I’m an anti-liberal/conservative/libertarian type who grew to and still despise Hillary. They claim she’s to the right of many of the other Dem candidates but I don’t buy that for a minute … although she may have tried to position herself there.
I know very little about Obama … should I be more worried about Obama in the White House than HRC?
For the record, I’ve got my problems with GWB, McCain and many other elected Republicans who seem to lack any principals or have the balls to stick to their guns and fight (not in the war sense).
Furthermore, I don’t believe that any Democrat in the White House would be the end of the world.
I don’t see why you should have any particular issue with Hillary. There has been much spittle-flecked hate aimed at her but there is nothing more anti-libertarian about her than any other main stream democrat. She’ll run to the right of Obama and Edwards and probably govern that way as well.
My advice is don’t listen to what other people are saying about a candidate. Look at the candidate’s own record and see what they have actually done in office. Then decide whose record you are most in agreement with.
HRC for whatever her flaws is the most moderate of the leading Democratic Candidates. I am intrigued by Obama, but I honestly know too little so far about his beliefs and policies. He is a bit of a cipher. Edwards appears to be a good solid lefty and adds the anti-libertarian bonus of having made his fortune as a Personnel Injury Super-Lawyer. You should probably fear him the most.
How do you feel about Rudy, a liberal Republican that is more than willing to fight?
How are tort lawsuits “anti-libertarian”? My understanding of libertarianism is that the preferred method of regulating corporate misconduct is private lawsuits (as opposed to government regulation).
Honestly, I am not sure. What you say makes sense, but I thought overall libertarians disliked the Personnel Injury tort system. Why don’t we wait for What the … !!! to respond.
There isn’t really any need to “worry” about either of them. Neither of them are wide-eyed radicals or more corrupt than usual. Neither of them are idiots, and Congress would not permit either of them to stray very far out of the middle. Either of them would also be a vast improvement over what we’ve got now.
I think this is something that most people would now agree with.
There are the factors of a deep and wide dislike of HRC that seems to go beyond reasonable and the latent prejudice of the country that could work against Obama. I think the two leading candidates for the Democrats both make it easier for a Republican to be elected in 2008 than following Bush would make it seem.
Just being Republican will be a large amount of baggage for many voters. I think this will be a larger number than the traditional liberal core of the Democrats.
There are things in HRC’s record I don’t like. There are comments she’s made off the cuff that I think show either idiocy, or stunning arrogance. Or both. But, compared to anyone now being mentioned from the Republican party, hands down a better option.
1) Assuming a Democrat wins, then which Democrat would move the country farther to the left?
In this case, I think your answer is Edwards, but Obama could be some kind of closeted super-liberal.
2) Any Democrat would move things in a direction you wouldn’t like, so which Democrat has the best chance of beating a generic Republican?
In this case I think Obama should scare you. The main question here is- can people be motivated to vote against someone? If so then Obama is toast based on latent racism. If not I think he has the best shot of the people in the race right now.
I’m wondering if the Islamosphere should be seriously worried about an Obama presidency, having experienced an Islamic culture first-hand. From such a perspective, I’d suggest that an Obama presidency would be vastly preferable to a Clinton one for a conservative such as yourself.
Why do people call Obama a cipher? He’s got a website. He’s got a policy plan. He’s had podcasts going for over a year now where he discusses his PoV on the issues.
You’ve been watching too much Fox News, IMO – the real lefty types wouldn’t want to see HRC win, simply because they believe she’ll just pay lip service to progressive values while continuing the Republican trend of kowtowing to corporate values.
Yet you choose to ask, “Who is more repulsive, HRC or Barak Obama?” Hmmm.
Just about any Democrat in the White House would be a damn better sight than any of the current crop of Republican front-runners, IMO.
Why so low an opinion of Rudy Giuliani? He is the most moderate of the bunch. Is it his 100% support of the police no matter how much they screwed up? Is it policies?
He has a well-documented reputation for hot-headedness and petty vindictiveness. I don’t think I want someone like that with his finger on The Button™.
(And really, anyone who calls a press conference to announce a divorce from his wife strikes me as someone who doesn’t have a good sense of tact…)