It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


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

page: 4
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 07:06 AM
reply to post by rival

I mirror all your points except social programs. I would take social programs above and beyond what we have. I agree with cutting military budget drastically. I am radical left.

posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 09:24 AM
reply to post by rival

You sound like a somewhat conservative Democrat...Unfortunately, there is no Conservative Democrat Party...Probably to narrow it down a little more, you'd have to give your views on Free/Fair Trade, illegal aliens and redistribution of wealth...

posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 10:19 AM
reply to post by Iscool

Rosa Koire is kind of a conservative democrat. She a lesbian and a smart lady fighting against agenda 21.

Rosa Koire Huffington Post Interview

posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 11:13 AM
I'm with whoever has a primary since Florida is a closed primary state. Republican primary I'm a Repub bobbing for the best apple in a barrel of piss...Democrat primary, I'm a Dem bobbing for the best apple in a barrel of vomit.

posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 11:54 AM
I'm basically with you on most accounts except the subsidies for specific energy types.

I think we would see a more efficient market if energy were an actual open market, without the government regulations on how the electricity is created. If you want regulations, they should be on regulating waste and pollution, not on the method.

This is what has kept us away from small-scale nuclear. IMO small-scale nuclear is the only real path forward, wind and solar are nice for peak production, but not reliable enough for an entire energy grid.

posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 01:07 PM

Originally posted by rival
reply to post by newcovenant

How something can be unchecked and over-regulated...

Over-regulated means when someone needs emergency assistance and the red tape involved
adds months to their wait. In my single experience my family had no money for food and it took
over a month. By the time I was approved I was back working and didn't need assistance.

Unchecked refers to the growing number of government social programs since SSI was instated.
The latest, of course, is the Affordable Care Act. At some point government social programs literally
become a robbing of upper wage earners for the benefit of lower wage earners (and the unemployed).
The number of people receiving government assistance is growing rapidly. The US Department of
Health and Human Services reports that 55 million US citizens receive welfare, food stamps, or
unemployment insurance. This is from a pool of 310 million Americans--one person out of
six. When (or if) that number approaches fifty percent it literally becomes a forced transfer of wealth
from the rich to the poor.

Red tape is unfortunately required to verify needs and lessen abuse of a system funded by taxpayers.
If you hadn't been lucky enough to get back to work you might easily have been grateful for assistance and I know there are things like medical care and food stamps you can get immediately and without a wait.

The Affordable Care Act makes it more difficult for upper wage (actually investment) earners to profit from the medical hardships of the lower wage earners when they become injured or sick. Frankly, the Affordable Care Act makes it that much harder for Insurance Companies to kill the poor and it was designed to be a work in progress but all the GOP was concerned with was caps on the value of a human life - to protect buddies sporting unsafe working conditions and other issues that help the employer and screw the worker.

Also that transfer of wealth you speak of is uneven. The poor are paying over 10% of wealth and earnings and the rich through various loopholes and financial laws created by the rich to benefit the rich are paying around 2%. If the rich would pay the same percentage of tax on income we could provide minimum basic needs for the poorest among us and set them on a path to independence that the entire country prospers from. It is smart spending and investing in ourselves.

Discretionary spending, which accounts for roughly one-third of all Federal spending, includes money for things like the Army, FBI, the Coast Guard, and highway projects.

Mandatory spending accounts for two-thirds of all government spending. This kind of spending is authorized by permanent laws. It includes insurance programs like Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and federal retirement and disability programs that provide benefits to federal civilian employees, members of the military, and veterans.

edit on 28-1-2013 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 01:24 PM
What your answers tell me most about you is, you're a woman.

posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 01:45 PM
It doesn't take a genius to know that political parties are BS. I will let the great comedian Chris Rock explain this to you....

Video may have strong language.

posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 03:57 PM
reply to post by mrnotobc

What your answers tell me most about you is, you're a woman.


Because of the pro-women bit?

posted on Jan, 28 2013 @ 04:03 PM
reply to post by WaterBottle

Cutting military spending is liberal? Um's actually fiscally conservative.

Would taking that money and spending it on something more in line with 'liberal' negate it being fiscally conservative to begin with?

I would hope to shift the budget elsewhere.

posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 06:50 PM

Originally posted by rival
I'm having a hard time deciding where I fit in. I've been lumped in with "libtards"
and "right-wing gun nuts" and I'm just wondering is there anyone else like me who
doesn't "fit" the ready made mold of either party.

First of all I want to point something out. You have asked which party line you walk closest to, but what you should be asking, is "am I comfortable with the idea that the system as it stands asks me to fit into any mould, into which I do not automatically find myself pouring."

The fact is, that you have the veiws you have. If you do not find yourself fitting into a mould, feeling synchronicity with a particular group or party, then you should vote against the power parties. You should actually take the time to find out what political movements are actually out there (its likely more than you think) and get involved with a group outside of the mainstream of political debate. Alternatively, if you feel your view is shared by other people, who are without representation, without a unified front from which to state thier veiws in a national forum, then think about starting one yourself!

There are that many people in your nation, that you cannot possibly be alone in the way you think, and the conclusions you draw. Wether they are right or not, or popular or not, who can say without finding out? If you are not comfortable being put in a box, then my advice would be to stay outside the box.

top topics

<< 1  2  3   >>

log in