Presidential Candidates and Real Estate
Each candidate on all sides brings a unique perspective and plan to overhaul the White House. Every single candidate yarps about how much trouble Washington is in and how they plan to fix our nation. Aside from how I feel about that angle, I am interested in what the pulse of the real estate community is for issues most dominant in our industry…
Which candidate has the best plan for recovery of the credit crunch?
Who best understands the plight of the self employed (Realtors)?
Is there a progressive plan to insure the self employed (Realtors)?
Does anyone have a good understanding of the housing slump?
Does the RE community need a candidate with a corporate background or a political background?
All that said, who is the BEST overall candidate for the real estate industry in the 2008 Presidential election?
January 20th, 2008 at 7:17 pm
Romney - hands down answer to all questions. He is the business candidate without question. From business to the Olympics to Massachusetts, he has repeatedly showed his ability to handle fiscally difficult situations and his grasp on the way business works.
However, for me, straight dope economics isn’t my number one concern. It is high on the list, but comes behind my distaste for socialism and desire for national security…so I haven’t decided if he is the right answer to all questions…
And that’s just the way I see it
January 20th, 2008 at 7:33 pm
I think it’s to early to call, I’m still getting to know some of the candidates, but I’m for sure fine with McCain, and Romney.
As much as I personally like Obama as as person, his tone of message, I think another 8 years of experience wouldn’t hurt. The buzz around him blurs the reality that some of his ideas are rather naive.
I don’t care who’s in office, just get me my damn health coverage at national group rates…
January 20th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
Since apparently no direct descendants of Attila the Hun are running, I don’t like any of ‘em. :).
I don’t want any candidate to have any plan for real estate except — to leave us the hell alone.
I don’t ever discuss socialized medicine for the same reason I don’t discuss man-caused global warming — it’s a silly subject unworthy of my time.
Seriously, the Republican candidates embarrass me.
That’s the bad news.
The good news?
As long as there’s no recession, or it’s perceived as mild, I think Republicans could run Daffy Duck and win — as long as there is no third party candidate.
That’s how the last Clinton go in if you’ll remember.
January 20th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
Plans really don’t matter. Once they get to Washington the system will eat’m up. At least from what I’ve seen.
But if we want a plan, I love Huckabee’s National Sales Tax in lieu of the IRC. Will it ever happen? Never. But I would prefer it.
Given all of that, I have given money to McCain. If not him, I’d listen to Obama…though I do have my doubts.
I’m really of the opinion to wait (outside of McCain) who shakes out and then make major decisions.
January 20th, 2008 at 9:24 pm
April- as a self-employed person, what is your number one ballot issue?
I have to say that Mitt most closely matches my personal and business views, but I’m not convinced that anyone really has a feasible plan for small businesses. The amount of taxes a business owner (Realtor) has to pay is ridiculous.
January 20th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
Benn- I think you’re right about Obama. What he has going for him is a likeability factor which certainly isn’t enough to make a great president (shall I provide examples of well-liked Presidents who fell far short of their slick campaign promises?).
It would be great if NAR would lead the charge in insurance. I personally don’t think a President will be taking charge of this issue (and I CERTAINLY don’t think universal health care is worth a crap).
January 20th, 2008 at 9:30 pm
Jeff- it does not surprise me at all that you don’t like any of the candidates.
I say that in a silly tone but I’m serious.
I think you’re on to something about the Republicans’ chances. I would prefer that Obama take the Dem ticket because he’d be the easiest to beat against a Romney or McCain ticket. How about you?
Bottom line that most of us have agreed on so far- our personal wallets are best protected by a Republican President.
January 20th, 2008 at 10:04 pm
To me, it’s not that important. The nation is about far more than my profession. I think one problem with the voting public is that they base their vote far to much on a narrow set of issues. For instance, there’s a huge number of people who will only look at the candidates stand on gun ownership (either way), or abortion, or even their religion or race.
Getting back to the question though. Whoever currently has NO plan would be the best choice on the issue.
January 20th, 2008 at 10:17 pm
Todd- I think you’re right about people sticking on singular ballot issues. That said, there’s surely someone you would most value if you narrow it down to considerations of your professional role?
If no specific candidate tickles you, would you prefer someone with small business experience, big business experience, or knows how to handle Washington politics?
January 20th, 2008 at 10:27 pm
I’m with Todd — no plan is the best plan.
Obama? Really? The man hasn’t said anything of substance since this time last year. He’s just an inch to the right of Karl Marx and Hilary.
Seriously, I’d rather run against her than him.
January 20th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
I think you missed the point about Obama- he’d be so easy to beat… it’d be like going against the HS quarterback who is promising vending machines in every classroom instead of the bitchy chick who is president of every other club in school who yells “pay attention, pupils” when she stands up in the gym to make her speech.
The dems don’t have anyone IMO that’s presidential, but at LEAST stoopid Kerry isn’t running again- I can sleep at night.
Guys- why is no plan the best plan? Is it because the smartest people are flexible to the intellectual advisors they surround themselves with, or because it’s all bs anyway? Talk to me.
January 20th, 2008 at 11:05 pm
Because whatever happens to the real estate market, will more like come out positive with less government involvement.
January 20th, 2008 at 11:07 pm
It means we all can implement our own plans freely.
January 20th, 2008 at 11:12 pm
Todd- I understand better, and I TOTALLY agree! I’m seein’ you eye to eye now, buddy!
January 20th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
Jeff- yes yes and yes. Oh, and yes.
All that said, if someone had a BB to your head (I know where you live), which candidate represents the interests of the real estate professional most closely?
January 20th, 2008 at 11:24 pm
Romney and Giuliani would be best for real estate. Romney because he understands, and Rudy because he wants to mimic Regan’s tax cuts.
Hillary and Obama might give us a replay of the mid to late ’70’s, but it would probably end in a replay of the early ’80’s. Not cool at all.
January 21st, 2008 at 6:36 am
I’ll be the contrarian here and voice my support for Ron Paul. I don’t trust any of the other ones (except perhaps Obama) - and RP is a fiscal conservative, he’s under budget running his office in the House, understands that we need to protect the United States’ interests first and foremost (no entangling alliances, and recognition that the weak dollar threatens our country on so many levels.
I’ve heard that NAR may support Hillary & that’s is enough for me.
That, and his desire to eliminate the IRS …
January 21st, 2008 at 6:47 am
As a follow-up, at least I know where I can disagree with him - he is clear on his issues. The others, I see them as typical politicians - they’ll go whichever way the wind blows. I just want gov’t to stay out of the way.
January 21st, 2008 at 8:10 am
The govmint needs to stay the hell away from 1) real estate; and 2) my taxes.
I don’t expect any candidate to get me health coverage at national group rates. That should be the primary goal of the NAR, but instead we get from them stupid ass commercials, web sites and blogs that try to convince people that realtors aren’t evil, shitty magazines, and a Nazi-like quest to shut down domain names and force agents to not use the term “MLS”.
I wish I shared some of the optimism shown here that any Republican candidate can handily beat Obama or Billary. Obama is getting the young vote out in droves and is incredibly charismatic, and this country elected the other Clinton twice, so anything can happen.
The most important issues to me that a President can really do something about are: National Defense and policy, and court appointments.
Romney probably has the best business mind. McCain is probably the best for national defense and would likely pull the most votes from the Dems and left of center independents (meaning his liberal tendencies scare me, particularly when it comes to court appointments). I wish Fred Thompson hadn’t blown it.
There are 24 Republicans on the Arizona Primary ballot. I haven’t decided who to vote for yet. It will be interesting to see if McCain can win Arizona. Despite (or because of?) being a Senator here for 20 years, there is a lot of anti-McCain chatter going around…
January 21st, 2008 at 11:02 am
Hmmm….
Reading your comments…
I don’t envy the fact that I am yet not able to vote in a US election…
However, I was planning on getting US Citizenship this year, but if Hillary gets elected I’m willing to wait it out four more years!
January 21st, 2008 at 11:08 am
Jay — Daffy can beat them, but I didn’t say wipe them out.
Also, Bill wouldn’t have come within sniffing distance in 1992 were it not for the Texan with the Napoleonic Complex. Bush would’ve hit 52-55% or so of the vote. Remember, 19% of the vote went third candidate that year. 19%! The vast majority of those votes were conservative voters upset with Bush. Even with all that help, Bill still couldn’t get more than 42-44% of the vote.
Ross Perot changed the course of history.
Bloomberg can do the same.
The common denominator? A Clinton needs it to win in both instances.