The 2008 presidential field at-a-glance

[jon1856]

As todays papers show, the fields on both sizes are filling up.
So, in order to be helpful, just thought this thread should start up.

From the Washington Post-Their coverage section:
http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2...al-candidates/

Washington Post Politics main page:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/politics/

White House 2008 candidate rankings
Rating the presidential candidates in light of recent conditions
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16711490/

MSNBC's Politics main page:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032553/

CNN's Politics main page:
http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/

Fox's Politics main page:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/index.html

Reuters Politics main page:
http://www.reuters.com/news/politics

From The Rasmussen Report site-

Rasmussen Reports is an electronic publishing firm specializing in the collection, publication, and distribution of public opinion polling information.
Rasmussen Reports was the nation's most accurate polling firm during the Presidential election and the only one to project both Bush and Kerry's vote total within half a percentage point of the actual outcome.

"The most comprhensive public opinion coverage ever provided"
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/
https://www.rasmussenreports.com/politics.htm
https://www.rasmussenreports.com/currentEvents.htm

http://www.uspoliticsguide.com/

http://realclearpolitics.com/

[jon1856]

Some views of the situation from the Editorial/Op-Ed pages:
http://cagle.com/news/2008WhosRunning/

[jon1856]

Perhaps it is time to give this a bump up.

Yes, many links.
But the different sites just about cover all the "angles"

Pick and choose your education.

[jon1856]

Here is a rather interesting link from the Washington Post site.
Lets you "vote" or pick on position statements on about 25 major
issues.
At the end, you find out whose position you favor.
Takes about 20 minutes or so.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...candidatequiz/

I did it rather quickly and was rather surprised at the result.

[UGAalum94]

I enjoyed taking the quiz, but it really just seems to test your preference in rhetoric. Often answers are virtually identical, but choosing one expression comes out as a preference for a candidate when there was really no substantial difference among the choices.

Which version of Yes, I think Roe vs. Wade should be overturned in the Republican quiz or No, I wouldn't privatize social security in the Democratic quiz really made your candidate stand out?

[jon1856]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I enjoyed taking the quiz, but it really just seems to test your preference in rhetoric. Often answers are virtually identical, but choosing one expression comes out as a preference for a candidate when there was really no substantial difference among the choices.

Which version of Yes, I think Roe vs. Wade should be overturned in the Republican quiz or No, I wouldn't privatize social security in the Democratic quiz really made your candidate stand out?

Not sure if you did it, but it took me a question or two to realized that you can click to see entire answer.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by jon1856

Not sure if you did it, but it took me a question or two to realized that you can click to see entire answer.

I did, but there's still for most of the questions not a very meaningful difference in most of the answers. It comes down to what flavor you like your rhetoric more than much of a philosophical or substantive difference, or so many seemed to me at least.

A great part of what I will be trying to evaluate when I actually vote will be which of the candidates is actually most likely to follow through on these ideas if elected, both in intention and ability. (I think at least 50% of what most of them are saying is a reflection not of what they think needs to be done but what they think we want to hear.)

The likelihood of actually getting the government I want a lot more important to me than the order of their top three priorities if elected, especially when for almost all of them two of the three priorities are the same.

[jon1856]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I did, but there's still for most of the questions not a very meaningful difference in most of the answers. It comes down to what flavor you like your rhetoric more than much of a philosophical or substantive difference, or so many seemed to me at least.

A great part of what I will be trying to evaluate when I actually vote will be which of the candidates is actually most likely to follow through on these ideas if elected, both in intention and ability. (I think at least 50% of what most of them are saying is a reflection not of what they think needs to be done but what they think we want to hear.)

The likelihood of actually getting the government I want a lot more important to me than the order of their top three priorities if elected, especially when for almost all of them two of the three priorities are the same.

Good thoughts.
I agree.

[GeekyPenguin]

I just did the WaPo quiz and got the candidate I'm supporting, so that worked out well for me. The thing was designed really poorly though - it should have just shown you the full answer from the beginning.

[epchick]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I enjoyed taking the quiz, but it really just seems to test your preference in rhetoric. Often answers are virtually identical, but choosing one expression comes out as a preference for a candidate when there was really no substantial difference among the choices.

I totally agree! I just finished the democratic version and they all said the same thing, just ina different way. I ended up just picking the answers that I thought sounded best.

[eli_the_chopper]

http://www.theonion.com/content/vide...most_important

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by eli_the_chopper

http://www.theonion.com/content/vide...most_important

I loved that.

[PhiGam]

I would recommend checking out Ron Paul and Bill Richardson. This country needs a huge change economically or we could be looking at a recession in 5-7 years. The fed can't lower interest rates forever. Did you know that our country can't even pay the INTEREST on our current deficit? We produce nothing in this country anymore!

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by eli_the_chopper

http://www.theonion.com/content/vide...most_important

Earlier this year The Onion reported that after losing for so many years the American Public is sitting out this election.

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Earlier this year The Onion reported that after losing for so many years the American Public is sitting out this election.

I am so mad about the whole Michigan primary debacle but I don't know if the rest of the country knows what's going on here. Bottom line, we aren't really having a primary. Here's the deal:

Under Democratic National Committee rules, only Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire and South Carolina are allowed to hold primaries before February 5.

Michigan Democrats moved their state's primary date to January in an effort to increase the state's influence in the nominee selection process, arguing Iowa and New Hampshire unfairly dominate the process.

Obama, Biden, Edwards, and Richardson took themselves off the ballot since it was an "illegal" primary. Clinton and Dodd are still on the ballot, but Dodd has dropped out of the race after last night's Iowa caucus.

On our ballot will be Clinton, Dodd, Kucinich and Gravel (who???). We can also vote "Uncommitted" or we can Write In. However, write ins for the candidates who dropped off the ballot WILL NOT COUNT.

Additionally, since the Michigan Democratic Party did not follow the Democratic National Party guidelines, the DNP has voted to exclude our delegates from the Convention anyway.

Why even bother???? Most are saying to just go and vote Uncommitted if you don't want to vote for Clinton. The MDP needs some new leadership.. ugh!