Best Presidential Candidate [Moved]

[The Flash]

In your guys opinions who is the best candidacy for president of the US and why?

[Akhlut]

In your guys opinions who is the best candidacy for president of the US and why?

Best as in one most likely to win, or best as in the one who we would most like to actually be the president?

If it is the former: I think Obama is probably going to win, given that the most likely Republican nominees are all crazy and sleazy.

If it is the latter: I'm vacillating between the Greens and the Socialist Workers Party this year, as always. The Greens are still moving through their nomination process, currently with Kent Mesplay and Jill Stein as the two contenders (I'm leaning toward Mesplay solely because he actually tells me what his platform is, whereas Stein does not have her platform organized as of yet), while the SWP has a ticket of Stewart Alexander/Alex Mendoza doing the "cross-armed opposites" pose together.

As for my reasoning: I like the Greens, especially on environmental issues (minus opposition to nuclear power, but, eh, can't agree with everyone on everything), and on the issues of campaign finance reform, equal time for all people running for office, increased social programs, and the like.

The Socialist Workers Party has similar goals, though more focus on economic reform rather than environmental reform as the Greens do.

[Skgoa]

Of those currently running? Obama overall and Romney as republican presidential candidate. (Both most likely and best.)
Outside the box? Simon_Jester.
OK, a little closer to the box? Elizabeth Warren, Anthony Wiener, that democratic senator who answered a TEA partyer's question with "what planet are you from"...

[ComradeClaus]

ron paul, if he's not lying about what he's promissing.

[Simon_Jester]

ron paul, if he's not lying about what he's promissing.

He doesn't have to be lying; he's a damned loony.

Would you care to justify your opinions of him?

[Terralthra]

Outside the box? Simon_Jester.

I don't think Simon_Jester's 35.

[Simon_Jester]

[blinks]

[looks up page Skgoawards]

Aw, thanks. I didn't notice that bit. And no, no I'm not.

[aerius]

The funny part is I'd rather vote for Shep than any of the candidates that are running for president.
The Shep Platform

Energy is solved
Oil imports is solved
Full energy independence
NASA gets to do something meaningful
We get massive job & wealth creation from the above along with many technical advances

[lance]

ron paul, if he's not lying about what he's promissing.

He doesn't have to be lying; he's a damned loony.

Would you care to justify your opinions of him?

I am also in the Ron Paul camp

Pro-Anti- Drug&shooting war, honest about his positions, and some other good stuff
Negative-Wants to do a bunch of crazy stuff that that has no chance of passing so doesn't matter.

[Starglider]

Ron Paul is the only main party candidate who gives a damn about civil rights, and who is even vaguely honest and true to his principles rather than vote-grabbing. With the US having the highest incarceration rate in the world by far, and sliding fast towards fascism, this is way more important than his economic platform. Although even there he accurately diagnoses problems (such as the completely corrupt Federal Reserve) that no one else will even mention. Assuming you aren't making a third party protest vote, Ron Paul is the only candidate on offer that would be even slightly disruptive to the Washington political elite.

[Count Chocula]

I'd like to say Ron Paul for the crazy option, but he doesn't have the folksy charm or AFY charisma Reagan had to go against the Republican establishment. If Romney doesn't step on his dick or have women come out of the woodwork to say he felt them up, I'm afraid he'll get the nod.

And if all he does is say "I will take no vacations, fly no pizza chefs to the White House, and play no golf until the unemployment rate is at or below 8%," he'll win. Even rich Republicans can play the class envy game if they have a little discipline.

[Simon_Jester]

The point of the exercise here seems to be to find the best candidate, not the one we expect to win.

The argument that Ron Paul is the best on offer strikes me as... interesting. It's a difficult question for me- are we better off with a man whose ideal nation would collapse under its own weight, but who seems immensely willing to take on obvious problems with the status quo?

Or are we better off with a man who has no ideal nation and is perfectly content to let the status quo gradually slide towards dystopia... but who won't do anything specific to accelerate the decline compared to the background rate.

I wouldn't say I prefer the honorable crazy over the dishonorable person who is conservative* enough not to break the machine by force. But I am beginning to sympathize with the argument.

*In the real sense, 'reluctant to bring about major radical changes,' not 'American right'

The funny part is I'd rather vote for Shep than any of the candidates that are running for president.
The Shep Platform

Energy is solved
Oil imports is solved
Full energy independence
NASA gets to do something meaningful
We get massive job & wealth creation from the above along with many technical advances

I'd take Shep over anyone in the Republican field. Indeed, I've said it to him.

I'd take Shep over Obama only if I were convinced of his essential flexibility- i.e. that he grasps that no, you should not actually stop doing climate science altogether, any more than you should cancel Constellation in mid-project. Sharply increasing funds to a program is easier than sharply decreasing them; budget cuts have to be done rather gradually and with an eye to what won't get done when the money dries up.

Shep is, by inclination, an Eisenhower Republican- an adherent to the school of technocratic big-government thought that the military-industrial complex loves and which will cheerfully do big infrastructure projects. On issues of civil rights and economics and most policy, I can live with an Eisenhower Republican. On social issues I can't, but then, that's where Shep diverges most sharply from Ike.

[Stark]

If only there was even a superficial feasibility study attached to any of that instaed of a laundry list 33% useless milnerd bullshit?

I'd vote for that.

[Lonestar]

I'd vote for stark.


I mean if a Kenyan can be president, why not a Kiwi?

[Lonestar]

I guess I should give a more serious post.

Ron Paul would be the best Candidate for the GOP, seeing as he is(apperantly) the only one in the bunch including Obama, that is loudly talking about why increasing the power of the Executive is bad. Stuff like SOPA and the 2011 NDA is largely out of the public discourse, someone like Paul would at least mention it a lot.

[SCRawl]

Moved.

[Grumman]

If I was an American, I'd vote for Ron Paul. As I see it, he'd rein in Congress's worst ideas and Congress would rein in his worst ideas, which is a lot better than Obama and Congress merrily skipping off together to kidnap whoever they want and lock them up without trial for as long as they want.

I haven't heard much at all about Huntsman, but what little I have heard was good. So he'd be on my short list too.

[Zaune]

And if all he does is say "I will take no vacations, fly no pizza chefs to the White House, and play no golf until the unemployment rate is at or below 8%," he'll win.

If he made it 4%, and actually kept said promise, you could sell me on the guy.

Why 4%? Because it was the approximate figure for unemployment six or seven years ago when I could walk into any temping agency and have something, no matter how insecure or poorly paid, within a month. I suppose it's as good a number to aim for as any.

[Simon_Jester]

When I suggest that ordinary people would make decent presidents, it's usually not so much because I think they're geniuses at policy. It's because I'm pretty sure they won't be easily bribed to push the same incredibly bad policies as most American politicians do.

The whole "leave no billionaire behind, screw civil rights, I've got a war on terror to keep fanning" mindset is choking this country. Replacing our leadership class with mundane people who would not normally be considered to have presidential caliber wouldn't necessarily be good for the country, at least it could break that choke hold.

Electing people with lots of credentials is all well and good. But if they don't have the basic moral character to be bribe-resistant and to seriously think they have an obligation to keep up the long term health of the nation, their credentials aren't going to matter. They're just going to mindlessly enact the policies of whoever offers them campaign money and waves a shiny PowerPoint presentation under their noses.

[Vendetta]

ron paul, if he's not lying about what he's promissing.

Ron Paul would destroy the US economy faster than any other person you could possibly elect. Even a five year old child who really really wants a gold plated space shuttle.

And then he would set fire to the ruins and dance about them singing obscene songs about Ludwig von Mises.

[Eframepilot]

Ron Paul would destroy the US economy faster than any other person you could possibly elect. Even a five year old child who really really wants a gold plated space shuttle.

And then he would set fire to the ruins and dance about them singing obscene songs about Ludwig von Mises.

But hey! At least our civil liberties would be protected.

[Dalton]

OK, a little closer to the box? Elizabeth Warren, Anthony Wiener, that democratic senator who answered a TEA partyer's question with "what planet are you from"...

Barney Frank?

[Sriad]

Ron Paul would destroy the US economy faster than any other person you could possibly elect. Even a five year old child who really really wants a gold plated space shuttle.

And then he would set fire to the ruins and dance about them singing obscene songs about Ludwig von Mises.

What OTHER kind of songs would you sing about Ludwig von Mises? I think low-key recitations of Mises/Friedman slash-fics during Fireside Chats are more likely though. Ron Paul isn't getting younger.

538 now lists him as the Iowa front-runner (support for Gingrich fell off HARD since last poll) but also notes that he's the sixth candidate to hold that position.

Yea, Barney Frank is "that Democratic senator" (who is, sadly, retiring after this term); if I could wave my magic wand and make someone president he'd be on the short-list.

[Lord Zentei]

Jimmy McMillan. He's got the best facial hair.

Oh, you meant based on the issues? Well, fine.

Ron Paul is nuttier than a pecan pie considering some of his positions, including his desire to nuke multiple departments and his gold standard ideas, but yes, at least he's against an overly strong executive branch and stuff like the Patriot Act, so yes he's pro civil liberties (provided that you're not a pregnant woman living in an anti-abortion state). Also, he doesn't want to maintain a military empire across the globe, nor does he support the war on drugs. But if he were elected it's not at all certain that he would manage to push through his agenda as much as he would like (I hope!) so perhaps the pendulum would simply meander away from where it is now rather than go full bore libertopia. But it's a bit of a risk though. So... pass.

Gary Johnson is another libertarian, and saner than Ron Paul too. Too bad he's got even less of a chance than Huntsman.

Speaking of which, Huntsman's good for a moderate GOP candidate. Not perfect, but better than the other Big Eight Seven, and arguably less bad than the wolf-in-sheep's-clothing Obama.

Another moderate conservative better than the Big Seven is Buddy Roemer, former Louisiana governor.

Yet another moderate conservative is Fred Karger. He wants energy independence (including alternative energy), an end to wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants already in the US, is actively against DADT and DOMA, is opposed to the war on drugs, is pro legalization of pot, and is pro choice. But I doubt that the Tea Party would support an openly gay Jew to the white house.

There aren't any really good candidates in the big parties who have a chance. And I'm not familiar enough with the smaller parties to say anything about them.

[General Mung Beans]

The Socialist Workers Party has similar goals, though more focus on economic reform rather than environmental reform as the Greens do.

I actually wouldn't mind a Socialist President (by God, not support them certainly but tolerate) provided their national security platform wasn't a joke.