By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Sarah Palin vs Obama if eletions where today

 

Sarah Palin vs Obama if eletions where today

Obama 41 53.25%
 
Sarah palin 16 20.78%
 
Dead fish 20 25.97%
 
Total:77
SamuelRSmith on 21 April 2010
highwaystar101 said:
Dead fish was tempting, leagues above Sarah Palin anyway. However, I'm going for Obama as he has that human touch.

I agree, I like zee human touch.



Around the Network
highwaystar101 on 21 April 2010

Wouldn't someone like Ron Paul be the logical choice to run for the Republicans? Especially over Sarah Palin.



Rath on 21 April 2010
Kasz216 said:
draik said:
I just don't get it, could any of you from the USA explain this to me.

Why is Sarah Palin popular and even considered as a candidate for the presidency. Aren't there better alternatives to her in the republican party? Surely there are some more qualified people in the party? Or is it the Hockey mum thing?

She's viewed as a raving loony here by many.

She's a successful female poltician that isn't cast as "frigid and angry" as most female polticians are.

Furthermore, she doesn't give off the general bland "Everyday politican" type thing you see with people like John Kerry, Mitt Romney etc.

 

Basically, she has Charisma.  Look at our last few presidents during their elections.

 

Obama - He's an "everman" guy... loves basketball... has a personality.  You'd like to have a beer with him and watch a game.

Bush - "Everyman type guy."... "cowboy type image."... "liked to make jokes.  You'd like to have a beer with him and watch a game.  Just so long as he dosen't start asking you if you've found Jesus.

Bill Clinton - He's an "everyman" type guy.  Can play the Sax!  Good sense of humor.  You'd like to have a beer with him and watch a game... and talk about the cheer leaders.

Bush Sr - Ok... you wouldn't want to have a beer with him, but he was Vice President... and he was running against Michael Dukakis who was even more awkward.

Reagan - An actor!  Yet still humble!  You'd totally want to have a bear with him and hang out.

 

What does having a bear with Reagan involve? It sounds scary =P



draik on 21 April 2010
Rath said:
Kasz216 said:
draik said:
I just don't get it, could any of you from the USA explain this to me.

Why is Sarah Palin popular and even considered as a candidate for the presidency. Aren't there better alternatives to her in the republican party? Surely there are some more qualified people in the party? Or is it the Hockey mum thing?

She's viewed as a raving loony here by many.

She's a successful female poltician that isn't cast as "frigid and angry" as most female polticians are.

Furthermore, she doesn't give off the general bland "Everyday politican" type thing you see with people like John Kerry, Mitt Romney etc.

 

Basically, she has Charisma.  Look at our last few presidents during their elections.

 

Obama - He's an "everman" guy... loves basketball... has a personality.  You'd like to have a beer with him and watch a game.

Bush - "Everyman type guy."... "cowboy type image."... "liked to make jokes.  You'd like to have a beer with him and watch a game.  Just so long as he dosen't start asking you if you've found Jesus.

Bill Clinton - He's an "everyman" type guy.  Can play the Sax!  Good sense of humor.  You'd like to have a beer with him and watch a game... and talk about the cheer leaders.

Bush Sr - Ok... you wouldn't want to have a beer with him, but he was Vice President... and he was running against Michael Dukakis who was even more awkward.

Reagan - An actor!  Yet still humble!  You'd totally want to have a bear with him and hang out.

 

What does having a bear with Reagan involve? It sounds scary =P

Off topic, but made me think of this.



 

Kasz216 on 21 April 2010
highwaystar101 said:
Wouldn't someone like Ron Paul be the logical choice to run for the Republicans? Especially over Sarah Palin.

He would... if it wasn't for the fact that most Republicans hate Ron Paul more then Obama.

The thing is... when you become President, you don't just become president.  You become head of the party.  That means if Ron Paul won the election.. he and his Librertarians would suddenly control the RNC.

Neo-consrevatives would rather lose and ride it out and wait for the storm to pass then let Ron Paul in office.  



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 21 April 2010

Ironically by the way... Obama may be best if this election is held now.

By the time 2012 is around he may be ineligible to run in a number of states.

A decent amount of states are including a provision that would require someone to show their birth certificate to run in that state... and really... all it would take is 1 state to have that law.



highwaystar101 on 21 April 2010
Kasz216 said:
highwaystar101 said:
Wouldn't someone like Ron Paul be the logical choice to run for the Republicans? Especially over Sarah Palin.

He would... if it wasn't for the fact that most Republicans hate Ron Paul more then Obama.

The thing is... when you become President, you don't just become president.  You become head of the party.  That means if Ron Paul won the election.. he and his Librertarians would suddenly control the RNC.

Neo-consrevatives would rather lose and ride it out and wait for the storm to pass then let Ron Paul in office.  

Yeah, I've heard they don't like him for pretty much the reasons you gave (Libertarian). It's a shame because quite frankly he seems miles better than Sarah Palin.



outlawauron on 21 April 2010
Kasz216 said:
highwaystar101 said:
Wouldn't someone like Ron Paul be the logical choice to run for the Republicans? Especially over Sarah Palin.

He would... if it wasn't for the fact that most Republicans hate Ron Paul more then Obama.

The thing is... when you become President, you don't just become president.  You become head of the party.  That means if Ron Paul won the election.. he and his Librertarians would suddenly control the RNC.

Neo-consrevatives would rather lose and ride it out and wait for the storm to pass then let Ron Paul in office.  

True. Ron Paul is too liberal on social issues to be accepted by the majority of Republicans.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

Millennium on 21 April 2010

I'd cast a blank ballot and then go drink myself into a stupor.



Complexity is not depth. Machismo is not maturity. Obsession is not dedication. Tedium is not challenge. Support gaming: support the Wii.

Be the ultimate ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today! Poisson Village welcomes new players.

What do I hate about modern gaming? I hate tedium replacing challenge, complexity replacing depth, and domination replacing entertainment. I hate the outsourcing of mechanics to physics textbooks, art direction to photocopiers, and story to cheap Hollywood screenwriters. I hate the confusion of obsession with dedication, style with substance, new with gimmicky, old with obsolete, new with evolutionary, and old with time-tested.
There is much to hate about modern gaming. That is why I support the Wii.

Kasz216 on 21 April 2010
highwaystar101 said:
Kasz216 said:
highwaystar101 said:
Wouldn't someone like Ron Paul be the logical choice to run for the Republicans? Especially over Sarah Palin.

He would... if it wasn't for the fact that most Republicans hate Ron Paul more then Obama.

The thing is... when you become President, you don't just become president.  You become head of the party.  That means if Ron Paul won the election.. he and his Librertarians would suddenly control the RNC.

Neo-consrevatives would rather lose and ride it out and wait for the storm to pass then let Ron Paul in office.  

Yeah, I've heard they don't like him for pretty much the reasons you gave (Libertarian). It's a shame because quite frankly he seems miles better than Sarah Palin.

Yeah, people just couldn't stomach his social issues... and just how radically he'd try and change everything.

 

Ron Paul supporters are basically your typical fiscally conservative, socially liberal types.  Like Economists, Proffesors of buisness and financial classes, small buisness owners. 

Largely people who know about economics but find it repugnent that the government can tell gay people they can't get married etc.

 

I'm not sold on the "fair tax" system, however most Economists seem to be... so long as it's done on a point of sale AND buisness level and also keeps sin taxes.