Advertisement

What do you think?

August 31, 2008

Editor's note: Each week, The Herald-Mail invites readers to answer poll questions on its Web site, www.herald-mail.com. Readers also may submit comments about the poll question when voting. Each Sunday, a sampling of edited reader comments will run in The Herald-Mail.

Last week there were three poll questions. The first question was: Should the legal drinking age be lowered to 18?

"Eighteen-year-olds are adults. They can vote, serve in the military, smoke legally, have families and everything else adults are legally allowed to do. Many are already drinking illegally and many families give alcohol to their young children. Responsibility is the key here and there are a lot of adults who have no responsibility."

"Yes, even if it's only for active duty military. If you are old enough to fight for your country, you should be able to have a drink."

"No. ... At 18, there is no maturity to understand the consequences of drinking and driving. I know there are 21-year-olds that don't understand that, either."

Advertisement

"As someone who is 20 years of age and will 'legally' be allowed to drink in less than a year, I personally think the age needs to either stay where it is or be increased to 25. I will admit, I do drink illegally. I never go out in public and drink or drink and drive, but occasionally, I will have an alcoholic beverage in the privacy of my own home, which my husband and I pay a mortgage on. I feel as long as I am not putting myself or others in danger, it's my right. If I can pay taxes, I can drink a beer at home."

"It is not a matter of age. It is a matter of maturity, which comes with the passage of time. There is considerable difference between the ability to foresee the consequences of your actions when you are 21 than when you were 18. With the exuberance of youth, one is more inclined to take chances. Chances are one thing one should not take when it comes to consuming alcohol."

The second question was: Do you think Barack Obama's selection of Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware as his running mate was a good choice?

"I think it was a great choice. Biden brings experience from the Foreign Relations Committee and brings the working middle class to the Democrats' side. (Hillary) Clinton would not have been a good choice since she is so concerned about herself and her husband's legacy."

"Hillary would have been a better choice. She would have united the party. Joe Biden believes he is always right and can be very nasty at times."

"Yes. Obama just made 35 years of experience immediately available to himself for 24/7. But that doesn't mean he will use it. Biden will be like all other vice presidents before him - in the shadows having no real authority."

"Hold it - isn't Obama about change? Didn't he say that if we keep putting the same old people into government, we'd get the same old results? And then he picks a 35-year veteran congressman?"

"Even with the choice of Biden, Obama still does not have any experience. He is running for the most powerful and important job in the country. What business would appoint someone with no experience for a CEO? No one if they want to keep their business doing well."

The third question was: Who should GOP presidential candidate John McCain choose as his running mate?

"I believe it should be Mitt Romney or (Michael) Steele from Maryland. Both are brilliant men when it comes to the economy. Romney realizes we shouldn't raise taxes if we want the economy to recover and we need to drill and do it all to not be energy-dependent in an unstable world where Russia may become a threat and Iran already is."

"To guarantee a victory in the November general election, Mr. McCain should choose a solid CONSERVATIVE running mate. Choices include Paul Ryan, Tim Pawlenty, Rob Portman, Mark Sanford, Michael Steele, Kay Bailey Hutchison, Sarah Palin, Haley Barbour, Bobby Jindal or maybe even Mitch Daniels."

"John Adams. He has as much vitality as any of those listed and is still a much smarter candidate."

"He should just pick (Joe) Lieberman. He's basically a Republican anyway."

"Now this is not my view, but from what I hear people say and talk, some think that Lieberman would be a wise choice for McCain. That he could be a good choice to win swing votes and win over some Democrats, being that he is, well, still sort of a Democrat. Does anyone think that would be good logic?"

The Herald-Mail Articles
|
|
|