"The Economist's" Pick for President

• Posted by a hidden member.
  Log in to view his profile
  
  
  Oct 30, 2008 2:28 PM GMT

  It is always interesting to read what a well-known newspaper thinks about the two Presidential candidates. Here is the British newmagazine The Economist's explanation on why Mr. Obama deserves to be elected President.
  
  http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displayStory.cfm?story_id=12516666&source=features_box_main

  QUOTE REPORT SPAM
• Posted by a hidden member.
  Log in to view his profile
  
  
  Oct 30, 2008 5:55 PM GMT

  That was a damn good article! Thanks for sharing!

  QUOTE REPORT SPAM
• Posted by a hidden member.
  Log in to view his profile
  
  
  Oct 30, 2008 6:25 PM GMT

  a1972guy saidThat was a damn good article! Thanks for sharing!

  
  
  I love this quote....
  
  "...At the beginning of this election year, there were strong arguments against putting another Republican in the White House. A spell in opposition seemed apt punishment for the incompetence, cronyism and extremism of the Bush presidency. Conservative America also needs to recover its vim. Somehow Ronald Reagan’s party of western individualism and limited government has ended up not just increasing the size of the state but turning it into a tool of southern-fried moralism...."
  
  Now, the question is, why didn't the Republican leadership see this coming? As you can tell from the posts from avid Republicans on RJ, they still don't get it. They still don't understand how much their rhetoric has lost the rest of the country, even people on the fence.

  QUOTE REPORT SPAM
• Posted by a hidden member.
  Log in to view his profile
  
  
  Oct 30, 2008 6:51 PM GMT

  Regan Republicans aren't happy with the Republican party today. I doubt many of them considered voting McCain in the first place.
  
  Once the two parties stop completely juxtaposing themselves in a binary system of if it isn't up, it must be down; if it isn't black, it must be white; then we can actually have progress in the political system. Until then, we will just have bland I am voting for X because I am not Y.
  
  Both parties need to separate them from all religious affiliation and any stigma or stereotype that has been created for themselves over the past 12 years.
  
  Thanks for the article.

  QUOTE REPORT SPAM
• Posted by a hidden member.
  Log in to view his profile
  
  
  Oct 30, 2008 7:16 PM GMT

  WOW!

  QUOTE REPORT SPAM
• Posted by a hidden member.
  Log in to view his profile
  
  
  Oct 31, 2008 6:14 AM GMT

  Great article !!! thanks for posting !!! Pinny makes a good point about the party's separating from religion especially, and the "cast" both party's have plastered themselves into has got to be broken, because its making both pretty immoveable. I am actually hoping for the appearance of a third party with a credible number of followers to shake up the system.

  QUOTE REPORT SPAM