Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

What am I? Liberal or Conservative? Republican or Democrat?

page: 2
9
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


Just curious, why would you bother arguing with a person on how they may or may not classify themselves?

It's kind of a personal thing, not really a contentiously debatable issue.




posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 08:48 PM
link   
reply to post by kosmicjack
 


It's not a personal thing, political terms have specific meanings, not what you choose to define it. People will fall into these classifications whether they like it or not. It's just a "I'm a rebel look at me" mentality to deny this.... either that or they are just confused or afraid to admit what they are.



edit on 26-1-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 08:51 PM
link   
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


Believe it or not, people agree with issues on both sides, while also seeing a lot of issues as a waste of time, and both parties love to rage about the non issues. Tried and true. I don't label myself and as far as D or R goes, I loath both parties and while I agree with both sides on issues I never put myself in either box, let alone engage in the endless arguments that always occur when the 2 are in the same room together. Just because you agree with them does not at all mean you must join a side.

Like I said before, politicians from both parties play the game well but behind the scenes its a totally different story. So continue to label and defend your party but I'm here to tell you that you are completely wasting your time... unless of course you really really really enjoy engaging in endless arguments while calling the other guy political names.

Yeah I'm the cool kid.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 08:53 PM
link   
I can not get over the FACT that with over 300 million people in the United States it boils down to which "party" we belong to. It really is stupid if you stop and think about it. Almost like a pay-per-veiw event, both sides put up their best guy then promote them to death to the point where you almost don't want to watch. Meanwhile there is more then likely at least a thousand persons that would better fit the job that get no media or corporate backing for no other reason as they do not have strings protruding from their backs which can be pulled to simulate a sort of action. I myself will stay purple and not expect any change in the distant future, it looks as tho we both have a lot of the same views on the parties so I would say Independent. Its more of a question as to which side you should back if you feel the need to make your vote count so to speak. Seem more rep to me.
edit on 26-1-2013 by Maddog5595 because: correction



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by rival
 


You are an individual and like many Americans, only apply a label because the strangle hold of the party-system requires such. What you exhibit is inherently a product a free citizen, one that can decide for itself and choose how you wish to view the world around you. In the most basic sense, those labels help us identify those who we associated most closely with, but obviously cannot fit into a tidy box as the politicians and news-media wish they could.

Of course, as many move away from the prescribed and entrenched labels, new labels will form that best identify with the sub-group of individuals; another by-product of a free society and freedom of association.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 08:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Swills
 


Both Democrats and Republicans are a pest on Earth.

But political parties have nothing to do with left and right politics. Left and right wing politics are ideologies, not parties. They exist independently from some silly group of humans trying to beat each other at the polls.

There isn't even a left wing party to choose from. Both D&R are rather right wing. Any real leftist isn't going to mess with the democratic party.




Yeah I'm the cool kid.


No, now I just think you're confused, as political parties have nothing to do with believing in right and left wing ideology.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by WaterBottle
The general person is going to agree with one side more than the other, or they are moderate. If you choose not to label yourself, you're not nullifying your beliefs. If you listed them, you would fall into a pre-defined category.


But the very essence of the OP is saying that he is split his beliefs are kind of all over the board and are not easily defined and - even if it is defined - it can be defined as not distinctive toward any one particular political leaning.

Maybe this would be more helpful:

Link to political compass thread



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by rival
 


I agree with your stance on issues.Maybe not totally on 6.Don't know if this help's but I consider myself a Blue Collar Republican.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 09:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Swills
 




Like I said before, politicians from both parties play the game well but behind the scenes its a totally different story.


Yes, someone else pointed out it is all scripted theatrics like the WWE. As a kid we had the pro-wrestling
headquarters in FW at the Cowtown Coliseum and my dad worked security. He told me stories of how
the fighters would beat each other up all night (ostensibly as mortal enemies), .and then go have
breakfast together afterwards. Like ex-Gov, ex-wrestler Jesse Ventura said about politics where
politicians oppose each other publicly but once out of the public view they socially interact
and have dinner and the like...all for show

Politicians, like wrestlers, are simply creating a side to be on--giving people an easy choice to make
and an easy label to attach to themselves. I've always disliked the easy road...always looking
for the one less traveled. It is more interesting to make up your own mind AND more courageous.
edit on 26-1-2013 by rival because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by kosmicjack
 


He sounds like a moderate to me.

But even then, most "moderate" people lean slightly to the left or right a little more.

edit on 26-1-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 09:10 PM
link   
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


Well there you go, we agree and we disagree. My point, as its always been, is to not label yourself and choose a side.
edit on 26-1-2013 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by WaterBottle
reply to post by Swills
 


Both Democrats and Republicans are a pest on Earth.

But political parties have nothing to do with left and right politics. Left and right wing politics are ideologies, not parties. They exist independently from some silly group of humans trying to beat each other at the polls.

There isn't even a left wing party to choose from. Both D&R are rather right wing. Any real leftist isn't going to mess with the democratic party.




Yeah I'm the cool kid.


No, now I just think you're confused, as political parties have nothing to do with believing in right and left wing ideology.


I would say both parties are left wing, because both parties preside over growing government power and neither side has reduced governmental perivew into anything.

The two sides together are totalitarian, as in nothing is beyond government regulation.

In the book "Liberal Fascism" the Repub author Jonah Goldberg claims that the Left, progressive, dems are totalitarian because "nothing is outside of the reach of the humanist philosophical front" (paraphrased), but I think both parties put government everywhere.

Dems are for bigger government and getting reelected,
Repubs are bigger government slower and getting reelected.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 09:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by rival
reply to post by Swills
 




Like I said before, politicians from both parties play the game well but behind the scenes its a totally different story.


Yes, someone else pointed out it is all scripted theatrics like the WWE. As a kid we had the pro-wrestling
headquarters in FW at the Cowtown Coliseum and my dad worked security. He told me stories of how
the fighters would beat each other up all night (ostensibly as mortal enemies), .and then go have
breakfast together afterwards. Like ex-Gov, ex-wrestler Jesse Ventura said about politics where
politicians oppose each other publicly but once out of the public view they socially interact
and have dinner and the like...all for show

Politicians, like wrestlers, are simply creating a side to be on--giving people an easy choice to make
and an easy label to attach to themselves. I've always disliked the easy road...always looking
for the one less traveled. It is more interesting to make up your own mind AND more courageous.
edit on 26-1-2013 by rival because: (no reason given)


According to Murray Rothbard

One Semester of American History, Lecturer Murray Rothbard (in smaller parts)

The original Republicans from the Civil War were New England Prodestants telling everybody what was good for them. The original republicans were big government we-know-best types. The Democrats, from Thomas Jefferson until about 1900, were local government, live and live, leave us alone types. Most Catholics and Lutherans were Democrats.

The switch of Reeps to conservative, "free enterprise", "Defenders of the Constitution" happenned after decades of Reep (Rockefeller and J.P. Morgan) control/influence of the Federal Government, at about the time of the Federal Reserve and WW1.
The switch of the Dems to "Defenders of the Common Man" aka socialists, happenned about the same time.

Both parties switched after the Government had made the monopolies and established the Federal Government as absolute authority over everything

So you could say we were all made Republicans then or that we are all made to be Democrats now.

The Government hasn't grown smaller since the 1820's.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 09:47 PM
link   
reply to post by rival
 

You are Purple (apologies if someone already said this as I only read the OP). Basically you are probably like many who are Fiscally Conservative but Socially Liberal.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 10:29 PM
link   
reply to post by WaterBottle
 



Jefferson's metaphor of a wall of separation has been cited repeatedly by the U.S. Supreme Court. In Reynolds v. United States (1879) the Court wrote that Jefferson's comments "may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the [First] Amendment." In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), Justice Hugo Black wrote: "In the words of Thomas Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect a wall of separation between church and state."[2] However, the Court has not always interpreted the constitutional principle as absolute, and the proper extent of separation between government and religion in the U.S. remains an ongoing subject of impassioned debate.[3][4][5][6]


so the state can't force you to worship any religion.
but i can go on state property and worship, preach to whomever will listen.
the state can use the word god on it's currency and in the pledge of allegiance.

but i nor the state can force you to listen, or to utter the word god.

and it's not the job of the supreme court to interpret the constitution.
read a book...



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by WaterBottle
reply to post by bjax9er
 


How is that liberal? A conservative would not want to establish an empire all over the world and engage in imperialism.

You're not a conservative, you're a neo-con.

edit on 26-1-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)


oh boy here we go.

are Americans ruling over sovereign countries?
no, not one.

if believing in peace through strength makes me a neo-con, then i guess i'am a neo-con.
rather that then a weak little pacifist.

don't hurt me or i'll point my finger at you, you bad person.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Semicollegiate
 





I would say both parties are left wing, because both parties preside over growing government power and neither side has reduced governmental perivew into anything.


You don't understand what the terms left and right wing mean. The extreme left is anarchism, the right wing is statism.

You're extremely politically confused.
edit on 27-1-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by bjax9er
 





if believing in peace through strength


And war is peace. Nice double peak.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 01:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by bjax9er

Originally posted by WaterBottle
reply to post by bjax9er
 


How is that liberal? A conservative would not want to establish an empire all over the world and engage in imperialism.

You're not a conservative, you're a neo-con.

edit on 26-1-2013 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)


oh boy here we go.

are Americans ruling over sovereign countries?
no, not one.

if believing in peace through strength makes me a neo-con, then i guess i'am a neo-con.
rather that then a weak little pacifist.

don't hurt me or i'll point my finger at you, you bad person.





a weak little pacifist.


Also known as a Victim!






top topics



 
9
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join