.josh Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 Bill Richardson - HispanicBarack Obama - BlackHillary Clinton - WomanFor sure Hillary is running. Bill and Barack both have started "presidental exploratory committees," which I think means that they are interested, and they are putting their feelers out to see if it's a good idea, but they haven't 100% committed. But from what I can tell, they are pretty much going to run. Now, I find it kind of odd that it's always been a couple of white guys running for president, and now all of a sudden, it's a couple of minorities and a woman. Does anybody else find this odd? I just get the impression that this was somehow orchestrated on purpose. Like, maybe someone(s) out there [i]really[/i] want Hillary to win, so to ensure her victory, she's being pitted up against a couple of minorities, cuz you all know how racist america is: better to have a white woman than a black/hispanic man, sort of thing. Or maybe the real powers that be are just trying to make it fair? Like, seeing as how virtually every single president to-date has been a white male, maybe people think that Hillary will win, simply because she is a woman, and not because people actually took the time to listen to what each candidate believes/promises. So maybe the powers that be decided that the best way to combat this bias was to bring in their own minorities?Or maybe it's some kind of sign of the apocalypse? Well, I'm just kind of making random speculations on the oddness of this. I have no actual proof for any of these scenarios. Thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelmanronald06 Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 I think Hilary should be president anyways. She is a wonderful woman (I have met her at a National Honors Society banquet), she is smart, and I believe she will do good things in office. Futhermore, we know that we can't put a republican in office. Both the House and the Senate are controlled by Democrats. If we put a Republican in the White House, our nation will move nowhere fast because of how the two would fight each other. So, we know that we need a Democrat, and thus far Hilary is our most profitable candidate to announce her run for presidency. Besides, it is about time a woman served as President. I think that the US has been at a standstill for some time, and the only thing that will get us moving again is a change in Presidential Office....a female president. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShogunWarrior Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 [quote]Or maybe it's some kind of sign of the apocalypse?[/quote]Wow, that could be a loaded statement.I would like to see Barack become president but then again he has his colour, his name(Barack Hussein Obama) and smart white woman to contend with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redbullmarky Posted January 21, 2007 Share Posted January 21, 2007 Margaret Thatcher has proven that a woman can actually run a country very well with more balls, stamina, conviction, etc, than half the "lets say what people want to hear because i have no spine" men.As for the whole race thing - unfortunately I can see some of your point. The whole "Big Brother" thing over here has proven that there are undertones of that sort of prejudice regardless of how much racism there [i]seems[/i] to actually be. Whether it's connected or not, I doubt it - surely anyone (be it white, black, asian, etc) has the right to run in the campaign? I'm sure there was nothing stopping anyone else jumping on board. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AXiSS Posted January 22, 2007 Share Posted January 22, 2007 Can't forget Oprah Winfrey! ::) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcombs_31 Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 There are a lot more than 3 people running for President, but it will be interesting. Anything has to be a step up from what we have now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obsidian Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 Keep in mind that all of the aforementioned people have to actually win the primaries and get chosen to be their party's candidate before they're going to be [i]officially[/i] in the running for the presidential race. Of the three original possibilities, I would have to say I'm leaning toward Obama, but who knows what people really stand for anymore anyway?I will go out on a limb here, though, and say that although I am not opposed in any way to a woman running for office, I would never be able to support Hillary Clinton in the race. Yes, she is an incredibly intelligent individual, and I see her track record in New York and what she has been able to accomplish there. My biggest issue is all of the underhanded things she supported her husband in when he was running and in office, and there's no way I could support that.Ron, I see your point about the Republican vs. Democrat in the white house as far as opposition in the House, but by no means IMHO is that a reason to choose a candidate. Whether you vote Dem or Rep, you should vote based on principles and standards you believe your candidate will uphold. Simply voting for a candidate because they are a "match" to the current House situation is a bit shallow, IMHO.The last several elections, I've been leaning towards the unheard of candidates for the Libertarian party for their stand on many of the issues. Obviously, some people aren't even aware that the party exists, and it's rare that the candidate gets more than 5-10% of the total vote, but if they stand for the principles you believe in, I say vote with your heart on things like that.Just my 2 cents ;) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelmanronald06 Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 [quote author=obsidian link=topic=123397.msg511294#msg511294 date=1169559678]Ron, I see your point about the Republican vs. Democrat in the white house as far as opposition in the House, but by no means IMHO is that a reason to choose a candidate. Whether you vote Dem or Rep, you should vote based on principles and standards you believe your candidate will uphold. Simply voting for a candidate because they are a "match" to the current House situation is a bit shallow, IMHO.[/quote]I'm not saying we should vote for ONLY a democrat because it will even the odds, but I am saying it is something we must consider. I mean, if it comes down to having a republican and a democrat who will either both be good in the office, or bad in the office, then I think that the scale tipper should be the democrat just because of the House situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obsidian Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 [quote author=steelmanronald06 link=topic=123397.msg511300#msg511300 date=1169560780]I'm not saying we should vote for ONLY a democrat because it will even the odds, but I am saying it is something we must consider. I mean, if it comes down to having a republican and a democrat who will either both be good in the office, or bad in the office, then I think that the scale tipper should be the democrat just because of the House situation.[/quote]Ah, yes. I agree that if there are two people who would be equivalent on all matters that party should not be the deciding vote... but on that note, if they were equal in what they stood for and were going to promote, the difference in party shouldn't be an issue with the House, either, should it? ;) I'm just ragging you a little bit here, but I seriously doubt we'll ever get to the point where we'll have candidates from both parties who will both be on the level with where they stand. I'll also go a step further than what you were saying, too: if there are two candidates who are both going to be bad in the office, I say your solution works the other way, too: vote Rep so that nothing gets done! LOL :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmgmyr Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 [quote author=jcombs_31 link=topic=123397.msg511267#msg511267 date=1169555796]Anything has to be a step up from what we have now. [/quote]haha I second that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ober Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 Apparently the latest polls show Bush's approval rating is the lowest ever... or at least equal to Nixon's when he resigned.Apparently there are still a few holdout morons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmgmyr Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 and most of them live in Texas... haha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ober Posted January 23, 2007 Share Posted January 23, 2007 Ain't that the freakin truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.