Are you satisfied with the candidate choices?

United States
October 20, 2008 6:07am CST
In America over half of the country is not completely satisfied with the men (or possibly women), who get chosen for the general election. Many preferred other candidates such as those in the primaries and aren't to fond of the actual party decision. How do you feel about this years election, do you feel as if there could have been a better choice from the primaries? Why?
1 person likes this
5 responses
@Taskr36 (13925)
• United States
20 Oct 08
I'm definitely not satisfied. I think of all the democrats that ran only Kucinich and Dodd would have been worse choices than Obama. For the republicans, I myself voted for Romney, but in retrospect I think that if we really wanted some serious change, Ron Paul was the ONLY candidate from either party that would have made any tangible, long-term change.
1 person likes this
• United States
20 Oct 08
haha, I voted for Ron Paul in the primaries. I traveled far distances to rally for him, I went to debates, and I even met the man. I feel that his way of confronting things was the best, his economical stances were so good, he knows how to make an economy really healthy. I really like his views on personal liberties and foreign policy as well. Have a great day!
@Taskr36 (13925)
• United States
20 Oct 08
I did have some serious differences with the guy, but he seemed to be great at inspiring people. I wonder how he would have done if he hadn't been blacklisted by the media. I'm sure you'd agree that this year's candidates were chosen by the media more than the voters. I know too many people who know nothing about Ron Paul beyond his name. I know even more people who had no idea that Joe Biden ran for president in the primaries.
1 person likes this
@piasabird (1737)
• United States
20 Oct 08
Are you satisfied with the candidate choices? No!
@Guardian208 (1095)
• United States
20 Oct 08
Not at all. Though I am a conservative Republican, I am disappointed with both candidates. I blame the primary process. For the Republicans, they chose 3 very robust candidates; Romney, Huckabee and Guiliani. Each had a strong following that siphoned votes from each other. McCain kind of flew in under the radar and won. If there had not been 3 strong candidates other than McCain, someone else would have gotten the nomination. The Democrats fielded 4 virtually identical candidates. If you look at the top issues, they all agreed on each one of them. Then it became a popularity contest. Who do you like more, or who do you dislike least. Each of the candidates was strong with the exception of Obama (in my opinion). Anyone of them would have been a better choice. Before anyone blasts me for my last comment, I feel the same way about McCain. Any one of the others would have been a better choice.
@spalladino (17925)
• United States
20 Oct 08
I believe that McCain should have chosen Romney or Huckabee as his running mate and that, by choosing Palin in an attempt to add former Hillary Clinton supporters to his base, he struck a fatal blow to his chances to win the election. With the current state of the economy, Romney in particular, would have been able to instill the confidence of the Republican party membership in his and McCain's ability to lead this nation back towards financial security and prosperity.
@laglen (19782)
• United States
20 Oct 08
I think this every four years: With the amount of people that are natural born citizens thirty five and older, and this was all we could come up with???