Am I Republican or Democrat?

[Refugee]

In U.S. politics I’m not sure what I am.

I want a small government and low taxation. I don’t mind paying for welfare, but it’s a bare minimum. I’d like the basic life need utilities of electricity, water and household heating nationalized and subsidized by the government if necessary to keep those prices artificially low.

I don’t care if my medical care is socialized or private, but if I have to pay so does everyone else, no free rides, even if you’re on welfare, you pay a percentage out of your welfare money and the amount of care you receive is proportional to what you pay.

Free markets; minimum government restrictions and regulations; no ban on firearms and an end to relative equality, in other words, equal opportunities with an acceptance of unequal outcomes. An end to group status and a return to individualism, you become what you’re capable of.

So, apart from being a left or right nut job, where do I stand in American politics? :smiley:

[Peter1469]

An independent. Neither party would accept all of your platform.

[Refugee]

An independent. Neither party would accept all of your platform.

Oh. I wondered why I've never been called a right or left wing nut job. :laugh: In the UK all that would make me a conservative, but I just wondered.

[Chris]

Toss a coin, there ain't a flip of a difference between them.

The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then they get elected and prove it. ~P. J. O'Rourke

[Cigar]

Come join the winning team :grin:

[1751_Texan]

In U.S. politics I’m not sure what I am.

I want a small government and low taxation. I don’t mind paying for welfare, but it’s a bare minimum. I’d like the basic life need utilities of electricity, water and household heating nationalized and subsidized by the government if necessary to keep those prices artificially low.

I don’t care if my medical care is socialized or private, but if I have to pay so does everyone else, no free rides, even if you’re on welfare, you pay a percentage out of your welfare money and the amount of care you receive is proportional to what you pay.

Free markets; minimum government restrictions and regulations; no ban on firearms and an end to relative equality, in other words, equal opportunities with an acceptance of unequal outcomes. An end to group status and a return to individualism, you become what you’re capable of.

So, apart from being a left or right nut job, where do I stand in American politics? :smiley:


There are so so many issues that you have not even scratched the surface of what Ideology you have.



Here is a good test. The BS test. Whenever someone makes a claim/argument on this forum...if it makes you say...BS; note the person and thier ideology.

[Libhater]

You have mostly Conservative ideals, but where you run off the track is your penchant to
have government subsidize various utilities (which is highly unconstitutional), and your
care free attitude concerning the implementation of a socialized over a privately run medical
care system. Just look at all the problems we're currently having with this socialized obamascare
health system, and so your reluctance to stick with the private plans is or should be very troubling.

[Chris]

There are so so many issues that you have not even scratched the surface of what Ideology you have.



Here is a good test. The BS test. Whenever someone makes a claim/argument on this forum...if it makes you say...BS; note the person and thier ideology.


So your test is simply if you feel something is BS, it is? That's deep.

Then there's Carl Sagan's Baloney Detection Kit (http://www.brainpickings.org/index.php/2014/01/03/baloney-detection-kit-carl-sagan/):



Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the “facts.”
Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view.
Arguments from authority carry little weight — “authorities” have made mistakes in the past. They will do so again in the future. Perhaps a better way to say it is that in science there are no authorities; at most, there are experts.
Spin more than one hypothesis. If there’s something to be explained, think of all the different ways in which it could be explained. Then think of tests by which you might systematically disprove each of the alternatives. What survives, the hypothesis that resists disproof in this Darwinian selection among “multiple working hypotheses,” has a much better chance of being the right answer than if you had simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy.
Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it’s yours. It’s only a way station in the pursuit of knowledge. Ask yourself why you like the idea. Compare it fairly with the alternatives. See if you can find reasons for rejecting it. If you don’t, others will.
Quantify. If whatever it is you’re explaining has some measure, some numerical quantity attached to it, you’ll be much better able to discriminate among competing hypotheses. What is vague and qualitative is open to many explanations. Of course there are truths to be sought in the many qualitative issues we are obliged to confront, but finding them is more challenging.
If there’s a chain of argument, every link in the chain must work (including the premise) — not just most of them.
Occam’s Razor. This convenient rule-of-thumb urges us when faced with two hypotheses that explain the data equally well to choose the simpler.
Always ask whether the hypothesis can be, at least in principle, falsified. Propositions that are untestable, unfalsifiable are not worth much. Consider the grand idea that our Universe and everything in it is just an elementary particle — an electron, say — in a much bigger Cosmos. But if we can never acquire information from outside our Universe, is not the idea incapable of disproof? You must be able to check assertions out. Inveterate skeptics must be given the chance to follow your reasoning, to duplicate your experiments and see if they get the same result.


It does take a little thought though.

[donttread]

In U.S. politics I’m not sure what I am.

I want a small government and low taxation. I don’t mind paying for welfare, but it’s a bare minimum. I’d like the basic life need utilities of electricity, water and household heating nationalized and subsidized by the government if necessary to keep those prices artificially low.

I don’t care if my medical care is socialized or private, but if I have to pay so does everyone else, no free rides, even if you’re on welfare, you pay a percentage out of your welfare money and the amount of care you receive is proportional to what you pay.

Free markets; minimum government restrictions and regulations; no ban on firearms and an end to relative equality, in other words, equal opportunities with an acceptance of unequal outcomes. An end to group status and a return to individualism, you become what you’re capable of.

So, apart from being a left or right nut job, where do I stand in American politics? :smiley:



Can you see the conditioning where you feel you should be one of two instead of even considering other parties? You sound like a great candidate for the left/ right coalition forming around local chemical free food and clean water. But I assure you your answer does not lie in either end of the dying Donkephant

[Refugee]

I did say that I wondered what spectrum Americans thought I lay on, not that I wanted to be. U.S. politics is so complicated, even the forum argues who is what. :smiley:

I do have some socialism that’s true, but only in the sense that it’s run by the government, not provided by it by others. The entitlement socialism the UK has now was never meant to be that way, but part of a national insurance scheme. I suppose it’s like the passport service or getting a driving license, you buy them from the government. Our welfare system started the same way; you bought your welfare from paid insurance contributions, just as you would a company.

The government control of basic utilities comes from the notion that citizens are at least entitled to basic human needs. What happened in the UK was that they were privatized and sold to foreign companies, who obviously put up the prices to the point where we now have old people dying every winter because they can’t afford to heat their homes. It’s either afford to heat or eat.

Compared to American politics which seems extreme, you’re one or the other; the UK incorporates bits of everything, capitalism, socialism and liberalism. Of course, now it’s moving into progressivism, but I suppose it was always more about ‘fair play’ than ideologies.

[Chris]

I did say that I wondered what spectrum Americans thought I lay on, not that I wanted to be. U.S. politics is so complicated, even the forum argues who is what. :smiley:

I do have some socialism that’s true, but only in the sense that it’s run by the government, not provided by it by others. The entitlement socialism the UK has now was never meant to be that way, but part of a national insurance scheme. I suppose it’s like the passport service or getting a driving license, you buy them from the government. Our welfare system started the same way; you bought your welfare from paid insurance contributions, just as you would a company.

The government control of basic utilities comes from the notion that citizens are at least entitled to basic human needs. What happened in the UK was that they were privatized and sold to foreign companies, who obviously put up the prices to the point where we now have old people dying every winter because they can’t afford to heat their homes. It’s either afford to heat or eat.

Compared to American politics which seems extreme, you’re one or the other; the UK incorporates bits of everything, capitalism, socialism and liberalism. Of course, now it’s moving into progressivism, but I suppose it was always more about ‘fair play’ than ideologies.



"I did say that I wondered what spectrum Americans thought I lay on...."

But parties are not what I'd associate with thought.

In terms of principles I'd say your thought is somewhat Hayekian, Thatcherian. That's based on that earlier discussion we had about Thatcher.

[texan]

I am independent and conservative on financial issues and liberal on some social things.

I can be swayed. I am willing to compromise.

I voted for Obama (no way could I put McCain in there)the first time then realized that is wasn't anything special like he sold us,he was ordinary. He has broke his campaign promises so many times it hurts. NowI am completely out on this fear mongering democrats are doing with the racecard and it starts right from the top. Can't take the heat so call everyone a racist and run to the black community to help you confirm your narcissistic skin thinned behavior.

Example: I was not for Obamacare because I knew they werelying about many of the facts they sold it on. Then asked everyone to ignore the BS and just fix it. Well screw you for lying, now I am keeping score and will grade the deal like it or not. I won’t rollover and take it in the arse because of any party affiliation.

[Ransom]

Quite simple Refugee. What is your first inclination should you see a societal problem that needs fixing. Is your initial gut reaction to wonder what government program could fix that? In that case, yer a lib and Dem. Should you not look to government for every protection and answer....then you're a Republican.

[Chris]

Quite simple Refugee. What is your first inclination should you see a societal problem that needs fixing. Is your initial gut reaction to wonder what government program could fix that? In that case, yer a lib and Dem. Should you not look to government for every protection and answer....then you're a Republican.

By that definition then any rep/con who looks to government for protection and answer, say on the issue of marriage or foreign intervention, is a dem/lib.

[Ransom]

By that definition then any rep/con who looks to government for protection and answer, say on the issue of marriage or foreign intervention, is a dem/lib.

Nonsense. Any Repub looks to the government for a military for example. A national Guard and a police force in every state. Prison systems, etc. On the issue of marriage, a Republican example would be DOMA...the "defense of marriage" act. Ensuring that We the People rather than robes or executives define our institutions. You'll find Republicans very active, our representative to the federal government we want active in protecting our very rights....to carry weapons, private property...or freedom of speech. There are many issues we consider the government does better and we don't mind paying taxes in support of these initiatives. The lib considers every problem....health care, birth control, food, shelter, educating our children, land management...look to unions today for example. Today, private unions aren't necessary. Work safety, labor laws, the EEOC...the federal government has now taken over the role of union protection for employees.

Republicans believe in self-determination. Equal opportunity. You libs want equal outcome....and you'll use the federal government as a wrench to make that happen.

[Chris]

Nonsense. Any Repub looks to the government for a military for example. A national Guard and a police force in every state. Prison systems, etc. On the issue of marriage, a Republican example would be DOMA...the "defense of marriage" act. Ensuring that We the People rather than robes or executives define our institutions. You'll find Republicans very active, our representative to the federal government we want active in protecting our very rights....to carry weapons, private property...or freedom of speech. There are many issues we consider the government does better and we don't mind paying taxes in support of these initiatives. The lib considers every problem....health care, birth control, food, shelter, educating our children, land management...look to unions today for example. Today, private unions aren't necessary. Work safety, labor laws, the EEOC...the federal government has now taken over the role of union protection for employees.

Republicans believe in self-determination. Equal opportunity. You libs want equal outcome....and you'll use the federal government as a wrench to make that happen.



Like I said, you all big government cons/reps look to government for solutions no different than libs/dems. You may have different values, may take different positions on issues, but you both look to government to provide and enforce solutions.

[patrickt]

There are so so many issues that you have not even scratched the surface of what Ideology you have.

Here is a good test. The BS test. Whenever someone makes a claim/argument on this forum...if it makes you say...BS; note the person and thier ideology.

BS!

[Libhater]

Like I said, you all big government cons/reps look to government for solutions no different than libs/dems. You may have different values, may take different positions on issues, but you both look to government to provide and enforce solutions.

Why do you keep throwing up that blatant lie about Conservatives? Conservatives and Tea Partiers are against big government, period.

[Chris]

Why do you keep throwing up that blatant lie about Conservatives? Conservatives and Tea Partiers are against big government, period.


I see a spectrum of conservatism from the progressive to the libertarian. Blatant examples of progressive conservatism is found in neoconservative imperialism couple with liberal domestic agendas. At the other end of the spectrum or more or less libertarian factions like the Tea Parties for limited government domestic and foreign. So it depends on the conservative we're talking about.

[1751_Texan]

Quite simple Refugee. What is your first inclination should you see a societal problem that needs fixing. Is your initial gut reaction to wonder what government program could fix that? In that case, yer a lib and Dem. Should you not look to government for every protection and answer....then you're a Republican.

I find your answer interesting but "incomplete" to my understanding...

When a societal problem needs fixing[as you stated] a lib looks to a government solution...ok

Now a conservative sees the same problem but looks to whom for the fix? How does the conservative"unite"[I don't know if that is the best term] to fix said problem? By what group or association of conservatives is this accomplished? In other words, how do like minded consevatives come together to solve problems?