Frag On Sight - View Single Post

ChemicalWarrior · 01-21-2008, 10:24 PM

Huckabee is much more likely to run the country based on religious beliefs. I can't see how someone who isn't a evangelical would even consider voting for him. Romney doesn't have the balls to be honest. I don't think changing your view on something is instantly bad, but the guy does it on everything depending on the month, week, day, hour, minute, second.

Rudy Giuliani has no chance to be honest. He is often considered the worst mayor in New York City history and he didn't even do anything special on 9/11! Running on nothing but trying to bend history the complete opposite way that it actually happened.

John Edwards and Ron Paul both actually have the best plans as far as the actual meat but they're far to extreme (meaning, just barely outside of centrist for Edwards) for the establishment. These are the two that would actually change something, be it for the better or worse. You see, the US is a very centrist place and we're happy with "well as long as you don't screw it up..." type of bullshit. Bush screwed it up, and as long as the next guy/women doesn't then they'll look grand.

Obama will faulture on his "lack of experience" which is bullshit. He's got more REAL experience than Hillary, oh and he's black which in a country that is very racist (the world in general is, we're humans afterall) won't go over well. Hillary has a chance as long as she doesn't screw up, which chances are upwards that she might. McCain, I actually liked this guy oh about 2 or 3 years ago. Now he's nothing more than suck up and panders like everyone else.

No good choices to be honest, though Obama is the best out of who could win.

01-21-2008, 10:24 PM	#9 (permalink)
ChemicalWarrior Moderator Addict Posts: 2,051 Shouts: 0 Join Date: Jun 2005 Age: 19 Thanks: 2 Thanked 18 Times in 15 Posts Add to xFire Friends List	Huckabee is much more likely to run the country based on religious beliefs. I can't see how someone who isn't a evangelical would even consider voting for him. Romney doesn't have the balls to be honest. I don't think changing your view on something is instantly bad, but the guy does it on everything depending on the month, week, day, hour, minute, second. Rudy Giuliani has no chance to be honest. He is often considered the worst mayor in New York City history and he didn't even do anything special on 9/11! Running on nothing but trying to bend history the complete opposite way that it actually happened. John Edwards and Ron Paul both actually have the best plans as far as the actual meat but they're far to extreme (meaning, just barely outside of centrist for Edwards) for the establishment. These are the two that would actually change something, be it for the better or worse. You see, the US is a very centrist place and we're happy with "well as long as you don't screw it up..." type of bullshit. Bush screwed it up, and as long as the next guy/women doesn't then they'll look grand. Obama will faulture on his "lack of experience" which is bullshit. He's got more REAL experience than Hillary, oh and he's black which in a country that is very racist (the world in general is, we're humans afterall) won't go over well. Hillary has a chance as long as she doesn't screw up, which chances are upwards that she might. McCain, I actually liked this guy oh about 2 or 3 years ago. Now he's nothing more than suck up and panders like everyone else. No good choices to be honest, though Obama is the best out of who could win. __________________ What could appear next?