PDA

View Full Version : General Politics Need assistance with political perspective


Bowser
08-30-2008, 05:18 PM
I need to get a better understanding of where I am in my political leanings. I will readily admit that I am no poly-sci major, and usually lead with emotion when it comes to politics. I usually end up leaning democrat (most likely because that's how the folks always voted), but I find myself agreeing with opinions on both sides of the fence, and sometimes making a hybrid of said ideas to come to my own conclusion.

What I'm looking for are people to explain what ideas their party embraces that they agree with. Please don't assume to think for another party (democrats want to kill babies and feast on the corpses), just give me your thoughts on why you like your particular party. Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, others I can't think of - all responses are welcome, and I'll try to respond to each with thoughts on your thoughts. Thanks.

tmax63
08-30-2008, 05:59 PM
As a rule of thumb Repubs generally are for smaller government/less governmental intervention, stronger on military, pro-business, less taxes, pro 2nd Amend. Religion wise they tend to be traditional family and oppose abortion.
I agree with with most of these tenents. I don't think raising taxes for more government programs is the answer as I feel I can best determine how I spend my money. I think the free market will adapt to changing conditions if given the chance instead of governmental interference to force change. Prime example ethanol and alternative fuels. The market wil move to these as they become cost effective and they don't need taxes and grants and be coerced by the government to do it before it is profitable to do so. The main point I don't follow the crowd on is abortion. I DO feel it is wrong but I think that is a decision best left up to the mother, doctor, her God and the father if he is in the picture. Just because i wouldn't consider it for my family (I'm male) doesn't mean that there aren't times for someone else that it might be an option. Incest and rape come to mind. I think it's way to personal a decision for the government to take a "one law fits all" approach. Just my 2 cents worth.

Bowser
08-30-2008, 06:06 PM
As a rule of thumb Repubs generally are for smaller government/less governmental intervention, stronger on military, pro-business, less taxes. Religion wise they tend to be traditional family and oppose abortion.

Let's see -

smaller gov't/less intervention - I have no problem with this. Actually, I wouldn't mind more government, as long as it didn't interfere with the lives of people in general.

stronger on military - good with that, but I'm not in favore of us becoming imperialistic with that military strength.

pro business/less taxes - yes, please. Stronger dollar = good (although I'm not sure how the dollar gets stronger these days without SOME taxation, at least short term)

religion - I am definitely not a traditional religious worshipper.

BigMeatballDave
08-30-2008, 06:12 PM
I think of myself as a conservative, for the most part. At least fiscally. Socially, I oppose Abortion. Support the death penalty. I oppose Gay marriage, but I don't oppose Civil Unions, I just don't care.

Adept Havelock
08-30-2008, 06:13 PM
As a rule of thumb Repubs generally are for smaller government/less governmental intervention, stronger on military, pro-business, less taxes. Religion wise they tend to be traditional family and oppose abortion.

I think that "rule of thumb" has been hammered flat over the last few years.

How much did government spending or entitlement programs drop during the period 2000-2006 when the GOP had control of the legislature and executive branch?

That's been part of the GOP platform, but it seems to be lip service at best these days.

Especially when you look at big-government "Social" conservatives like Huckabee.

Taco John
08-30-2008, 06:14 PM
I don't ascribe to a party. I ascribe to a philosophy: libertarianism.

I believe that people should be free to make thier own choices, provided that those choices don't infringe on the liberty (using hte broader meaning of the term) of others. In other words, my freedom to do as I please stops at your property line.

wazu
08-30-2008, 06:17 PM
Let's see -

smaller gov't/less intervention - I have no problem with this. Actually, I wouldn't mind more government, as long as it didn't interfere with the lives of people in general.

stronger on military - good with that, but I'm not in favore of us becoming imperialistic with that military strength.

pro business/less taxes - yes, please. Stronger dollar = good (although I'm not sure how the dollar gets stronger these days without SOME taxation, at least short term)

religion - I am definitely not a traditional religious worshipper.

You sound similar me. I am actually a Christian but it has very little to do with my politics. I am pro-life, but the fiscal issues tend to drive my voting more. I do not support a ban on gay marriage, and frankly can't believe that something like that is even an issue in 2008.

At the end of the day, smaller government that most closely reflects the U.S. Constitution is what I care about the most. This includes a bias against international imperialism. On the balance, I tend to vote a mix of Republican and Libertarian.

tmax63
08-30-2008, 06:17 PM
The Repubs have wandered away from the smaller government part of it because pork barrel spending gets them re-elected. I firmly believe there needs to be term limits and make being a politician less of a career field.

Taco John
08-30-2008, 06:19 PM
Bowser, check this thread:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=188076

This is one of the better political quizzes that I"ve seen...

Bowser
08-30-2008, 06:20 PM
I think of myself as a conservative, for the most part. At least fiscally. Socially, I oppose Abortion. Support the death penalty. I oppose Gay marriage, but I don't oppose Civil Unions, I just don't care.

Abortion - I believe the woman has a right to choose, but only to a point, say halfway through the second trimester. Hypocritical? Maybe, but that's how I feel about it.

Death penalty - all for it. They probably need to do more and speed up the process.

Gay marriage/Civil Unions - I support them. There is no reason not to, IMO.

And while I'm thinking about it -

Gun control - I believe people have the right to bear arms, but like abortion, only to a point. Automatic weapons should not be available to the public, imo. Those should be weapons for the police and military, imo.

Bowser
08-30-2008, 06:26 PM
Bowser, check this thread:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=188076

This is one of the better political quizzes that I"ve seen...

Interesting -


"Your score pegs you as economically centre-leftist and socially moderately libertarian"


The only thing I wish on polls like that is they should have a numbering system 1-10, instaed of just the five options.

Thanks for the link. I guess I'm the next Mao, lol.

Taco John
08-30-2008, 06:27 PM
Interesting -


"Your score pegs you as economically centre-leftist and socially moderately libertarian"


The only thing I wish on polls like that is they should have a numbering system 1-10, instaed of just the five options.

Thanks for the link. I guess I'm the next Mao, lol.



What were your economic and social scores?

wazu
08-30-2008, 06:28 PM
Interesting -


"Your score pegs you as economically centre-leftist and socially moderately libertarian"


The only thing I wish on polls like that is they should have a numbering system 1-10, instaed of just the five options.

Thanks for the link. I guess I'm the next Mao, lol.

I take back what I said. PINKO COMMIE!

tmax63
08-30-2008, 06:28 PM
You're talking full-auto right? They aren't available to the general public now without special licensing. The media does a fine job of making semi-automatic weapons out to be the bad guy but they are just a tool just like a chainsaw or a hammer. It has been shown many times and many places that the people that gun laws target don't pay attention to them anyway and the 99.9% of the people that do follow them aren't the problem.

Saggysack
08-30-2008, 06:28 PM
Abortion - I believe the woman has a right to choose, but only to a point, say halfway through the second trimester. Hypocritical? Maybe, but that's how I feel about it.

Death penalty - all for it. They probably need to do more and speed up the process.

Gay marriage/Civil Unions - I support them. There is no reason not to, IMO.

And while I'm thinking about it -

Gun control - I believe people have the right to bear arms, but like abortion, only to a point. Automatic weapons should not be available to the public, imo. Those should be weapons for the police and military, imo.

Democrat


Ewwwww

BigMeatballDave
08-30-2008, 06:45 PM
I firmly believe there needs to be term limits and make being a politician less of a career field.Could not agree more.

banyon
08-30-2008, 06:46 PM
For my part I'm a progressive. This is different than being a liberal because basically it is a philosophy of preventing concentrations or abuses of power where they may exist. If you believe Lord Acton's axiom "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.", then it's very hard to understand why it would matter whether power were concentrated in public or private hands. IMO, both are a problem right now. There's far too much secrecy and clandestine government activity that the public is not a part of. Additionally corporate wealth and power is at a level that has been unmatched at any time in our history except maybe the turn of the last century. Progressives are for a regulated market system that employs competition, but reduces the harshest effects of capitalism on labor and society in general.

Thus I'm looking for solutions that lead to empowering regular citizens both in their public and private roles. Also, wealth concentration is a big part of power, and the pendulum needs to swing back the other way a bit. The fact that CEO to worker pay has gone from a 20:1 or 30:1 ratio to a 400:1 ratio just in 20 years and that median wages have gone down is something that hasn't happened in this country since the Depression. To keep our country at its best and most productive, we need a vibrant and productive middle class.

Most progressives including myself are also against any curtailing or restriction on basic civil rights.

Also, unlike a lot of progressives, I have a fairly hardline stance on illegal immigration, but that is due to the fact that I see it more as a way that corporate elites use the labor to destroy unions and the ability of workers to negotiate for a fair wage. They also use the illegals to enjoy the ability to maintain substandard working conditions and environmental standards.

Lastly, fiscal responsibility is also a key concern, as sound budgeting practices should never yield the sort of unmanageable debt we've gotten ourself into.

BigMeatballDave
08-30-2008, 06:49 PM
Automatic weapons should not be available to the public, imo. Those should be weapons for the police and military, imo.I agree, but that doesn't matter. Even if all automatic weapons are banned, criminals would still find a way to aquire them.

Mr. Kotter
08-30-2008, 07:02 PM
Democrats tend to be liberal on social and economic issues. Republicans tend to be conservative on social and economic issues. Of course, almost no one is completely liberal or conservative, rather they are a mix of the two. What one thinks is the proper role of government versus personal responsibility, complicates such analysis. Social conservatives and liberal economic types fall into what is most often called a "populist" group, whereas social liberals and conservative economic types would generally be considered libertarians.

This is a brief overview of the political spectrum:

Radical: Seen as being on the far left of the political spectrum, radicals call for wide-sweeping rapid change in the basic structure of the political, social, or economic system. They may be willing to resort to extreme methods to bring about change, including the use of violence and revolution. (Estimated to be 1-3% of the population)

Think jAZ, pennchief, jettio etc.

Liberal: Liberals believe that the government should be actively involved in the promotion of social welfare of a nation's citizens. Liberals usually call for peaceful, gradual change within the existing political system. They reject violent revolution as a way of changing the way things are, often called the status quo. (Approximately 25-30% of the population—usually associated with the Democratic Party in the U.S.)

Think Hamas, Irishjayhawk, banyon, Amnorix etc.

Moderate: Moderates may share viewpoints with both liberals and conservatives. They are seen as tolerant of other people's views, and they do not hold extreme views of their own. They usually advocate a "go-slow" or "wait-and-see" approach to social or political change, but embrace change that they think will benefit the public good. (Approximately 35-40% of the population—may be Republican or Democrat)

Think keginkc, gobowe, Adept Havelock (on the left), BabyLee, BEP, Mr. Kotter (on the right)

Conservative: People who hold conservative ideals favor keeping things the way they are or maintaining the status quo. Conservatives are usually hesitant or cautious about adopting new policies, especially if they involve government activism in some way. They feel that the less government there is, the better. They agree with Jefferson's view that "the best government governs least." (Approximately 25-30% of the population—usually are Republicans)

Think Raiderhader, Cochise, patteeu, Donger, Duckdog

Reactionary: Sitting on the far right of the ideological spectrum, reactionaries want to go back to the way things were-the "good ole days." Often reactionaries are willing to use extreme methods, such as repressive use of government power, to achieve their goals. (Estimated to be 1-3% of the population)


Think T-O-M Ca-sh, Lattimer/Bootlegged, bunnytrdr


Of course, each of us, me included, can be/come across a certain way on a variety of issues, so we can't usually pigeon-hole anyone with 100% accuracy.

Then there is the notion, that the political spectrum is not linear at all, but rather more circular. Finally...just as little, in a meaningful and substantive sense, really separates moderate liberals from moderate conservatives, little really separates radicals on the left, from reactionaries on the right...except for their preferred methods of governing, therefore some find it useful to view the political spectrum as more of a circle.

Logical
08-30-2008, 07:11 PM
I think you need to understand that the parties morph over time. Currently BEP is right and the neo-cons control the republican party so it is not really representative of the conservative movement, primarily because it is not in the least financially conservative and it has a goal of predominately using US power across the world.

Mr. Kotter
08-30-2008, 07:18 PM
I think you need to understand that the parties morph over time. Currently BEP is right and the neo-cons control the republican party so it is not really representative of the conservative movement, primarily because it is not in the least financially conservative and it has a goal of predominately using US power across the world.

Of course, at various times in history, parties may pursue policies that are out of character for them; if that change persists, then the modern view of that philosophical and ideological orientation may need to be revised. The move from classical liberalism, for example, to what we generally thought of as conservatism in the twentieth century is a glaring example. Whether the neocon influence on the Republican party persists past W's presidency or not (I doubt it will) will determine whether or not the definition of modern conservatism needs to be revised.

Logical
08-30-2008, 07:37 PM
Bowser, check this thread:

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=188076

This is one of the better political quizzes that I"ve seen...
My results were

Economic score: +1.68
Social score: -5.39
Your score pegs you as economically centre-capitalist and socially libertarian.
Centre-capitalists often support free trade and low taxes, but take pragmatic stances on economic issues, supporting what they see as the best balance between encouraging business and maintaining free trade.
Social libertarians generally believe that the government should not judge morality, and are generally against the illegalization of things that do not directly affect other people in a negative way. Many strong social libertarians may also be social progressives, favouring legislation to correct what they see as socially backwards governmental regulation, although some simply wish for the government to make little judgment on social matters.

Mr. Kotter
08-30-2008, 07:38 PM
For my part I'm a progressive. This is different than being a liberal because basically it is a philosophy of preventing concentrations or abuses of power where they may exist. If you believe Lord Acton's axiom "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.", then it's very hard to understand why it would matter whether power were concentrated in public or private hands. IMO, both are a problem right now. There's far too much secrecy and clandestine government activity that the public is not a part of. Additionally corporate wealth and power is at a level that has been unmatched at any time in our history except maybe the turn of the last century. Progressives are for a regulated market system that employs competition, but reduces the harshest effects of capitalism on labor and society in general.

Thus I'm looking for solutions that lead to empowering regular citizens both in their public and private roles. Also, wealth concentration is a big part of power, and the pendulum needs to swing back the other way a bit. The fact that CEO to worker pay has gone from a 20:1 or 30:1 ratio to a 400:1 ratio just in 20 years and that median wages have gone down is something that hasn't happened in this country since the Depression. To keep our country at its best and most productive, we need a vibrant and productive middle class.

Most progressives including myself are also against any curtailing or restriction on basic civil rights.

Also, unlike a lot of progressives, I have a fairly hardline stance on illegal immigration, but that is due to the fact that I see it more as a way that corporate elites use the labor to destroy unions and the ability of workers to negotiate for a fair wage. They also use the illegals to enjoy the ability to maintain substandard working conditions and environmental standards.

Lastly, fiscal responsibility is also a key concern, as sound budgeting practices should never yield the sort of unmanageable debt we've gotten ourself into.

All that to say, "I'm a liberal--but not a communist." ;)

Logical
08-30-2008, 07:39 PM
Of course, at various times in history, parties may pursue policies that are out of character for them; if that change persists, then the modern view of that philosophical and ideological orientation may need to be revised. The move from classical liberalism, for example, to what we generally thought of as conservatism in the twentieth century is a glaring example. Whether the neocon influence on the Republican party persists past W's presidency or not (I doubt it will) will determine whether or not the definition of modern conservatism needs to be revised.

I don't know Rob McCain has promised to maintain the Bush tax cuts and pushing US power abroad, sounds neo-con to me.

Mr. Kotter
08-30-2008, 07:44 PM
I don't know Rob McCain has promised to maintain the Bush tax cuts and pushing US power abroad, sounds neo-con to me.

We'll see; I see the neocon view as much more aggressive and arrogant that what I expect out of McCain. Rhetoric, as you know is one thing; policies and actions (as well as priorities) can often be something else.

banyon
08-30-2008, 07:49 PM
All that to say, "I'm a liberal--but not a communist." ;)

Not really, liberals aren't concerned so much with the accumulation of government power. Like Molly Ivins said, "It's focusin' less on who's getting screwed, and more on who's doing the screwin'."(loose paraphrase)

Mr. Kotter
08-30-2008, 07:56 PM
Not really, liberals aren't concerned so much with the accumulation of government power.

Eh, admit it; progressive is just the label liberals have embraced since liberalism became a real pejorative.

:)


Seriously, though.....I understand the distinction you are trying to make, and I think they only difference then between you and most "liberals" then....is you seem less willing to trust the government to bring about the coerced egalitarian society you both envision, and I suppose....you expect it to magically appear around campfires where comrads in tie-dyed shirts have joined hands after a couple of bowls to sing "Kumbayah!"

;)

J Diddy
08-30-2008, 08:01 PM
Eh, admit it; progressive is just the label liberals have embraced since liberalism became a real pejorative.

:)


Seriously, though.....I understand the distinction you are trying to make, and I think they only difference then between you and most "liberals" then....is you seem less willing to trust the government to bring about the coerced egalitarian society you both envision, and I suppose....you expect it to magically appear around campfires where comrads in tie-dyed shirts have joined hands after a couple of bowls to sing "Kumbayah!"

;)

don't argue with him, he'll beat you like a student

:)

Mr Luzcious
08-30-2008, 08:03 PM
Not really, liberals aren't concerned so much with the accumulation of government power. Like Molly Ivins said, "It's focusin' less on who's getting screwed, and more on who's doing the screwin'."(loose paraphrase)

Generally looks pretty much the same from the outside though.

banyon
08-30-2008, 08:15 PM
Generally looks pretty much the same from the outside though.

It's an "address the symptom or the root of the problem" distinciton. I think liberals are more concerned with the effects and effected people a lot of the time, not that I'm unconcerned about them, but it's about the focus.

Direckshun
08-30-2008, 08:24 PM
Bowser...

I will generally say that I support capitalism. It is a means by which competition makes life better for most.

However, in a capitalist system, there are winners, and there are losers. And sometimes people lose so bad in this system that they end up homeless, jobless, and starving.

I support a government safety net for these people, and for many more who need basic necessities to make this life a livable one. I support welfare for the impoverished. Social security for the old. Public education for all. Health care for all. etc.

People shouldn't be struggling to survive. If you're familiar with Maslow's hierarchy of needs, I basically support government help with the first, most basic level.

That's the most basic defense I can make of my beliefs.

Logical
08-30-2008, 08:27 PM
Bowser...

I will generally say that I support capitalism. It is a means by which competition makes life better for most.

However, in a capitalist system, there are winners, and there are losers. And sometimes people lose so bad in this system that they end up homeless, jobless, and starving.

I support a government safety net for these people, and for many more who need basic necessities to make this life a livable one. I support welfare for the impoverished. Social security for the old. Public education for all. Health care for all. etc.

People shouldn't be struggling to survive. If you're familiar with Maslow's hierarchy of needs, I basically support government help with the first, most basic level.

That's the most basic defense I can make of my beliefs.Just curious where you draw the line, is National Health Insurance part of the first level?

Direckshun
08-30-2008, 08:31 PM
Just curious where you draw the line, is National Health Insurance part of the first level?
Universal health insurance. Yes.

Bowser
08-30-2008, 10:29 PM
Thanks, all, for the input. I am trying to be a little more learned about politics in general instead of just making wisecracks about it. And sorry, TJ, I didn't write down my scores. I think they were both in the negative, though. Adam's right, aparently - I'm a damned dirty commie (according to your test, anyway :D ).

Mr. Kotter
08-31-2008, 10:28 AM
Thanks, all, for the input. I am trying to be a little more learned about politics in general instead of just making wisecracks about it. And sorry, TJ, I didn't write down my scores. I think they were both in the negative, though. Adam's right, aparently - I'm a damned dirty commie (according to your test, anyway :D ).

Well, even if you are a commie....you're a decent and good commie. Anyone who shares his Boulevards with an out-of-town tailgate leech like me, well....they can't be all bad.

BTW, could you bring a couple of extras to the Raider, Bronco, and Bills games for me?

;)