Wednesday, January 09, 2008

Foreign Policy Ratings

Below I will rank the top 9 candidates in terms of foreign policy:

1. Ron Paul 96%
Ron Paul is the only candidate of the top 9 who is a non-interventionist. In other words, he doesn't feel that the USA should have troops in 130 countries. This does not mean that he's a pacifist (he believes in war when declared by congress) or an isolationist (he believes in free trade and friendship). Paul believes that our constant interventionism actually plays a part in producing our conflicts. He'd rather not be in the UN, instead remaining completely sovereign. Instead of intervention, we should spread democracy by example. Paul is the only candidate that voted against the war in Iraq (Obama would have, but wasn't in office). In regards to immigration, Paul is against amnesty and for an amendment ending birthright citizenship. If you want a non-interventionist candidate, he's your only choice.

2. Fred Thompson 94%
Thompson believes in 'peace through strength.' He voted for the war in Iraq and doesn't believe we should have a time-table to exit. He is the loudest voice for claiming that Iraq would be nuclear by now if not for the removal of Hussein. He supports stronger missile defense, support for Israel, and no amnesty for illegal immigrants. If you want a classic peace through strength candidate, he's probably your pick.

3. Barack Obama 87%

Obama is one of only 2 candidates against the war in Iraq, though he wasn't in office at the time of the vote. Obama wants all troops out of Iraq by March. Obama believes in diplomacy and international coalitions to intervene in the problems around the globe. He supports meeting with enemy leaders. He supports a Palestinian State. He thinks we should increase legal immigration and provide illegals with an in-house pathway to citizenship (albeit at the back of the line, so to speak). If you want a democrat who's been against the war in Iraq consistently, he's your only choice.

4. John McCain 86%
McCain is a former Prisoner of War and is for a very strong military. He believes the key to fighting terrorism is better military intelligence. He voted for the war in Iraq and strongly praises the recent surge as necessary and effective. He thinks would should finish our mission in Iraq even if it takes 100 years. He is against 'torture' of POW's, but is more 'liberal' than most of his fellow republicans when it comes to how to deal illegal immigrants. If you want to finish the job in Iraq no matter what and how long it takes, he's your man.

5. Rudy Giuliani 85%
Giuliani helped NYC through 9-11. He favored the war in Iraq and thinks it's ridiculous to constantly be talking about withdrawing in the midst of the war. He was for the Patriot Act. He thinks the key to defeating terrorism is to discredit the worldview. He said we do not need to try to understand why terrorists attack us, we just need to stop them from doing it. He is against deporting illegals so long as they are children, sick, or reporters of crime. Our foreign policy should be to actively spread democracy, whatever it takes. If you think we have an obligation to stop terrorism by spreading democracy via the military, vote for Giuliani.

6. Mitt Romney 82%
Mitt is yet another interventionist, but with a bit more of a diplomatic side than most of his fellow republicans. He favored the war, but thinks it has been mismanaged. He supports the surge and rejects a time-table for retreat. He thinks we should strengthen our alliances in the Middle East and try to modernize Muslim culture. This, he believes, will make them less likely to breed terrorists. Islamic Jihad hates the west and wants us gone. In regards to immigration, he's big on an employer verification system so illegals can't get jobs so easily. If you think Islamic Jihad wants to take over the world and it has nothing to do with us, he's probably your man.

7. Mike Huckabee 79%
Huckabee is another interventionist who favored the war in Iraq and doesn't support a time table for ending said war. He thinks the surge is good. We should win the war on terror by using overwhelming force. The goal is to defeat terrorism, not spread democracy. If he believed Iran had Nuclear weapons, he'd attack them without or without congressional approval. He's against amnesty, but with some allowance for a pathway to citizenship. He recently spoke of support for ending birthright citizenship. Huckabee seems to insert the most popular aspects of other foreign policies into his own. If you like what he's chosen, he's your guy.

8. Hillary Clinton 79%
Clinton voted for the right to fight Iraq, but now regrets that vote. She wants to bring the troops home by 2013 and flood Iraq with financial aid to cleanse the country. She supports global coalitions and UN involvement to solve world problems. She's against 'english immersion' for immigrants and for a path to citizenship for illegals. If you supported the war in Iraq, but have since changed your mind and think we should do nearly all foreign policy through the UN, she's your woman.

9. John Edwards 77%
Edwards, like Clinton, voted for the President's right to lead a war in Iraq, but then changed his mind and voted against funding the troops. He believes in UN diplomacy and throwing money at world problems. Besides the vote against funding the troops, he's nearly identical to Clinton. If you like Clinton, but don't like the idea of a female President, Edwards is for you.


The AJ Thomas said...

the best policy on pings? That's what I wanna know!

Aaron Perry said...

what'd you think of huckabee's "gates of hell" comment last night?

matthew said...

I think it's more of the same from Huckabee, a memorable line that catches the emotions of the tough-guy republican base.

He may be a better politician than he was a pastor, or, more likely, the type of success he had as a pastor fit right in line with pop-politics.

What did you think?

Aaron Perry said...

i thought it was ridiculous. it goes right in line with a paper i just finished on violence and shame. shame causes disruption in relations and violence, but violence also brings a people together. you see how divided the country is on violence, but you also saw how the threat of a hair-trigger violent response was awarded with applause. ridiculous, ridiculous statement.

matthew said...

I agree. Unfortunately such statements could potentially win him the republican nomination. Even still, I think he's sacrificing the national elections by such statements.

matthew said...

Oh, BTW, what did you think of Thompson's similar statement (send them to their 'virgins') or whatever he said. Same? Better? Worse?