Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

Tom Kalbfus · 2006-12-27 00:46:46

As far as manned space exploration is concerned, I think Newt is our man.

John Creighton · 2006-12-27 00:57:01

I voted for McCain but surely you can come up with some better choices.

Tom Kalbfus · 2006-12-27 09:18:09

I voted for McCain but surely you can come up with some better choices.

I just recognize that John McCain has been very critical of NASA and even wanted to cut its budget on occasion. I think Gingrich would be a better choice, since he had his proposal to award prizes for independent contractors achieving space goals. I have't a clue about Rudy Gulliani. Hillarr Clinton tries to be all things to all people, I'm not sure she would dependably push a Mars program, she tends to blow with the fickle winds of popular opinion. Obama is a big blank slate that the US Media is pushing, I don't know what he stands for, but the Press thinks he is such a great guy, personally I think he is the Media's affirmative Action program for the White House. The only reason I can think of for electing him is to be America's first black President, and I'm sorry that's not a good enough reason.

John Creighton · 2006-12-27 13:46:17

I think Gingrich would be a better choice, since he had his proposal to award prizes for independent contractors achieving space goals. I have't a clue about Rudy Gulliani.

Put Rudy there then maybe I’ll vote form him because I know nothing bad about him. It is too bad Arnold couldn’t run. That would be a hoot.

Commodore · 2006-12-27 20:54:37

On one hand Newt might be drawn to privatize. On the other hand he believes in all the glory and American leadership aspects. Not that McCain doesn't, I just don't think thats were his priorities are. Honestly, unless there is a massive influx of funds, there isn't going to be a lot going on during the next term of anyone.

I wouldn't trust any Democrat to do anything but employ as many engineers as possible. Anything that brings America glory is the enemy to them.

Newts the smartest, most principled politician in the country today. I think thats the best we can hope for on any issue.

Tom Kalbfus · 2006-12-28 21:40:52

On one hand Newt might be drawn to privatize. On the other hand he believes in all the glory and American leadership aspects. Not that McCain doesn't, I just don't think thats were his priorities are. Honestly, unless there is a massive influx of funds, there isn't going to be a lot going on during the next term of anyone.
I wouldn't trust any Democrat to do anything but employ as many engineers as possible. Anything that brings America glory is the enemy to them.
Newts the smartest, most principled politician in the country today. I think thats the best we can hope for on any issue.

He's also a historian and hopefully takes the long term view of things, that is what we need, someone who sees the big picture. From a historical perspective, the countries that venture into outer space will have a greater say in future developments of mankind than those who look inward. Someone who wants immediate tangible benefits for space travel is not going to do much of anything. Perhaps as a student of history, he'll be willing to look beyond tomorrow and consider the general sweep of history rather than just his own term in office.

As for Hillary, she's the flavor of the month candidate, if space travel is vdery popular, then she will be all for it, the problem is that she's rather fluid in her opinions and seeks the public mood and then adopts it as her own opinion. Kerry wants to use the War to his political advantage rather than win it, for him it is all about getting elected, it is hard to gage what he really stands for rather than him just saying what he thinks will get him elected.

Obama is an unknown Dark Horse candidate, much like a certain supreme court justice candidate with no applicable history. Just as I wouldn't want a supreme court justice without a record that I don't know anything about, I wouldn't want the same for the Presidency either.

John Creighton · 2007-01-01 23:40:59

I think McCain is the man. As much as I would like to get to mars now, the world needs the United States to be lead by a strong leader that stands for Freedom. Had McCain been leader there is a good chance there wouldn’t be an Abu Ghraib, there wouldn’t be a Patriot act and there might not even be an Iraq war. Abu Ghraib is the biggest road block for people to believing that the United States is there to bring freedom. It is a powerful piece of propaganda and makes the recruiting of insurgents and raising money for the insurgency much easier. Bush’s biggest failure is in the war of words and ideas. His military tactics are secondary.

Tom Kalbfus · 2007-01-02 09:38:46

I think McCain is the man. As much as I would like to get to mars now, the world needs the United States to be lead by a strong leader that stands for Freedom. Had McCain been leader there is a good chance there wouldn’t be an Abu Ghraib, there wouldn’t be a Patriot act and there might not even be an Iraq war. Abu Ghraib is the biggest road block for people to believing that the United States is there to bring freedom. It is a powerful piece of propaganda and makes the recruiting of insurgents and raising money for the insurgency much easier. Bush’s biggest failure is in the war of words and ideas. His military tactics are secondary.

Well if he can go back and make all the right decisions, then he can also go back and continue the Apollo Program, transition it into a Manned Mars program and our first Mars landings would be in the 1980s, but John McCain has demonstrated no ability to travel in time, nor has he demonstrated an ability to get it right more often than Bush. Jimmy Carter has also criticised George Bush, do you want to elect him as the next President? Remember what the Manned Space Program was during during the Carter Administration? What do you propose John McCain would have done differently about Abu Ghraib that was not done during the Bush administration? You could say it would not happen, but you could have just as easily said it might not have happened during the Bush Adminstration either and George Bush would not have had to deal with it. One could just have easily said there would have been no terrorist attacks either as the terrorists would have decided that the stars were not properly aligned.

C M Edwards · 2007-01-02 11:18:20

I voted for McCain but surely you can come up with some better choices.

Actually, no - Tom's chosen the field about right for this poll.

Only Newt Gingrich and John McCain have come out in favor of adopting Mars exploration as a goal (in any form). John Edwards has placed himself solidly in the "I'm not opposed in principle, but..." camp. Hillary Clinton is no luddite, and has a favorable voting record on space exploration, but has never made it part of her platform despite several opportunities and is unlikely to become a driving force. Same for Rudy Giulliani, only without the voting record.

It is only the start of the campaign, and candidates can still register right up until 2008. But IMHO the other candidates don't perceive this as important enough to commit, and Bill Nelson shows no sign of throwing his hat in.

If you're looking for a pro-space presidential candidate, McCain and Gingrich are your choices thus far.

IMHO, they're about equivalent on this single issue. I'll vote for McCain, because I've liked his policies in other areas, and he's got broader name recognition.

C M Edwards · 2007-01-04 08:40:56

Regarding name recognition, check out Google Trends. It basically counts search hits for various topics. In this page, search hits for the various presidential candidates are charted over time. Gingrich is not on it, not having officially declared his candidacy, but you can add him - just go to the search bar at the top of the page.

All that this chart records is searches and news article volume, not public opinion. Also, please note the sidebar linking various points on the graph to political events. Not everything of political importance is an election or policy making event, though - the biggest spike on the graph is when Barak Obama put in an appearance on the Oprah Winfrey show.

PS - Mitt Romney declared his candidacy today. Despite support for research being conducted in his home state of Massechussetts, he's another member of the "I'm not opposed in principle, but..." group, and I can't recommend him.

X · 2007-04-08 21:12:39

I wouldn't trust any Democrat to do anything but employ as many engineers as possible. Anything that brings America glory is the enemy to them.

In that case they'd employ as many scientists as possible. Bored engineers with a big budget might invent something useful even if no one intended them to.

SpaceNut · 2007-04-11 06:15:56

One might say that all presidential candidates will be facing this very issue and there stance will weigh heavily on the decisions of the voters when they cast there vote.

McCain Presidential Bid Linked to Iraq

John McCain, his presidential bid faltering and his support for the unpopular Iraq war unflinching, is seeking to convince Americans that the conflict is 'necessary and just.'

Yes you have served your country, so your view of the war is understandable but it is the insurgents culture that needs a less than civil display to get them to stop. Setting timetables of dates with no checks and balances for milestones of transformation towards democracy is not the way to go either.

The question is how is Afganistan different with our actions versus those in Iraq?

But what are the views for Nasa and space exploration? That amoung many other questions would need answering before it is time to vote.

So who are the players in the next act, Where might we find a complete list?

2008 race has the face of a changing America

'08 RACE FOR PRESIDENT

Edwards

Giuliani

Obama

Clinton

Romney

Thompson to run for president in 2008

I am sure there will be a changing status on all of this as the time grows near.

Tom Kalbfus · 2007-04-14 07:35:30

One might say that all presidential candidates will be facing this very issue and there stance will weigh heavily on the decisions of the voters when they cast there vote.
McCain Presidential Bid Linked to Iraq
John McCain, his presidential bid faltering and his support for the unpopular Iraq war unflinching, is seeking to convince Americans that the conflict is 'necessary and just.'

That's a pecular way of putting it. The Republicans aren't advocating war forever or even a little bit. I noticed no one seems to be putting pressure in the insurgents to end the war, after all they are the ones who are continuing it. I noticed Al Sadre's been calling on his insurgents to attack American troops instead of Iraqis, if he was interested in stopping the war, why doesn't he simply call on his troops to stop attacking period? No one puts any moral pressure on these guys, its always on Bush and no one else.

Yes you have served your country, so your view of the war is understandable but it is the insurgents culture that needs a less than civil display to get them to stop. Setting timetables of dates with no checks and balances for milestones of transformation towards democracy is not the way to go either.
The question is how is Afganistan different with our actions versus those in Iraq?

Its not different at all, it may have started differently, but it ends up the same. I doubt any President who's quit on the war is going to mount any sustained effort on space exploration either.

But what are the views for Nasa and space exploration? That amoung many other questions would need answering before it is time to vote.
So who are the players in the next act, Where might we find a complete list?
2008 race has the face of a changing America
'08 RACE FOR PRESIDENT

Edwards

Giuliani

Obama

Clinton
Romney
Other Republicans: Brownback | Gilmore | Hagel | Huckabee | Hunter | Pataki | Romney | Tancredo
Other Democrats: Biden | Clark | Dodd | Edwards | Kucinich | Richardson | Sharpton
Thompson to run for president in 2008

I am sure there will be a changing status on all of this as the time grows near.

SpaceNut · 2007-04-14 21:01:49

Tom I agree that the insurgents are the issue and closing there opportunities to attack is a must.

Yang Liwei Rocket · 2007-04-15 00:06:13

Isn't this Poll biased

I mean, I do not see a single American-democrat mentioned

Tom Kalbfus · 2007-04-15 09:53:58

I'm sorry to say Roosevelt is not running. The Roosevelts in general have always been pro-military and they always believed that America should win its wars. Roosevelt would never go to Hitler with hat in hand, begging for a peace settlement the way Nancy Pelosi does in Syria and Iran. I doubt either Roosevelt could have stomached the modern Democrats tendency toward surrender and giving up on America's conflicts. The Roosevelt Administration was also the one that interred Japanese Americans, because they wanted to take no chances than a fanatic might be among them that would cause trouble if allowed to roam free in thie country. For Roosevelt, the potential for terrorism was a serious matter and individual civil rights took a back seat to public safety. Most Democrats these days seem to be most concerned that the terrorist suspects get treated properly and get a fair trial in civilian courts in the United States above all other consideration of national security, and they seem most concerned that we do not invade Iran. For Roosevelt, what mattered was winning the war, something these modern Democrats just don't seem to understand, they are already willing to give up and throw in the towel just because we lost 3000+ military casualities, in World War II, 3,000 casualities represents the sinking of a single battleship and during that war many battleships were sunk. I doubt Roosevelt would have "raised the white flag" after losing one naval vessel.

I prefer the politicians who actually say what they believe rather than saying what they think the public wants to hear. George Bush has a vision and George Bush is stubborn, that's the sort of leader we need if we are to get something done in space. A wishy washy politician will change tracks and have a "flavor of the month" space program that's always changing its priorities, this works ok for space probes, but it will not get humans to Mars.

C M Edwards · 2007-05-21 15:05:47

Bill Richardson throws his hat in the ring.

All right. We now have a pro-space democrat in the US presidential race. What's more, Richardson has a decidedly pro-alt-space record. The range of choices for the space activist is no longer limited to McCain vs. lackluster.

I wonder what initial polls give him for chances?

-edit-

Oh, five percent as of May 20, 2007. I give him better odds than Al Sharpton.

X · 2007-05-24 20:54:34

Anyone know where Fred Thompson stands? Gingrinch has said he won't get in until sometime in September if he decides to, and if he waits that long I think Thompson will take what would have been Newt's base.

C M Edwards · 2007-05-25 12:28:05

Anyone know where Fred Thompson stands?

Try the Wikipedia Article on Fred Thompson.

According to several straw polls, Fred Thompson would be a front runner, but I attribute no significance to that until it becomes more than just a straw poll. I don't count a candidate in until he's in, and Thompson appears content to vacillate until the registration deadline.

X · 2007-05-25 20:39:46

Ha. I left it out, but I intended to ask where he stood on space. I know where he stands on the other stuff.

SpaceNut · 2007-06-18 06:58:13

Presidential candidates and space policy

To date, none of the presidential candidates for either party has revealed any hint of what their plans might be for civil space programs. Nor have there been any questions, thus far, addressing this issue during the several debates.
Supporters of only one candidate, Senator Clinton, recently sponsored a forum to discuss possible civil space positions she could take if elected.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2006-12-27 00:46:46

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#2 2006-12-27 00:57:01

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#3 2006-12-27 09:18:09

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#4 2006-12-27 13:46:17

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#5 2006-12-27 20:54:37

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#6 2006-12-28 21:40:52

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#7 2007-01-01 23:40:59

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#8 2007-01-02 09:38:46

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#9 2007-01-02 11:18:20

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#10 2007-01-04 08:40:56

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#11 2007-04-08 21:12:39

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#12 2007-04-11 06:15:56

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#13 2007-04-14 07:35:30

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#14 2007-04-14 21:01:49

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#15 2007-04-15 00:06:13

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#16 2007-04-15 09:53:58

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#17 2007-05-21 15:05:47

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#18 2007-05-24 20:54:34

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#19 2007-05-25 12:28:05

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#20 2007-05-25 20:39:46

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

#21 2007-06-18 06:58:13

Re: Newt Gingrich vs John McCain: Who'd make a better President.

Board footer