Now being updated at least once every 14 weeks! 

2008 Presidential Primary Candidates - 5 Cents
Posted by: Mark Nichols

18 Feb 2007

Maybe this is a topic for Paul's Civics 101 series, but I've been thinking a lot about politics recently and thought I might share a little bit about potential Presidential candidates.


Did you realize that the party system of government in the US isn't how things worked in the past? George Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson weren't elected because they were members of a political party. Electoral votes went to individuals instead of President/VP pairs. The individual with the most votes was elected President, and the runner-up was automatically the Vice President. They weren't necessarily even friends. In fact, the VP didn't really do much of anything (some things haven't changed! Hardy har har! ...I'm kidding). Did you also know that Presidential candidates never even did any of their own campaigning back then?!


I don't think Abraham Lincoln was originally a big fan of the party system, but people, including him, started seeing some advantages to forming parties. I forget what those advantages are, but they must have worked since that's how we operate now. You create a party organization, get people motivated about it, create a platform that wins voters to your cause, raise all sorts of money to pay for things like ads and telemarketing...


"Hi. This is Abraham Lincoln calling on behalf of the Union party."


"I told you people not to call my house! I'm having dinner!!!"" *click*


Anyway, now there are two major parties - Democrats and Republicans. They each will have primary elections sometime early next year to figure out who they want to run for President. It's an interesting concept - Democrats have to trash each other in order to gain their party's nomination. Then they have to be friends immediately after in order to try and beat the Republican choice for President. The same thing happens with Republicans. They beat each other up, then they have to be friends immediately after - sounds just like middle school.


Here are the Democrats that I think have a shot at the White House:


1) Hillary Clinton - She's an ex-First Lady who was a participant in a lot of policy-making under her hubby. She's now a senator from NY who controversially has supported the Iraq war. Women everywhere might vote for her. Fundraising shouldn't be an issue.


2) Barack Obama - He was just elected to the US Senate from Illinois. He's a rookie as far as politics go, but he sure seems charismatic enough. He probably won't have a lot of difficulty raising the big-bucks that one needs to be a "viable candidate".


3) John Edwards - He was John Kerry's Vice Presidential candidate back in the elections of 2004. He's an ex-US senator who might get a lot of the Southern vote.


4) Al Gore - He's not even running, but I still think he has a better shot at getting elected than John Edwards!


The Republicans that have a shot:


1) John McCain - He's a senator from Arizona, ex-POW during the Vietnam War, and a moderate who seems to be able to work "both sides of the aisle" (which means he plays nice with Republican and Democrats in order to accomplish things). He was a candidate back in 2000 against George W. Bush, but lost in the primary elections.


2) Rudy Giuliani - He's the ex-mayor of NY City who became Time Magazine's Man of the Year in 2001 after the 9-11 terrorist attacks there. Seen as a good leader who cleaned up the city, he actually used to be a Democrat, and is controversial because of his less-conservative views, which include support for abortion.


3) Mitt Romney - He's a one-term governor of Massachusetts who chose not to run again last year in order to focus on a Presidential run. He's Mormon, which many see as a liability, plus he's not as well known across the country. But he turned around the Salt Lake City Olympics after the bid scandal threatened their feasibility, and has a good national network and a personal fortune that screams "I'm a contender!"


There are a bunch of other candidates for each party, but they just don't seem to be that recognizable. I also doubt that they can all raise the "necessary" money in order to win a nomination from their party. So I'm stickin' to the list above. I've provided links to each person's website, so feel free to check out their views.

© 2007 Dime Brothers
Category: Politics    

Reader Comments:

I've always thought that if people are saying that Mitt Romney's church membership is affecting his politics, then he should do a press conference with Senate Majority leader Harry Reid. "See, my church membership has nothing to do with it. We agree on religion, but not on politics"

Of course, that combination will still be nothing compared to the marriage of James Carville and Mary Matalin. (14 years! That's good for anyone, let alone political opposites.)
05 Mar 2007
Paul R 

Leave a Comment:





Message:  Bold Italics Underline Insert Hyperlink

Web Development by Steve Black