UNL 206

Well definitely not Obama because he's a socialists who doesn't support going to college. So probably either McCain or Clinton because McCain is an ex fighter pilot who knows the benefit of technology and Clinton because she is a "philanthropist" who supports benefiting the American people.=)

I believe Clinton is, because she seems more into trying to get the vote of the youth. While knowing most youth is challenging standards!

I don't know a lot about politics but I'm pretty sure that socialism doesn't necessarily entail opposition to scientific research, and certainly not in Obama's case.... Anyway, it's hard to say... the Republican party at this point just seems so tied to big oil that I can't bring myself to trust them as far as any honest efforts to fund research in alternative fuels, which, in my opinion, is some of the most important research currently being done along with stem cells, which is also opposed by the Republican-affiliated Christian right. Maybe I'm narrow-sighted but I've always seen the democratic party as the more "progressive" of the (two) parties. And I like Obama a lot, I think of him as the people's candidate, if there is any democracy left in this country he will win, and if he wins, it will be us, the people, who got him there, and he will have no choice but to listen to us. And we, the people, for the most part I believe, truly support scientific/technological advancement. So I say Obama, but Clinton's a-okay in my book too, though. =)

I think that Clinton would be the candidate most likely to be supportive of funding scientific research. I know that shes said that if she was elected president that she would provide funding for stem cell research.

I think that the candidate that would be most supportive of funding scientific research would be clinton. She said that if she was elected president she would support funding for stem cell research.

I'm not too sure of which candidate would be the most supportive of funding because I haven't really followed the elections very closely. I believe that it should be one of the more important stands a candidate should take though because without funding we will fall behind other countries in terms of research and advancements.

I'm not too sure of which candidate would be the most supportive of funding because I haven't really followed the elections very closely. I believe that it should be one of the more important stands a candidate should take though because without funding we will fall behind other countries in terms of research and advancements.

I'm not too sure of which candidate would be the most supportive of funding because I haven't really followed the elections very closely. I believe that it should be one of the more important stands a candidate should take though because without funding we will fall behind other countries in terms of research and advancements.

I'm not too sure of which candidate would be the most supportive of funding because I haven't really followed the elections very closely. I believe that it should be one of the more important stands a candidate should take though because without funding we will fall behind other countries in terms of research and advancements.

I believe cliton would be the candidate most likely to be supportive of funding science research because I read an aticle about cliton joined to support the U.S Department of Energy's of science office.