PDA

View Full Version : Smartest People running for President



BIG IRISH
09-16-2006, 03:31 AM
Who would you choose? and Why?

Since it is my thread :blah :blah
I have picked, whom I consider the smartest individuals, IMO, that have been mentioned as possibilities for President in 2008.

Here is your choice

Gore & Gen Clark as VP

McCain & Gen Powell as VP

I Know the above will never happen.

jochhejaam
09-16-2006, 07:53 AM
Who would you choose? and Why?

Since it is my thread :blah :blah
I have picked, whom I consider the smartest individuals, IMO, that have been mentioned as possibilities for President in 2008.

Here is your choice

Gore & Gen Clark as VP

McCain & Gen Powell as VP

I Know the above will never happen.
I like the idea of Powell as a running mate but I wonder if he would seriously consider being one.

McCain/Powell > Gore/Clark

I think Gore would spell doom for the Dems. How many candidates for the WH, since 1900, having been defeated in an election have gone on to win the WH in a future race? Nixon...

Kevin Trudeau
09-18-2006, 01:59 AM
I'll be running for political office in the near future!

Nbadan
09-18-2006, 02:05 AM
Jeb Bush has a multi-million dollar war-chest and because of term limits in Florida, no place to spend it. Also, its not Allen, Mccain or any of the other wing-nut wanna-be's who are on top of the polls for the Republican Nomination in 08, its Guiliani.

Guiliani/Bush (?) Consider that possibility.

DarkReign
09-18-2006, 10:24 AM
Jeb Bush has a multi-million dollar war-chest and because of term limits in Florida, no place to spend it. Also, its not Allen, Mccain or any of the other wing-nut wanna-be's who are on top of the polls for the Republican Nomination in 08, its Guiliani.

Guiliani/Bush (?) Consider that possibility.

If another Bush is elected, I quit. There is no hope for the future if the status quo is kept. I voted for Bush in 2000 for no other reason than Al Gore sucks. Not that it matters in Michigan (blue state), but I regret it everyday I see him stumble thru life fucking everything up he touches.

Yeah, lets elect a controversial governor to VP.

What ever happened to being in Washington before being elected President. These governors are used to holding sway in their states only to be offended when the same isnt true in the WH.

101A
09-18-2006, 10:29 AM
What ever happened to being in Washington before being elected President. These governors are used to holding sway in their states only to be offended when the same isnt true in the WH.

A voting record on the national issues makes most congressman damn near unelectable.

Governor's can just talk about what they will do at the national level; don't have a record to lambast.

Extra Stout
09-18-2006, 11:21 AM
If Jeb Bush becomes President in 2008, we might start considering violent revolution.

sickdsm
09-18-2006, 12:04 PM
I don't think being a great leader has to do with being the smartest. I wonder how a computer nerd, star trekie geeks would do........


To be able to lead, you have to have a certain amount of charisma.

RandomGuy
09-18-2006, 01:21 PM
I'll be running for political office in the near future!

I'm blowing the whistle on the Government, the F.D.A. (The US Food and Drug Administration) and the Pharmaceutical companies.
There are Natural Cures that "They" Don't Want You To Know About, because they make too much money from you being sick and from you buying their drugs and having expensive surgeries.


That is because "they" require some modicum of scientific proof before endorsing a regimen of treatment. :rolleyes

Heh, I have a "natural" cure for impotence, just give me your email address, and I will tell you all about it... :lol

Kevin Trudeau
09-18-2006, 02:14 PM
That is because "they" require some modicum of scientific proof before endorsing a regimen of treatment. :rolleyes

Heh, I have a "natural" cure for impotence, just give me your email address, and I will tell you all about it... :lol

What kind of proof do you speak of?

The FDA told you that Vioxx was safe.
Now over 100,000 people are dead from using it as directed.

They lied to you! All in the name of profit.

And I'm blowing the whistle!

sickdsm
09-18-2006, 02:55 PM
That is because "they" require some modicum of scientific proof before endorsing a regimen of treatment. :rolleyes

Heh, I have a "natural" cure for impotence, just give me your email address, and I will tell you all about it... :lol


Wouldn't be like that natural "cure" for premature ejaculation now would it?

:lol

Nbadan
09-18-2006, 03:53 PM
The PNACers aren't gonna let a wing-nut whose not a total hawk on the war on terra, especially the war in Iraq, win the wing-nut nomination. This means that McCain will get torpedoed again. Wait for it.

BIG IRISH
09-19-2006, 05:09 AM
Who would you choose? and Why?

Since it is my thread :blah :blah
I have picked, whom I consider the smartest individuals, IMO, that have been mentioned as possibilities for President in 2008.

Here is your choice

Gore & Gen Clark as VP

McCain & Gen Powell as VP

I Know the above will never happen.

and I sure as to hell hope not:

Gore and Clark
They are qualified to be president, because they are Rhodes scholars. This statement is an oxymoron, because anyone that graduates the Oxford program named after Cecil Rhodes should be automatically disqualified from any leadership position of any kind within the United States of America. The essential mission of the Rhodes scholarship program is to plant the seeds of Socialism into otherwise bright young minds.

Clarke and Powell:
They are qualified to be president, because they are retired Generals This is a little harder to unravel, because I do believe that military leadership experience is usually a qualifier for political leadership. But, there are definitely exceptions, and if you spend time researching you will find out
that Powell and Clarke are perfumed princes

n. a man who is seen as bureaucratic or careerist; a man who is said to be effete, feminine, ineffectual, vacillating, or cowardly; (hence) a member of the U.S. military leadership (at the Pentagon); top brass.

McCain- Damaged goods and a POLITICAN.

I was hoping someone would come up with somebody that would appear to be a good choice-Didn't happen.

As it stands right now, I would vote for , Cough, sputter, hack, take a stiff drink,
Hillary and I can't stand the Bitch, but at least her hands are only dirty, not muddy. Forget Mr Brown and Vince Foster, folks, cough, sputter, hack.

101A
09-19-2006, 08:55 AM
and I sure as to hell hope not:

Gore and Clark
They are qualified to be president, because they are Rhodes scholars. This statement is an oxymoron, because anyone that graduates the Oxford program named after Cecil Rhodes should be automatically disqualified from any leadership position of any kind within the United States of America. The essential mission of the Rhodes scholarship program is to plant the seeds of Socialism into otherwise bright young minds.

Clarke and Powell:
They are qualified to be president, because they are retired Generals This is a little harder to unravel, because I do believe that military leadership experience is usually a qualifier for political leadership. But, there are definitely exceptions, and if you spend time researching you will find out
that Powell and Clarke are perfumed princes

n. a man who is seen as bureaucratic or careerist; a man who is said to be effete, feminine, ineffectual, vacillating, or cowardly; (hence) a member of the U.S. military leadership (at the Pentagon); top brass.

McCain- Damaged goods and a POLITICAN.

I was hoping someone would come up with somebody that would appear to be a good choice-Didn't happen.

As it stands right now, I would vote for , Cough, sputter, hack, take a stiff drink,
Hillary and I can't stand the Bitch, but at least her hands are only dirty, not muddy. Forget Mr Brown and Vince Foster, folks, cough, sputter, hack.

WTF? You gave the board a choice. You now discredit BOTH choices, pick a third you didn't list, and admonish the board for not coming up with someone else? Poor form, old man.

Spurminator
09-19-2006, 09:21 AM
What we need are Electoral reforms that are conducive to having more options on our ballots. This starts with requiring that winners receive a majority of the votes.

I will say this until I am blue in the face.