1
   

FIRST A2K STRAW POLL White House 2008

 
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Mar, 2007 08:29 pm
How about Reagan?

I mean, if you'd vote for Gore or Clinton, why not a dead guy?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Mar, 2007 08:50 pm
Thank you, thank you all.

Cjhsa, did you vote? Sincerely curious whom someone with your views would opt for.
0 Replies
 
2PacksAday
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Mar, 2007 08:51 pm
nimh wrote:
2PacksAday wrote:
I'm an {R} other.....Fred Thompson.

Tell me more? I know very little about him..



Well, he is best known for his acting...a few tv shows and several movies....Oh'god another actor turned politician....nah, he has very little in common with Reagan or Arnold...not a slight at either, but Fred is an educated/intelligent man.

He actually is a lawyer, somehow he got involved in the Watergate hearings {prosecution side} and helped take Nixon down...then he made a name for himself in some high profile cases back home in Tenn.

He's a big guy, 6'6...that's two meters, and just has this hard ass persona that appeals to many of us...I've watched him in a few televised Senate debates....impressive...excellent ass chewer, no matter what side of the isle his chewie is from. Now he may, very well be different "off camera" and it all could be a show, but I really don't think so.

When he is acting, the characters that he tends to play are basically interchangeable, FBI, Judges...government types...and when on a talk show...he is the same guy/character as you see on film. Yeah, kinda like John Wayne, but a better actor and a lot smarter....when Gore was picked for VP, Fred took his seat in the Senate, and then won the seat for a second term....and since then, he has been highly sought after for a white house bid.

I would guess that many of the same people...at least on my side of things, that wished for Powell to make a run, are also Thompson backers. Honestly, I can't recite his stance on issues...no clue...but I do not recall ever being disappointed when something he says or does hits the news.


In the "Is Obama Black Enough" thread, I almost mentioned Fred along with Yaphet Kotto as my dream team whitehouse runners....but I didn't want to sound too kooky. {as in, we should vote in the Professor from Gilligans Island because he was smart...kind of kooky} In the post I'm referring to, it may have seemed like I was just joking...me wanting Yaphet {also an actor} to run for prez....but I was somewhat serious. More for the natural charisma of the man than anything else....Fred and Yaphet are very similar in that sense.

Just a note, Yaphet is also listed as being 6'6....just saw him a few nights ago in "Midnight Run" with Robert De Niro...standing face to face, made Bobby look like a 12 yr old boy.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Mar, 2007 09:08 pm
OK, my curiosity was piqued.

Quote:
GOP stage set for Thompson
By Dan K. Thomasson
Wednesday, March 21, 2007

WASHINGTON - Thirty five years ago, Fred Thompson, then an obscure, young country lawyer from Tennessee, became a familiar face to millions of Americans engrossed in watching the historic drama of the Senate Watergate hearings unfold on TV. The exposure he received as the Republican counsel to the committee investigating the scandal propelled him to a lucrative law practice, a substantial movie career, then the U.S. Senate and finally a return to acting and private law practice.
When he first won election to a seat once held by his longtime mentor, Howard Baker, whose distinguished career ranged from the Senate to chief of staff of the White House to U.S. ambassador to Japan, he was considered by many as a potential presidential nominee. Possessing a rugged 6-foot-4 frame and a voice as rich and smoky as the Tennessee mountains surrounding his boyhood, he was, and is, an imposing figure. But he seemed reluctant then to pursue the presidential prospect and he soon became bored and disillusioned with the Senate, a condition not unusual among bright people after a few frustrating years in the world's champion debating club. He left that aspect of politics, but despite star billing as the chief district attorney in TV's popular "Law and Order" series, he kept his political ties and interests and a wide circle of friends, most of whom regard him as the same "good old boy" he was when he first came to Washington.
The other day, however, Thompson cranked up the buzz about the 2008 Republican presidential nomination more than a notch by letting it be known that if the planets were properly aligned this summer, he "might" be interested in finally seeking the job his friends hoped he would years ago. That this tentative step could stir up such a sudden flash of interest pretty much certifies the lack of overall enthusiasm by GOP regulars for the current, announced crop of hopefuls.
Thompson's appearance on the scene seemed to stimulate a sudden burst of interest, particularly among the conservatives who view him as acceptable and among the moderates who point out that he has never been reactionary. Also, Baker is leading the Thompson draft, if that is what it can be called at this stage. The former Senate Republican leader's endorsement still carries weight.
Part of the equation may be the "Hagel factor." Nebraska Sen. Charles Hagel, a Vietnam veteran who is a hard-nosed opponent of the Iraq policy and often mentioned as a potentially viable alternative for Republican moderates opposed to the new troop escalation, called a press conference about the same time Thompson's name surfaced to announce that he had really nothing to say. He still hadn't made up his mind.
Some who earn their living speculating about politics saw Hagel's hesitancy as a possible deference to Thompson. The two were close friends in the Senate and Hagel has shared Thompson's frustration with the Byzantine operations of the Senate. Obviously Thompson's name recognition is high enough because of his TV and movie performances to make a late entry into the campaign more plausible than it might be for others. But he also has solid credentials as well as a presidential demeanor. Additionally, he has friendships in the press.
Regardless of whether he possesses the desire, money and organization to capture the nomination and then the White House against odds that now clearly favor whoever wins the Democratic nod is another question. But many Republican spirits appear buoyed at least momentarily by his contemplation.
Source
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 22 Mar, 2007 09:45 pm
Brownback, Huckabee, Tommy Thompson, Hunter, or Fred Thompson may have potential. Don't know enough about any of them at this point, but voted Other Republican.

Other than that, Romney, Giuliani, and McCain probably in that order if the first bunch gets winnowed out.

There is always Gingrich eyeing the possibilities. I heard an ad on the radio this evening with him talking about the campaign being much too long, too much money, too many consultants, and not enough informal debates where the candidates actually say what they believe and know, as compared with what the consultants tell them to say in short sound bytes. So the drift I got was that Gingrich was plugging for what he would see as his best chances for announcing late and beating the opponents in debates. I got the definite idea that he is considering throwing his hat in the ring, but not until late, if the opportunity looks good. And I think Fred Thompson may be viewing the race in a similar manner.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Mar, 2007 05:52 am
Out of that list I'd pick Newt, but he'd never win, too much baggage.

Way too many anti-2A's on there from both sides of the aisle. Anybody from Mass, NY, or Nazinois would be a bad choice.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Mar, 2007 10:15 am
I think I agree with you, although I don't know for sure. I met a Democrat that said he would vote for Hillary, unless Newt runs, in which case he would vote for Newt. He is probably highly unusual, and I cannot claim to know how his mind works, but I did ask him if he had lost his mind considering the fact that one was a flaming liberal and the other was for responsible government, including balancing the budget, reasonable social policies like Welfare Reform that helped improve the situation, etc., for which Newt deserves much credit in the 90's.

Newt is the only politician that has ever accomplished something that I would have sworn was absolutely impossible in Washington, and that was to make a bureaucracy more efficient and to roll something back a bit, and I believe he actually accomplished this with Welfare Reform.

If he in fact did deliver divorce papers to his wife in the hospital, then I think his chances are nil to none. Morality will keep too many conservatives at home from voting, but it does not hinder most liberals from voting. We always have this handicap.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Mar, 2007 10:20 am
This is a great idea, and nicely executed too.

A quarter to the first person who guesses who I voted for.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Mar, 2007 10:23 am
I'm waiting for Craven to throw his prediction in the ring, and also tell us where OBL is hiding.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Mar, 2007 10:26 am
My vote is for Rudi. If the Libertarian Party had a candidate that might have a fighting chance, I would vote for him/her. But I am a realist.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Mar, 2007 11:39 am
sozobe wrote:
This is a great idea, and nicely executed too.

A quarter to the first person who guesses who I voted for.

Al Gore! Very Happy
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Mar, 2007 12:47 pm
I am a bit surprised that Obama is doing so well in light of the dearth of experience, etc.

I like Gore, and have never seen any valid criticism of him. He is scoring a lot of points nationally with his environmental activities, and deservedly so. He did a superb job as VP, including being in charge of a program that reduced the federal civilian workforce by 15 percent. He has excellent ideas in all the other areas. He served in Nam and has an excellent educational background.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Mar, 2007 12:53 pm
He has a big "L" on his forehead.

That shouldn't, in a just world, be a problem, but I think it would be.

Plus I just want to get out of the Clinton-Bush saga already. Bam, pow, I win, no, I win...
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Mar, 2007 01:51 pm
soz, but all the Dem candidates may be deemed libs.

But god only knows what the American electorate will vote for. Nixon was a known sleazeball when elected, and was accompanied by the moron (and former supermarket produce manager) Agnew. Reagan was largely senile and was a has-been actor controlled by his billionaire buddies. Bush II was, and is, a certified moron, which was quite evident from the debates. Don't forget good old Dan Quayle, who was a heartbeat away from being president.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Mar, 2007 01:53 pm
No, the "L" is for "loser."
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Mar, 2007 02:04 pm
I'm currently flip-flopping between Obama and Edwards. I happened to favor Obama the moment I voted. But if he has one more of those embarrassing disconnects with his staffers, my support goes to Edwards.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Mar, 2007 02:09 pm
Obama, and much further back, Hilary then Edwards.

The potential for reconciliation within the US on matters of race and religion and ideology look very promising indeed. The potential for reconciliation externally between the US and the rest of the world may be even better. And there is the potential for inspiration in the younger set to involve themselves in governance and in world affairs to a significantly greater degree than we've seen in a long time.

If voting in a repub primary, I would still pick McCain on the assumption that he would be the republican president most likely to steer his party back towards something reasonably sane.
0 Replies
 
fishin
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Mar, 2007 02:54 pm
Of the declared candidates from the two major parties listed I'd list them in the following order of preference:

Barack Obama
Rudy Giuliani
John Edwards
John McCain
Mitt Romney
Hillary Clinton

I still wish Olympia Snow or Sue Collins would throw their names into the race though.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Mar, 2007 03:04 pm
Now that's a bipartisan list!

Several people have done rankings, mine is roughly:

Obama
Edwards
Richardson

...

then I have a hard time deciding who I would vote for. Would like to know more about Richardson before committing, there, but what I've seen so far is promising. I like his foreign policy savvy, rare in a governor.

I like Olympia Snowe, too.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Mar, 2007 03:32 pm
Thomas wrote:
I'm currently flip-flopping between Obama and Edwards. I happened to favor Obama the moment I voted. But if he has one more of those embarrassing disconnects with his staffers, my support goes to Edwards.

His "staffers"? Are you referring to the guy who worked for the outfit that did Obama's website?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/16/2024 at 04:35:35