Why Clinton is (probably) the best choice still for a classic liberal

Can you please call it something other than classic liberalism. That label is taken and stands for freedom, free markets, and property rights.

Here is classic liberalism
Definition of Classic Liberalism

Intellectual sources: John Locke, Adam Smith, Say, Ricardo. Not even close to what you are describing or trying to save.

In the US other names of it are moderate libertarians and constitutionalist.

How about paleoliberalism as the word for what you are trying to describe.


originally posted by: nobunaga
"she will say anything and change nothing"
- barack obama 2008

pretty much sums it up. if i actually could believe a word out of her mouth, maybe id vote for her.
instead i will be voting for trump
why?
hillary wants more refugees, i want to feel safe
hillary is paid for by saudi arabia, trump is not
hillary wants to grant amnesty, which is bs... trump wants to allow them to stay, but pay back taxes
hillary is for open borders, trump wants to protect me and my family
GUNS!!!!!!!!!!! HILLARY DOESNT WANT THEM AND WANTS TO ABOLISH THE 2ND AMENDMENT!
theres a reason the border patrol, and the NRA has backed trump. we have a right to defend ourselves, and clinton wants to take that away
clinton is bought by wall street, trump self funded, and has received 19k only from wall street
hillarys husband committed sex crimes in the oval office, and her daughter was spoon fed with a golden spoon since birth, including getting a 900k a year job with her parents foundation when graduating
trumps kids are amazing, his wife is amazing and highly intelligent

hillary has strings tied to her from every country on this planet. im sure russia, mexico, china, and many other countries have hacked her email and have all kinds of information they can use to bribe hillary
trump is tied to nobody

trump is in good health, and ready to fight for us
hillary cant stand up without help, shes throwing up green balls, has amnesia, hasnt talked to the press in a year, she may have a serious medical issue, enough to have a doctor and an ambulance in her cavalcade

trump has balls of steel, and will stand up for us, and fight for us domestically and foreign
all hillary has is " its my turn"

yeah what he said times 2!

a reply to: SaturnFX

She doesn't want to take away guns. And you are 100% correct about the 2nd amendment. She can't get it abolished.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: SaturnFX

She doesn't want to take away guns. And you are 100% correct about the 2nd amendment. She can't get it abolished.

No, but the NRA, the GOP, and Scalia (+ other Right Wing judges) - - - can define what they state the 2nd amendment means today and make it law.

Even though what it actually means has never been established.

originally posted by: jellyrev
Can you please call it something other than classic liberalism. That label is taken and stands for freedom, free markets, and property rights.

Here is classic liberalism
Definition of Classic Liberalism

Intellectual sources: John Locke, Adam Smith, Say, Ricardo. Not even close to what you are describing or trying to save.

In the US other names of it are moderate libertarians and constitutionalist.

How about paleoliberalism as the word for what you are trying to describe.


It can be open to debate.
Lets for instance discuss property rights and the EPA.
you can suggest the EPA and the homeowner classic liberal would be at odds, but I disagree. who owns the air on your property that the company down the street pollutes? Who owns the water that is being poisoned by that company?
the EPA is a reaction to events that effect property rights.
almost everything on that list, and how I describe it, does translate into those things..liberty, property rights, self determination, free open markets (a monopoly is a very non free market thing for instance...or at least the final stage and destroyer of..)

But I do fluctuate and call it civil libertarian-ism, although that doesn't fit completely either.

originally posted by: SaturnFX
So, I have been steadily kicking the progressive element and the dullard far leftists for over a year now, and with good reason. I find the progressive social "justice" being pushed to be about as anti-liberal as there ever has been. a cancer and stain on the whole idealism of what liberalism is founded on.

Don't even understand what you are talking about. Social justice is the core flippity flap of Marx from day 1. Without it the libs, the left have nothing from the union days and even the pre WWII anti capitalism flapping's. Lenin, Chairman whats his name ect. They have about taken the world over and ruined this country on this fappage. What are you talking about social justice is "anti-lib"

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: SaturnFX

She doesn't want to take away guns. And you are 100% correct about the 2nd amendment. She can't get it abolished.

No, but the NRA, the GOP, and Scalia (+ other Right Wing judges) - - - can define what they state the 2nd amendment means today and make it law.

Even though what it actually means has never been established.

I don't give a dam what any of them think about it as I can read.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: SaturnFX

She doesn't want to take away guns. And you are 100% correct about the 2nd amendment. She can't get it abolished.

What they are trying to do is to get us to believe they can. They will burry it in laws and forget original intent of the dam thing. They will make the constitution "of no effect" by compounding bullskiff upon layers of skiff until the statues and laws will be discussed and not the constitution itself.

originally posted by: jellyrev
Can you please call it something other than classic liberalism. That label is taken and stands for freedom, free markets, and property rights.

Here is classic liberalism
Definition of Classic Liberalism

Intellectual sources: John Locke, Adam Smith, Say, Ricardo. Not even close to what you are describing or trying to save.

In the US other names of it are moderate libertarians and constitutionalist.

How about paleoliberalism as the word for what you are trying to describe.


I love you Jelly Rev.

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: SaturnFX
So, I have been steadily kicking the progressive element and the dullard far leftists for over a year now, and with good reason. I find the progressive social "justice" being pushed to be about as anti-liberal as there ever has been. a cancer and stain on the whole idealism of what liberalism is founded on.

Don't even understand what you are talking about. Social justice is the core flippity flap of Marx from day 1. Without it the libs, the left have nothing from the union days and even the pre WWII anti capitalism flapping's. Lenin, Chairman whats his name ect. They have about taken the world over and ruined this country on this fappage. What are you talking about social justice is "anti-lib"

Going with the definition of liberalism, not the laymans complaint

: the quality or state of being liberal
2
a often capitalized : a movement in modern Protestantism emphasizing intellectual liberty and the spiritual and ethical content of Christianity
b : a theory in economics emphasizing individual freedom from restraint and usually based on free competition, the self-regulating market, and the gold standard
c : a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of political and civil liberties; specifically : such a philosophy that considers government as a crucial instrument for amelioration of social inequities (as those involving race, gender, or class)
d capitalized : the principles and policies of a Liberal party

C is what you are suggesting is the only thing liberalism is, and that somehow it is actually the reverse.
Where liberalism (using C) see's social inequalities such as the right to vote, equal pay act, etc, a anti-liberal will be working against such equalities, by creating black or white only areas, giving extra consessions based on skintone or gender (gender being a bit more murky as some consessions do need to happen simply based on biology, but not much).

This country is not "ruined" because of social security, food stamp program, equal rights, etc etc etc..if it is, then the country was no good from the start.

this new liberal movement, the movement going against every definition posted there, the ones who (ironically?) call themselves progressive is the problem.
A bit like how the religious fundamentalist pro bloated military spending, supermax police state types call themselves conservative when they simply mock the very core values of conservatism.

Both sides have radicals, and the radicals on both sides have far too much power. its why rational debate seemingly has left the building, and also why the sides themselves are fracturing

originally posted by: Logarock

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: SaturnFX

She doesn't want to take away guns. And you are 100% correct about the 2nd amendment. She can't get it abolished.

No, but the NRA, the GOP, and Scalia (+ other Right Wing judges) - - - can define what they state the 2nd amendment means today and make it law.

Even though what it actually means has never been established.

I don't give a dam what any of them think about it as I can read.

Think? Did I say anything about think?

I stated fact.

a reply to: Annee

As far as I can tell it provides for an armed militia that the then sparsely populated states could call on if national defense was needed.

Do we anticipate a zombie apocalypse?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Annee

As far as I can tell it provides for an armed militia that the then sparsely populated states could call on if national defense was needed.

Do we anticipate a zombie apocalypse?

I am a gun owner and have researched the 2nd - - and opinions on what it actually means.

Truthfully, no one really knows what it actually means. That's a fact.

Although, the NRA people will argue that.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Had to go read up on Classical Liberalism. No, don't think Hillary is about over throwing the monarch.

She seems more Modern Liberalism

Modern Liberalism is a response to problems brought about by Classical Liberalism. - The power of monarchs was quickly replaced by the power of huge business and corporate elite. Class systems were still present, just switched around. This has led to government regulation of corporations. - Pure capitalism also resulted in, through excessive speculation, in the Great Depression. That is what people mean when the refer to "bubbles bursting." The government then gave itself the duty of moderating the economy to prevent it from happening again. - Modern Liberalism also has many social implication. It has much more to do with social equality than Classical. It pushes to give the most people possible access to a modern, high standard of living. It also has a values of sustainability and international peace. www.quora.com...

The best choice for a classical liberal among the current crop would be Gary Johnson.

It's all like cafeteria food set up for a mob. None of it is going to appeal in a big way, but the choices end up being the most palatable for the largest number. Or for the mathematically analogous, the lowest common denominator .

a reply to: SaturnFX

No.

Both Dr. Jill Stein and Gary Johnson are way better.
Hillary is a social progressive.
Gary Johnson is a classical liberal. So vote for him if your a classical liberal.