There are 4 major aspects if this election are : War, health care, abortion, and global warming. The reasons I say they are major political aspects is because everyone's talking about them and the news stations won't leave these topics alone. Also, I think if a candidate was to ignore where they are going to stand on these issues they'll will be committing political suicide.
For me I want a president who is going to stay in Iraq for just a few more years and then start pulling out. The reason- debt. George Bush isn't necessarily the biggest reason for our debt but the war has cost us a lot of money. Also, we would look weak if we were to totally pull out troops short of our main goal. I dislike people who say we shouldn't be in Iraq. I'd like them to say that face to face with the family members lost Sept 11, 2001.
Health Care is a massive topic. I would definitely like to see the presidential candidate talk about this. They can't win either way. How are we going to afford this without tax increase. What happened to capitalism and what it stands for. Look at other countries with free health care, it takes months to get into just a dentist office.
Now, the mother of all topics is abortion. There are religious, moral and several other aspects behind why not to have an abortion. Yet, in certain cases I can see why one would want an abortion: rape, incest...etc. The biblical argument would be that God has a plan for everyone and why not rape victims?
Global Warming in my opinion is a minor issue yet green party members make it a must for the presidential candidate to talk about. I personally think global warming is retarded. We've had global warmings and coolings before. The next reason it is so big is people stand to gain from hyping global warming.

To understand the president better, you must know the qualifications to become the president. You must be a natural born citizen. You must be at least 35 years old. Last, you must have lived in the U.S. for at least 14 years.
The President of the United States is one of the 3 most important parts of our government. The president has several jobs that are unknown to most people. The president has many jobs with each of these titles: Chief of State, Chief Executive, Chief Administrator, Chief Diplomat, Commander in Chief, Chief Legislator, Chief of Party, and Chief Citizen.
As Chief of State, Chief of State, he is the ceremonial head of the government of the U.S. He is then, the symbol of all the people in the nation. "The personal embodiment and representative of their dignity and majesty"-Taft. As Chief Executive, he is the executive power of the United States.
As Chief Administrator, he is heading one of the largest governmental machines the world has known. Today, the President directs an administration with some three million civilian employees. This company spends more than a trillion dollars a year. As Chief Diplomat, he is the chief architect of american foreign policy and the nation's chief spokesman to the rest of the world.
As Commander in Chief, he is the commander of the U.S. armed forces. He controls over 2 million men and women in uniform. As Chief Legislator, he is the architect of it's public policy.
The President seems to have a lot of power, yet, checks and balances he isn't an almighty dictator which is a good thing. He has the power to veto bills which is an important part of separation of powers. The presidents veto is to the legislative branch trying to pass a bill, yet they can circumvent him by asking the judicial branch whether the bill they are trying to pass is constitutional or not. So, I'd say the president is very important but not the most important out of the three.

Giuliani and Clinton

Giuliani and Hillary both popular one by last name “Clinton”, and one by job status “mayor of N.Y.”. This battle is basically a popularity contest who can get the most “support” through appearances, debates, and being at the right place at the right time, adding saying the right thing at the right time always helps too.



Giuliani best known for his former job as the Mayor of New York, Serving for two terms and the end of his first endeavor he was put on pause due his illness (prostate cancer). Despite all of this he kept going in his ambitions and chose to enter the presidential race. He holds the opinions of being pro choice, pro gay rights, is against universal healthcare, and supports illegal aliens in gaining citizenship.



Giuliani a contender in that battle against Hillary. Giuliani has some things going against him, three marriages hits a soft spot hit once with the Lewinsky affair, his inability to get social liberals to vote republican. There is a positive going for him though his strong leadership skills, image, and experience with national security through the tragedy of 9/11. Mayor Giuliani held the broken city of New York together, or so it seemed many hold him accountable for a poor decision in going against expert advice and building the new emergency command center underneath the World Trade Center. Some may view the judgment as ridiculous but other who view the glass as half full may see it as a point of strength not running in fear but rather standing and saying we fall and get back up.



Hillary Clinton, well recognized for being the first lady to Bill Clinton (1993-2001). Bring at an early stage and politics she decided to not just sit pretty and smile but rather make her Health Care Plan well known. She wanted to be heard and she was, yet wasn’t supported by the US Congress in 1994. Being noticed as a potential candidate for the United States President as early as 2002, she would be the first wife and first to nominated by a major political party. H. Clinton’s positives consist of her well known husband, her support is strong she is recognized for her many first and known for her passion in HealthCare. She has the tender care, but is this enough to overthrow the negatives of the money issues in her plan of which aren’t easily accepted by the wealthy, are there more people who few power, authority and strength in a man rather a women.



Hillary Clinton and Giuliani are strong in there differences and similar in there strengths so who triumphs? The person with the most popularity, weather they are recognized for positives or negatives is all comes down to when you have the ballot in your hand what name is in your head.

Republican Candidates

This 2008 Presidential election is going to be one of the most exciting in American history. We have so many problems that the new president is going to have to deal with such as border control, welfare, and social security are just a few. All I can say is that I do not envy the person who wins, because their job is going to be so tedious. So far for the Republicans they have four main candidates: Giuliani,
McCain, Romney, and Thompson.
Rudy Giuliani is New York City's former mayor and has been wanting to run since 2005. He has been leading several polls for the Republican nomination and the general election. He has been using the 9/11 attacks as his diving point for his campaign. Giuliani is pro-choice, and supports civil union between same sex couples and agrees for legal and medical reasons that same sex relationships should get the same rights under the law. He also believes in restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms and agrees with harsh punishment for illegal weapons or non permitted weapons. While opinions differ, some think that these positions could help him, should he secure the nomination, in the general election; others question whether the Republican base would support a nominee with Giuliani's social positions. In February of 2007, Giuliani unofficially entered the race for the 2008 U.S. presidential election by filing a statement of candidacy with the Federal Election Commission, but legally keeping him at the same level as he was while running an exploratory committee. On February 15, Giuliani officially announced that he was running on CNN's Larry King Live show.
John McCain is a Senator from Arizona. In 2000, he failed in his attempt to deny George W. Bush the Republican nomination. McCain's bipartisan compromise on judicial nominations and his strong support of campaign finance reform have drawn thunder of many groups, many of which have promised to work against any McCain campaigns for the Republican nomination in 2008. However, he has a strong stance on many issues and economically falls more along the lines of traditional republicans. These factors, along with his commitment to the War on Terror have boosted his popularity amongst conservatives since 2004, when he emphasized these traits while stumping for Republican candidates.
Mitt Romney is the former Governor of Massachusetts. Romney has made a number of trips to primary states such as South Carolina, Michigan, and New Hampshire, during recent years. Romney is running on his record as co-founder of Bain Capital, the CEO of the 2002 Winter Olympics, and his record as Governor of Massachusetts. Although he ran as a moderate for the office of Governor of Massachusetts he supported more conservative positions as his term progressed. In January Romney raised $6.5 million in his first fundraiser. Romney has already received major endorsements, including that of former Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert.
Fred Dalton Thompson former Senator from Tennessee and actor, best known for playing D.A. Arthur Branch on Law & Order. Thompson has worked as a lawyer, lobbyist, and character actor, and he represented Tennessee as a Republican in the U.S. Senate from 1994 through 2003.

No Pure Democracy?

America ended up with a rep. democracy for some very obvious reasons. First, a pure democracy or a direct democracy exists where the will of the people is translated into public policy directly by the people themselves in mass meetings. Clearly, we see that this type of governments can only be properly ran in very small communities where it is possible for entire towns to meet.
Next, I will address why such a stupid idea of democracy is even thought about, or even considered a possibility in governments. This idea is thought about because of many reasons. First, this idea is even thought about because in direct democracy there is no representaion. They argue this because representaives fomr certain areas cannot fairly indulge themselves in everyones complaints. They cannot handle everyones arguments, this tends to cause for the big cities problems to become most important. People from the small towns may have just as good of a problem or concern yet their voice does not get heard in a rep. democracy where as in a pure democracy it might. Another issue that people bring up when speaking of direct democracy is that people will argue that in a direct democracy the corruption or scandals in governments will be greatly reduced. They argue this because their will be less officials running, things, and therefore less people to put in the spotlight. Although direct democracy does not make the most sense one of the smartest men in history once said ""If liberty and equality, as is thought by some, are chiefly to be found in democracy, they will be best attained when all persons alike share in the government to the utmost." I don't think that it's just me when I say this sounds alot like direct democracy.
Now I will address why people are against direct democracy or for rep. democracy. People will say that rep. democracy makes more sense because of many reasons as well. Rep. democracy works for large cities as well as small cities, where as direct democracy will only work on a very small town. This is because a town that conisits of 100,000 people will not be able to get all those people to one place to vote on something simple that they probaly don't even care about. Second, the process of getting a mass number of people to one place to have them vote on a certain thing, will become slow and very unefficient. It will also cause voter fatigue, because most people in the U.S. probaly do not care about most laws that are passed in the first place. Also in a rep. Democracy there is what you call referendums, these are easily used to make voting easier. With this people will particapte in the voting process more.
“In the view of many modern political theorists, referendums, regardless of their legal form, enhance the quality of democracy through citizen participation in the political process in a way that elections alone cannot” (LeDuc 38).
I believe that rep. democracy makes 100 pervent more sense than a direct democracy. I believe this for many reasons. First, I believe that the matters of out nation should be left up to be decided by the well- educated people of the nation. I know that I do not want Billy Bob from Arkansas that can't read to be voting for something complicated that he doesn't even know what it means.(no disrespect to Arkansas or smart people named billy bob although your parents probaly weren't very smart either) Second, I know that I do not want to travel somewhere far fomr my house stuck in a lot of traffic because everyone in my town is going to vote on whether the Bible should be read in schools or whether teachers should be allowed to use student restrooms,or any restrooms for that matter especially those named Larry Craig.
If you are reading this you should of understood that direct democracy does not make sense if thought about clearly. If a person must travel to far ends of the earth to vote of every little thing, that definately sounds like the smartest way to do buisness.

LeDuc, Lawrence. The Politics of Direct Democracy: Referendums in Global Perspective. New York: Broadview Press, 2003.
Warburton, Nigel. Philosophy: The Basics. New York: Routledge Publishers, 2004.