Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Scrutinizing the Candidates


Zguy28

Recommended Posts

Somebody said Obama hasn't been scrutinized enough in another thread.

Some posters on here throw out all kinds of partisan crap about John McCain or Hillary.

Well, these links provide a good source of info on all of them.

Barack Obama

John McCain

Hillary Clinton

and yes even the Tailgate's own beloved Ron Paul :silly:

And I'll even throw in Ralph Nader for free.

So scrutinize away.

If anybody has similar sites to link do it. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obama is young and fresh, way too liberal, wants to pull out of Iraq to continue the fight on terrorism. Bad move. Wants to increase mandatory spending with little reform, again, not my cup of tea. Change apparently comes in the way of transparent websites that no one will check. Wants to kick lobbyists out of Washington by making deals public, doesn't address other ways one of power can be influenced. Misses big votes, misses many regular votes. May be only ambitious which could fade his effectiveness once highest goal is met.

Clinton has no real experience but claims otherwise due to previous addresses on credit check. Has no real integrity which is evident by her standing by her long time cheating husband, blasting a war she voted for, wants no diplomacy, continue American bigotry, been involved in many scandals.

McCain claims to be honest yet is one of the Keating 5, hooks up with lobbyists, is a war hawk, doesn't understand economics, will keep budget process from being complete, wants to grant amnesty, seems hypocritical by changing stances to appease base, and ****es about campaign finance until he needs money. Older then dirt.

Ron Paul. No real weakness, could be the G.O.A.T. But he's not in any one's pocket so won't get support. Older then dirt.

Nader. Older then dirt, out of touch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obama is young and fresh, way too liberal, wants to pull out of Iraq to continue the fight on terrorism. Bad move. Wants to increase mandatory spending with little reform, again, not my cup of tea. Change apparently comes in the way of transparent websites that no one will check. Wants to kick lobbyists out of Washington by making deals public, doesn't address other ways one of power can be influenced. Misses big votes, misses many regular votes. May be only ambitious which could fade his effectiveness once highest goal is met.

Clinton has no real experience but claims otherwise due to previous addresses on credit check. Has no real integrity which is evident by her standing by her long time cheating husband, blasting a war she voted for, wants no diplomacy, continue American bigotry, been involved in many scandals.

McCain claims to be honest yet is one of the Keating 5, hooks up with lobbyists, is a war hawk, doesn't understand economics, will keep budget process from being complete, wants to grant amnesty, seems hypocritical by changing stances to appease base, and ****es about campaign finance until he needs money. Older then dirt.

Ron Paul. No real weakness, could be the G.O.A.T. But he's not in any one's pocket so won't get support. Older then dirt.

Nader. Older then dirt, out of touch.

very objective. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clinton has... no real integrity which is evident by her standing by her long time cheating husband
That depends. Some would see that as strong integrity and loyalty for the relationship she has with him.

You know, like if I was five years younger I'D TAKE A FLAMETHROWER TO THIS PLACE! BOOYA!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...