Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Yankee Fan

2008 Candidates visiting this week

44 posts in this topic

Mitt Romney and McCain are visiting GR today and they and others will be in the area over the next week.

Is anyone going to one of these rallies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Mitt Romney and McCain are visiting GR today and they and others will be in the area over the next week.

Is anyone going to one of these rallies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mitt Romney and McCain are visiting GR today and they and others will be in the area over the next week.

Is anyone going to one of these rallies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mitt Romney and McCain are visiting GR today and they and others will be in the area over the next week.

Is anyone going to one of these rallies?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly. I can't think of any Republican candidates that are any good, or who will do anything but maintain the status quo. And those Romney pro-life/anti-gay ads they keep running are so irritating, he definitely will not get my vote. And McCain, making people "mad" in Washington? Come on. I'm thinking of switching parties this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct me if i'm wrong, but from where I sit the only republican who hasn't changed his positions would be Guliani. You could argue Ron Paul, but he's libertarian, and not a long time republican. It annoys me that Romney has moved so much to the right, because you know he didn't hold those views as the governor of Mass. He couldn't have. I'm also tired of hearing about how Michigan is his home state. He left, decades ago, and took his business with him. If he marches into Michigan and starts talking about being one of it's favorite sons, you all should tar and feather him. He left, probabally just when the state could have used him most, Michigan should give no time to fair weather politicians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a right-wing wacko I can't support any democrats. I suppose John Edwards would be less bad than the others. Either way Michigan's Democratic primary means nothing since only Hillary Clinton is on the ballot. And regardless of who wins the Republican nomination he'll probably lose in the general election. So, my vote being useless, I'll vote for Ron Paul just because I like him.

He's downright wrong on a few issues. For example, he wants to go back to the gold standard. But, even if by some miracle he were elected, there's no way he'd get congress to go along with 10% of what he wants, so I think he would be okay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As a right-wing wacko I can't support any democrats. I suppose John Edwards would be less bad than the others. Either way Michigan's Democratic primary means nothing since only Hillary Clinton is on the ballot. And regardless of who wins the Republican nomination he'll probably lose in the general election. So, my vote being useless, I'll vote for Ron Paul just because I like him.

He's downright wrong on a few issues. For example, he wants to go back to the gold standard. But, even if by some miracle he were elected, there's no way he'd get congress to go along with 10% of what he wants, so I think he would be okay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I don't know about Ron Paul. There has been a recent revelation about his past ideologies that are pretty frightening -- forget gold standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...It annoys me that Romney has moved so much to the right, because you know he didn't hold those views as the governor of Mass. He couldn't have. I'm also tired of hearing about how Michigan is his home state. He left, decades ago, and took his business with him. ... He left, probabally just when the state could have used him most, Michigan should give no time to fair weather politicians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just sent a message to someone in Lansing who'd know when our favorite candidate might be coming to town.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
He left to go to college, age 18.

(Kindof cool to read the Newsweek piece and see mentions of Cranbrook.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know about Ron Paul. There has been a recent revelation about his past ideologies that are pretty frightening -- forget gold standard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Indeed, I posted this link over on the poll page, but this article explains why Ron Paul falls well short of my personal gold standard.

The link doesn't work every time I click it, you might have to try a couple times to read the whole article.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I'm mad that our primary is essentially irrelevant this year, with no democratic delegates, and 50% reduction in republican delegates.

Can't get excited about it. I wanted to go shout my allegiance for barak (never voted for the dem. party before), but that's not gonna happen.

If the Polar ice Queen manages to win the primary, i'm going to be forced to vote for whoever the lesser of the republican evils are. I can't afford to waste it on a third party this time around.

democrats vowed not to campaign in michigan for the primary, because our state violated the DNC's rule with the primary or some garbage. So there will be no hillary, obama, or edwards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just sent a message to someone in Lansing who'd know when our favorite candidate might be coming to town.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Huckabee is the man! The media is making way too much of his religous beliefs. He is a strong Christian but I don't think he would be the kind to push any of his beliefs on others. He wants to secure the borders but is being realistic on what to do with those illegals who are already here. It would not be feasable to just deport everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think President Bush can run again, so he would not be considered a candidate. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hillary Clinton IS NOT the only candidate on the ballot in the Michigan primary.

RANT alert:

The whole "electable" way of thinking is what keeps us from having real change. The way I see it, a vote for someone other than who you really believe is the best person for the job is a wasted vote. The only way we are going to change what most people seem to agree is a deeply flawed system is for WE THE PEOPLE to use our power at the voting booth (assuming it is accurately recorded and counted) and do what we are TOLD "can't be done". It's our buying into that thinking and voting for someone we are TOLD is "electable" that perpetuates the [broken] system. Otherwise we are counting on change to be made by the people that this system is working for. [insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results]

Doing the "impossible" will change things radically and we are in such deep doo-doo that we cannot afford slow incremental change. [Radical means root as in ground up -- we the people] Good people will again be willing to run for office, big money will lose its grip, people will vote because they have good people to vote for, believe that their vote counts and (hopefully) become more engaged in the world outside their own individual short term wants/desires/comfort.

Somewhere along the way, maybe by design/manipulation, maybe not, we have given up the power of WE THE PEOPLE. There is an abdication of power and responsibility that manifests in an attitude/belief that it is someone else's responsibility to make decisions for us that affect us all and it is by our own doing that we continue to abdicate our power and responsibility. Isn't it more comfortable to blame "the administration" or others for the messes we are in? When we allowed GWB to take office for a second term, we told the world we agree with his policies. We are told, and we believe that "they" are more knowledgeable about things kept secret. Secrecy is tyranny. There is more information available, but don't expect it to be spoon fed to you. Trust in y/our ability to understand and make wise decisions. (How many of your elected representative have you met up close?) For years I resided in Dennis Hastert's district and that ended my belief that our elected representative are more capable of making good decisions that are in the best interests of all -- long term.

If you don't want to take the time to dig beyond the hype about candidates, there are a few online questionnaires available that based on your answers will match you with a candidate whose [stated] positions are most closely aligned with your beliefs. I don't entirely trust them, and doubt that they take into account how well the candidates actions match with their statements, but they can help you separate out some of the emotional/personality quirks that might prevent you from looking squarely at all options. Later, time permitting, I'll dig them out and post them.

As for me, after I've finished my obligations in Grand Rapids tomorrow (Friday), I'm heading to Detroit, fetching my mother and joining others where our preferred candidate will be.

None but ourselves can free our minds.

- Bob Marley

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The whole "electable" way of thinking is what keeps us from having real change. The way I see it, a vote for someone other than who you really believe is the best person for the job is a wasted vote. The only way we are going to change what most people seem to agree is a deeply flawed system is for WE THE PEOPLE to use our power at the voting booth (assuming it is accurately recorded and counted) and do what we are TOLD "can't be done". It's our buying into that thinking and voting for someone we are TOLD is "electable" that perpetuates the [broken] system. Otherwise we are counting on change to be made by the people that this system is working for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unfortunately, our political system requires candidates to build coalitions in order to get elected. Radical change may get some grassroots support, but it won't be broad enough to get elected, so as long as we're stuck with our current system we have to think in terms of "electable" candidates. It is a shame because there are some areas where we need radical change and real leadership to push for it.

If we didn't have such a winner take all system more than two political parties could probably survive, and representation would be more evenly spread across different ideologies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Case in point is this "new" strategy of the candidates focusing soley on "key" states due to the delegate count. Basically blowing off the smaller represented states. Very slippery slope and IMO a wake-up call that a overall could/should be looked at. Just look at our state of MI next week - If you wanted to vote for BO or JE - your out of luck. (please spare me the UNCOMMITTED - strategy).

I have a question - what would the harm be in having all 50 states holding the primary on the SAME day just like we do in the General Election? God knows campaigning is nearly a non-stop (no off years) effort now so it's not like one could argue they couldn't effectively get their message out (especially taking into account cable and internet proliferation? Also, while I'm on my soap box, pass legislation prohibiting exit polls for 24-48 hours after polls close - you would eliminate any so-called time zone +/- affect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have a question - what would the harm be in having all 50 states holding the primary on the SAME day just like we do in the General Election?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think this is becoming more of a posibility. The current system was built on the premise that candidates needed to reach individual voters in small towns. (Lincoln-Douglas debates, for instance)

That's why the tired, outdated, outmoded and innacurate tradition of Iowa and Hew Hampshire were created way back when (the early 70s I think?). They were a small states. Supposedly a "cross section" of America -- although that is no longer true. Anyone with even a small budget and a lot of ambition and organization could make a name for himself/herself. It was a way to allow the little guy to actually make a run for it, not just millionaires. can you imaginwe the cost of a nationwide primary for Joe Blow candidate? Impossible!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.