AF U.S Presidential Poll! (Pt. 3)

It's that time again, the final poll for the U.S. Presidential election! This list contains ALL of the candidates nominated by all of the parties, rather than just the 2 major (Republican and Demcrat) parties. The list is in aphabetical order by last names to maintain fairness. All links to each candidate are from Wikipedia, use that information lightly as it's easy to be manipulated. If you wish to know more about a candidate I would suggest you do some more in depth research rather than relying on the information contained on Wikipedia.

[hr-b]1[/hr-b]
Gene Amondson (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_Amondson) - Prohibition Party
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/99/Amondson.jpg

Chuck Baldwin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Baldwin) - Constitution Party
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:iD081Mj8bCsRPM:%3Ca%20rel=%20http://www.turntotheconstitution.com/ChuckBaldwin.jpg

Bob Barr (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Barr) - Libertarian Party
http://acandidworld.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/barr.jpeg?w=111&h=139

Róger Calero (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%B3ger_Calero) - Socialist Workers Party
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/88/Calero.jpg

Charles Jay (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Jay) - Boston Tea Party
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bd/CharlesJay.jpg

Alan Keyes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Keyes) - Independent
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:dy6T_AdKhcpnUM:http://www.renewamerica.us/plan/images/ak_1.jpg

Gloria La Riva (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gloria_La_Riva) - Socialism & Liberation Party
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:x7c7Xapv5nSx8M:http://www.pslweb.org/images/content/pagebuilder/44869.jpg

John McCain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain) - Republican Party
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:xA2-qXXkjHCCMM:http://nazret.com/blog/media/blogs/new/john_mccain.jpg

Frank McEnulty (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_McEnulty&action=edit&redlink=1) - New American Independent Party
http://a.wordpress.com/avatar/mcenulty-128.jpg

Cynthia McKinney (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynthia_McKinney) - Green Party
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:Fl5j0BOsAsdl5M:http://www.politisite.com/images/mckinney.jpg

Brian Moore (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Moore_%28politician%29) - Socialist Party
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:v-wbtlCcy5g-XM:http://www.votebrianmoore.com/images/11.jpg

Ralph Nader (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Nader) - Independent
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:i4ZHK8xJ1lrXvM:http://blog.pennlive.com/pennsyltucky/2008/01/nader12308.jpg

Barack Obama (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama) - Democratic Party
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:YnVKOOjmJ_rmUM:http://www.jewishpost.com/images/news/images/ObamaBarack.jpg

Ted Weill (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ted_Weill&action=edit&redlink=1) - Reform Party
http://www.politics1.com/pix1/weill.jpg

[hr-b]1[/hr-b]
If I have left any candidates out, please let me know and I'll be more than happy to add them.

I'm no fan of McCain, but nothing could be worse for our country than Obama. He'll raise taxes on the upper-income brackets and corporations (great idea in a struggling economy) to pay for his socialistic policies. These taxes will be paid by the consumer, mainly (little guy gets the shaft, again, lol). As the economy slows down and more companies move offshore to avoid taxes, revenue falls off. Then, we have an even bigger government operating in the red. Sounds pessimistic, though it's based on common sense rather than "textbook theory".

Besides, Obama approves of the Patriot Act, "war on terror", and immunity for communications companies that Bush wanted. In other words, false "Hope" and chump "Change".

Though Keyes is the cream of the crop, we are going to be stuck with McCain or Obama. Neither is worth a spit.













Never pay again for live sex! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=1) | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=3) | Chat for free! (http://showmewebcam.com/?p=5)

Though Keyes is the cream of the crop, we are going to be stuck with McCain or Obama. Neither is worth a spit.
Well then, frankly, none of them are. Unfortunately, only the two major parties can provide the expertise and infrastructure required to effectively run the executive branch. Electing or considering any of the others is obviously ridiculous (but is a valued part of the democratic process).

So, McCain or Obama.................. well Obama is perceived as being 'cleaner' than Hillary....... less of an insider, I guess. He comes across as being really sharp. McCain seems to fumble, but perhaps that's a sign of being more honest and less scripted.

Can't we get Bob Dole to run? He would be better............. or maybe dig up Hoover.............. :tongue:

He comes across as being really sharp. McCain seems to fumble, but perhaps that's a sign of being more honest and less scripted.

Noo...its a sign of being a poor public speaker...

IMO without their notes or teleprompter they all fumble including Obama. He nutted up addressing the Veterans in my area when he came to speak. Further evaluation is needed with real debates and see how they reply to the issues.

After watching Palin speak at the RNC there is no doubt in my mind on who has the best public speaker. :grinno: Plus whatever they are worth the polls have them back at a dead heat again after Obama got an uptick of a few points after the DNC.

CBS Poll (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/04/opinion/polls/main4416798.shtml)



http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y186/lizzywiz/mccain_palin.jpg

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y186/lizzywiz/republican.jpg

After watching Palin speak at the RNC there is no doubt in my mind on who has the best public speaker. :grinno:

Palin is a very good speaker and would have a great career in those info-infomercials, but her speech was full of half truths and exaggerations.

see how she did on the truth meter http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/personalities/sarah-palin/

And be sure to check out the video Palin's Trouble With The Truth
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/08/palins-trouble.html

Palin is a very good speaker and would have a great career in those info-infomercials, but her speech was full of half truths and exaggerations.

Obviously a "very good speaker" since her speech charged the Republican base. No question she was the "attack dog". According to Nielsen 37 million viewed her. Lets see how she or better yet Obama does on the upcoming mano a mano debates.


37,244,000 Million household viewers watched Sarah Palin's speech last night.

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's highly anticipated speech at the Republican National Convention on Wednesday night nearly matched the record-setting numbers of Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama.

Palin pulled in 37.2 million viewers across broadcast and cable networks, according to Nielsen Media Research.

That's 55% higher than Day 3 of the DNC, when her Democratic counterpart, Joe Biden, and President Clinton took the stage (24 million).

It's also up a sharp 99% from the Republican convention's third day in 2004 (18.7 million). In fact, it came close to upsetting Obama's historic address on Thursday -- the most-watched convention speech in history (38.4 million viewers).

Palin's viewership is up significantly from Tuesday's RNC tally, when 21.5 million tuned in to see President Bush and independent Sen. Joe Lieberman endorse nominee John McCain.

Palin has been beset by controversy since McCain shocked Beltway insiders by appointing the relatively little-known governor as his vice presidential pick. Her Wednesday night speech was presented as an opportunity to address her skeptics.

Source: The Live Feed / Neilsen Media Research

Speaking of being one sided as usual and the pot calling the kettle black. :rolleyes:

Sounds familiar and similarly can be applied to Obama. It looks like he didn't too good on the "Truth Meter" either compared to Palin.

Politifact Obama (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/personalities/barack-obama/)


And be sure to check out the video Palin's Trouble With The Truth
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/08/palins-trouble.html

Is that supposed to be a "smoking gun"? :lol:

All I see is hearsay and no evidence to support the claims against her. Even if guilty what is she going to get a slap on the hand? In contrast no worse than Obama aka Barry Soetoro fibbing on his Illinois State Bar application by not disclosing any alias names or covering up the fact that he actually claimed to be an Indonesian citizen and of the Islamic religion confirmed by the AP. Classic "Manchurian Candidate" to me. The problem is Dems/Liberals are too blinded to see it.

Barack Obama's Indonesian Registration appears as Barry Soetoro (http://blog.changeandexperience.com/2008/08/barack-obamas-indonesian-registration.html)

I'm no fan of McCain, but nothing could be worse for our country than Obama. He'll raise taxes on the upper-income brackets and corporations (great idea in a struggling economy) to pay for his socialistic policies.

Explain the problem here.

These taxes will be paid by the consumer, mainly (little guy gets the shaft, again, lol). As the economy slows down and more companies move offshore to avoid taxes, revenue falls off. Then, we have an even bigger government operating in the red. Sounds pessimistic, though it's based on common sense rather than "textbook theory".

Which would be different from the way things are going with these low republican taxes right now how?

Besides, Obama approves of the Patriot Act, "war on terror", and immunity for communications companies that Bush wanted. In other words, false "Hope" and chump "Change".

Yeah yeah yeah, he's a moron - but McCain also supports the Patriot Act, and voted to extend its use. So there's not much of a difference between the two here.

This is actually a very tough campaign for me...and I don't take the decision lightly. I don't think that Obama has the necessary experience to lead this country yet. Liebermann nailed it in saying that Obama has a very bright future in politics, and he will go on to do great things, just not quite yet. McCain is in no way going to change the direction of this country away from Bush policies, and I fully disagree with him on several crucial issues. I do believe he has a genuine interest in making our country better, but 1) he's not going to get anything accomplished , particularly on partisan issues like taxes, against a strong democratically controlled congress, and 2) he is just wrong on issues that are too important to be wrong on. Furthermore, the thought of Sarah Palin leading this country is frightening beyond imagination.

So where does that leave voters like me? Screwed, that's where. The US political system sucks.

Speaking of being one sided as usual and the pot calling the kettle black. :rolleyes:

Want to see the "pot calling the the kettle black"? Then check out this:

http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=184086

Obama is worse,he wants to get rid of every gun out there and change the second admendment.Obama is a liar,he says he wants to lower taxes,instead he want raise them.He was for the Washinton,DC gun ban that was struck down.McCain is for gun rights and the NRA will probally endorse him

Want to see the "pot calling the the kettle black"? Then check out this:

http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=184086

Yeah that was rather hilarious. :lol: Sometimes you gotta give that left winger Stewart credit. All politicians, politicos, talking heads or news pundits can be hypocrites, back pedal, lie or flip-flop including your man Obama so what is your point. Here is a big flip-flop. I bet that really pissed off the MoveOn.org idiots and their followers. :twak:


Surge 'Suceeded Beyond Our Wildest Dreams,' Obama Now Says
Friday, September 05, 2008
By Susan Jones, Senior Editor

The troop surge in Iraq has “succeeded beyond our wildest dreams,” Sen. Barack Obama conceded in an interview with Bill O'Reilly that aired on the Fox News Channel Thursday night.

Obama not only opposed the Iraq war from the beginning, he also opposed the troop surge and predicted it would not work. Sen. John McCain, the Republican presidential candidate, was a strong supporter of the troop surge.

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=35226

Obviously Palin is having an impact that Obama and the Demos are not taking too lightly.


Obama Sends Female Supporters to Blunt Palin's Impact
Friday, September 05, 2008
By Philip Elliott, Associated Press

Harrisburg, Pa. (AP ) - Barack Obama's campaign plans to employ high-profile female supporters in an effort to blunt GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin's potential to persuade women to vote Republican.

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/Content/Article.aspx?rsrcid=35223

Obama is worse,he wants to get rid of every gun out there and change the second admendment.Obama is a liar,he says he wants to lower taxes,instead he want raise them.He was for the Washinton,DC gun ban that was struck down.McCain is for gun rights and the NRA will probally endorse him

Ok, if you are going to play with the big boys in the Politics sandbox, you are going to need to change your posting habits.

1.) You need a purpose. This post is not in line with the current discussion. Please keep up.

2.) To avoid looking a little bit dim, please post relevant information. Please don't disrespect the people participating in this discussion with vague talking points you heard on a radical right blog.

3.) This is a mature (sometimes) discussion. If you are going to make absurd claims, please be sure to citethe information. You would turn in your little essays to your teachers with no bibliography, would you?

I know this may be a stretch, but we all have to dig in around here. These are tough times for all of us. And (www.cnn.com/politics) I (www.google.com) realize (wwwfoxnews.com) there (www.yahoo.com) are (www.politico.com) not (www.barackobama.com) very (www.johnmccain.com) many (http://www.nytimes.com/pages/politics/) resources (www.msnbc.com) for (www.realclearpolitics.com/) you (www.washingtonpost.com/politics) to (politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/) utilize (www.blogcatalog.com/directory/politics) in (www.dailykos.com/) your (www.campaignline.com) quest (www.uspoliticsonline.com/) for (www.politicaldiscussion.info/) relative (www.politicalrant.org) information (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&rls=com.microsoft%3A*%3AIE-SearchBox&rlz=1I7GWYE&q=Use+a+search+function%2C+you+jackass%21&btnG=Search), but please try your best. Thanks!

Obama is worse,he wants to get rid of every gun out there and change the second admendment.Obama is a liar,he says he wants to lower taxes,instead he want raise them.He was for the Washinton,DC gun ban that was struck down.McCain is for gun rights and the NRA will probally endorse him

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Oh, wow.
That came out of nowhere. Besides if you're a gun lover, you should be voting for Bob Barr who's actually on the board of directors of the NRA - not John McCain. Barr by the way is also for states rights, and repeal of the patriot act (he did vote for it, but not until sunset clauses were included on several key issues).

And also it'd be impossible for Obama to get rid of "every gun out there" even if he wanted to - don't you have a single clue as to how the government works?

Besides if you're a gun lover, you should be voting for Bob Barr who's actually on the board of directors of the NRA - not John McCain.

I don't know about that. McCain has made new inroads with the NRA. Just because Barr is on the NRA Board of Directors doesn't mean squat and no reason for gun lovers to vote for him strictly on that basis. :grinno:


LOUISVILLE, May 16 -- Sen. John McCain, once derided as one of the "premier flag-carriers for the enemies of the Second Amendment" by the National Rifle Association, enthusiastically embraced the group's pro-gun agenda at its annual convention here Friday.

In front of a crowd of about 6,000 people who gave him two standing ovations, McCain also mocked Democratic Sen. Barack Obama as a liberal, anti-gun politician and made a direct appeal to the "bitter" voters Obama said were clinging to their "guns or religion" to soothe concerns about their economic struggles.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/16/AR2008051603640.htm



And also it'd be impossible for Obama to get rid of "every gun out there" even if he wanted to

To be fair we all know Obama supports the Second Amendment. :uhoh:

Obviously it will be very difficult to get rid of over 200 million firearms in this country and gun ownership being ingrained into the very fabric of American society going way back. They will have to pry mine out of my cold dead hands. :lol:

Obama is not for gun rights and voted for every gun control law proposed.I read this in the magazine,First Freedom which I am a member of the NRA.Obama also wants to get rid of 90% of gun shops.

Obama also wants to get rid of 90% of gun shops.

:confused:

You'll need to clarify that comment. Any links to credible information so we can properly debate this issue? Last I heard it was back in 1999 and in reference to not having any gun shop especially one that operates out of their home within 5 miles of any school or park or something to that effect. But obviously since the D.C. handgun ban ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court even Obama has back pedaled or flip flopped. Also, he is looking for votes since he is the Democratic candidate for President.

Look, to clarify. This is the Politics Forum where we have specific guidelines and higher standards especially when it comes to sensitive issues and proper debating. This is not a regular OT Forum where you can say or do as you please. Do us a favor please review the guidelines below.


Please be warned and advised that the strongest debates on AF occur here in the Political forum.

There are extremely opinionated individuals on both (or even all) sides of most of the debates.

Although emotions can run high when debating something that you feel strongly about, remember that you are not debating someone else's intelligence (or lack thereof), background or location, but rather the topic itself and their position on the topic.

For best results :D try to back up your assertions with some sort of evidence, and also be prepared to have others find evidence against your assertions and shoot holes in what you have said.

Personal attacks will just get threads closed or worse, so avoid attacking the messenger and stick to attacking the message.

Enjoy the war, er, I mean the spirited debates to be found here.

:popcorn:

Edit Update:

Trolling Not Allowed :nono:

An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who intentionally posts controversial or contrary messages in an online community such as an online discussion forum or USENET, with the intention of baiting users into an argumentative response.

http://www.automotiveforums.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=675792

The NRA found out about this and I seen this on a card,about 8 in total to pass on to gun owners in the First Freedom Magazine

The NRA found out about this and I seen this on a card,about 8 in total to pass on to gun owners in the First Freedom Magazine

:rolleyes:.........:banghead:

Well, I for one am not a member of the NRA and do not get that magazine. Waste of money. You missed the point. At least put something up to support your position so others may review it to see what you are talking about, for possible comment, rebuttal or to get a good laugh regardless of the perceived credibility or lack thereof of the source.

Look, it is as simple as this.

NRA-ILA (http://www.nraila.org/)

On the Second Amendment, Don’t Believe Obama! (http://www.gunbanobama.com/Default.aspx?NavGuid=530ecfa4-ae4e-4819-97e6-892463d99f08&SiteGuid=c63367a2-996a-422c-9afd-0d6f49a0ca86)

I get that magazine and it is not a waste of money joining the NRA which my father is a member too.I want to keep my rifles and Obama wants to take them away.

I get that magazine and it is not a waste of money joining the NRA which my father is a member too.I want to keep my rifles and Obama wants to take them away.

You know I am getting a case of "deja vu" because this conversation seems to remind me of a conversation we had at one of the GM Tech Forums. You just don't get it do you? :shakehead Man, I sure hope you don't plan on voting for McCain and the Republican Party.




http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y186/lizzywiz/BD023A.jpg

or dumb :lol:

I don't know about that. McCain has made new inroads with the NRA. Just because Barr is on the NRA Board of Directors doesn't mean squat and no reason for gun lovers to vote for him strictly on that basis. :grinno:

Well there's McCain's support of wiretapping, and general support of the patriot act. Whereas Barr wrote in sunset clauses for the protection of Americans civil liberties; and now favors repeal of the act- McCain voted to keep the act.
If you want to talk about liberties in the U.S. Barr supports a lot more than just your right to play with toys. :wink:
There's also McCain's want for wasting more time, money and lives in Iraq, as opposed to Barr who wants to clean up and go home... Barr's opposition to torture (it's true McCain opposed torture in his rhetoric, but in practice he's essentially done nothing to stop it). Barr wants to revise the war on drugs, since it's obvious to anybody with half a brain, it's been a total failure and needless waste of money so far...
Let's see here, Barr supports letting states decide the fate of medicinal marijuana instead of the federal government, supports letting states decide the fate of same sex marriage instead of the federal government... etc. He supports states rights instead of a heavy handed bloated big government - like McCain and Obama want.
Let's not forget his opposition to the 16th amendment either.

McCain and Obama are fighting for the votes of average-joe-dumbass, and that's exactly the audience that will vote for them.

McCain and Obama are fighting for the votes of average-joe-dumbass, and that's exactly the audience that will vote for them.

You are preaching to the choir on Barr. I already made up my mind on who and what party to vote for. Now please make up our minds. That is why I mentioned you are an enigma. For the dummies - puzzle. Are you supporting Nader or Barr? You can't have it both ways or are you still undecided?

Are you implying that moderates, centrists or swing voters are "average-joe-dumbass? Because that is all that is left. The base on either the Demo or Repub sides are already locked in.

Nader has my vote. As much as I appreciate Barr and the libertarians, Nader has a track record of actually helping Americans - and whether or not he wins any office ever he'll still be helping plenty of people out. I'd rather give my vote away to somebody who's honest and pragmatic, than throw it out to somebody who's just fishing for votes and hasn't ever done anything of any real merit for anybody like Obama or McCain.

Nader has my vote.

:screwy:

I bet you haven't spent a single penny contributing to his campaign. Talk is cheap. Lets see how November 4 turns out.