vice-versa all USA citizens can also cross into Old Mexico without any Passport. Imagine how wonderful this will be for our future generations.

    Vote Jose Illegal in 2008!

    ReplyDelete
  4. LOL

    Anonymous, why in the world would Mexico want to seize land in the U.S.A. when Mexico is making so much more money from U.S. companies going across the border? And U.S. companies in Mexico have to provide benefits that they do not have to provide for workers in the U.S.

    Also, there are some people who believe that the U.S. is a place to go to work and make money, and then go back to their home of origin to live and retire.

    As for Jose Illegal...Mexico is not the only country from which the U.S. receives illegal immigrants.

    We also get illegal immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Europe, as well as a host of other lands.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Helen,
    I "feal your pain" and all the other illegal immigrants from Cuba, Haiti, Vietnam, etc..... I want you to know that Presidential Candidate Jose Illegal will make free & open borders for all people of all nationalities, race, color, creed, and religion. He promises free travel across borders for everyone with no discrimination. Even if you say your from the mountainous region along the borders of Afghanistan/Pakistan he promises to give you USA valid drivers license.

    In regards to your, and other good citizens concern about Mexico seizing USA land, let him put your concerns at rest. This step will not be necessary. Anyway...what is in a name anyway??? USA and Mexico will not be seperate countries with borders, but one great place know as The American Territory.

    Only problem next will be how do we bring those crazy Canadians into our Territory? They like very much their Molson and Pabst Blue Riboon and are not very accepting of our superior Corona and Dos Equis beer.

    Please vote Jose Illegal in 2008!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous,

    I find your satire amusing.

    If you feel so strongly for your candidate, then why do you post anonymously?

    As for different races crossing country borders...are you saying there are extra-terrestrials or Neanderthals? After all, humans are all the same race: Homo Sapiens.

    Europe joined to make themselves a stronger economic force. Are you suggesting that North America do the same? Do you believe the results would be the same as it has been for Europe?

    ReplyDelete