Beyond the discussion; where do you stand politically?

[RockyTop85]

The Dems and The Repubs have moved farther left.

You should try to keep up sometimes.

Based on what? Deregulation and a tax cut?

You’re saying rhetoric is meaningless. Dems haven’t passed meaningful legislation since 2010.

 

[USAFgolferVol]

Ok, so now we're talking about state level parties.

Yes, I will agree with you when it comes to the TN R party. For the most part it has moved further right on several stupid issues. Thankfully they have remained somewhat fiscally responsible.

I suppose I should have clarified the Republican party in general, but it's still only my opinion

 

[hog88]

I suppose I should have clarified the Republican party in general, but it's still only my opinion

As a whole I wish the Republican party would move further right on fiscal matters.

 

[USAFgolferVol]

As a whole I wish the Republican party would move further right on fiscal matters.

In my lifetime, the Republican party has never been fiscally responsible. Never. I agree wholeheartedly

 

[InVOLuntary]

That's not what I am implying. They've become far too political

Sort of like Ilan Omar? Should evangelicals just SFTU?

 

[USAFgolferVol]

Sort of like Ilan Omar? Should evangelicals just SFTU?

I'm not talking about a fringe element like Omar. No, it's a free country.

 

[InVOLuntary]

I'm not talking about a fringe element like Omar. No, it's a free country.

Then what's your problem. All politicians are going to interject their personal beliefs into politics. Whether that belief structure is based on religion or some other foundation. They're not doing anything anyone else is it's just you don't share those positions so you think they are injecting themselves too much.

 

[AM64]

I have a problem with saying government should stay out of my pocket, but it's OK for government to tell people how to live their lives. The contradiction is that I do believe that we have to have some laws to keep things sane - unfortunately those sometimes infringe upon an individual's freedoms.

Is that typed as you intended? Maybe there should be a "no" instead of an 'a'.
Generally speaking, do you think we have too many, too few, or just about the right number of laws to "keep things sane"?

Yep, I screwed that up. Should have said it something more like

I have a problem with saying "government should stay out of my pocket but it's still OK for government to tell people how to live their lives". Meaning that when you think back to some republican administrations they were supposedly fiscal conservatives but were a bit to big on dictating what a person could do (the moral majority thing). I'm of the variety that I don't care what you do as long as you don't do it in my face or tell me I have to accept or at least believe it's normal ... or ask me to pay for the nonsense. I suppose I have other some weird contradictions in that I believe in the right to assemble and to free speech - but not in the road or on my property, and I don't believe in destruction of private or public property in the name of free speech, and I have a problem with burning or otherwise showing disrespect to flags or other national symbols ... ours and others ... including the Confederate flag.

On fiscal conservatives, I don't think they can exist as long as there are enough of the other type to bring home the bacon. If one group bribes people for votes, the other is forced to do the same or the fiscal conservatives will be removed by the people anyway. It's a destructive policy, but there are no checks in place to stop it once started.

 

[Smokey X]

the one thing that this thread has made abundantly clear to me is that McDad is a great moderator...therefore I nominate him to be the moderator for any future debates of politicians...

I consider this thread to be nited....

Freak, could you please add the nited stamp to the task bar?

 

[happy-go_vol]

Because they've moved the party to the right

Which is needed, i don't think post birth abortions should praised or become law. Can't understand why marxists hate life. I guess when your worldview has no god, i guess life doesn't matter.

 

[USAFgolferVol]

Which is needed, i don't think post birth abortions should praised or become law. Can't understand why marxists hate life. I guess when your worldview has no god, i guess life doesn't matter.

I don't think late term abortions are appropriate either

 

[happy-go_vol]

I don't think late term abortions are appropriate either

Yet you support the party who passes laws that allows babies to die after birth. Over 17,000 babies have been born after a botched abortion and have been allowed to die.

The doctors basically move them to another room and they starve to death. That's the party you support.

 

[McDad]

the one thing that this thread has made abundantly clear to me is that McDad is a great moderator...therefore I nominate him to be the moderator for any future debates of politicians...

I consider this thread to be nited....

Freak, could you please add the nited stamp to the task bar?

Thank you, Smokey.

 

[McDad]

Yet you support the party who passes laws that allows babies to die after birth. Over 17,000 babies have been born after a botched abortion and have been allowed to die.

The doctors basically move them to another room and they starve to death. That's the party you support.

Happy, take this for whatever you think it worth. But very few people align with their party 100%. When USAFgolfer or anyone posts a point of agreement with another person, it doesn't open the door for dialogue to attack based on the party he partially supports. And that advice goes the other way when people come at you with claws out.

 

[happy-go_vol]

Happy, take this for whatever you think it worth. But very few people align with their party 100%. When USAFgolfer or anyone posts a point of agreement with another person, it doesn't open the door for dialogue to attack based on the party he partially supports. And that advice goes the other way when people come at you with claws out.

I understand but how anyone can support a party who believes in death of a baby, the most innocent of human life is just beyond me. Any person who has seen and heard an ultrasound of a heartbeat has to know that its a human and not a bunch of cells. The marxist party continues to expand on what is acceptable to die. Truly sad.

 

[McDad]

I understand but how anyone can support a party who believes in death of a baby, the most innocent of human life is just beyond me. Any person who has seen and heard an ultrasound of a heartbeat has to know that its a human and not a bunch of cells. The marxist party continues to expand on what is acceptable to die. Truly sad.

I understand. It's an issue you're passionate about. And, I am inclined to agree about infanticide.

I'm simply offering up a suggestion to encourage each other where common ground is found even if it is only a sliver of turf.

 

[joevol33]

If this is about the party then they've left me. As a registered ii independent I would typically find candidates that appealed to me on both sides. Both parties are really so far to the left now. The democrats are full on socialist teetering on communism. I'll never vote for another Democrat. Democrats just 20-30 years ago were more conservative than republicans today.

I think Trump is a POS . He's an egomaniac, self centered, scum bag personally but he's a much better alternative than the socialist democrats whose platform is basically:

Higher taxes
Free healthcare for all
Open bordered with free services for anyone that comes
Anti-law and order
Green new deal
Anti 2A
Destroy anyone that gets in their way

That's basically their platform and they seem to be proud of it.

I'm feeling this also

 

[AM64]

I’m really more libertarian in my views now. My old party has changed and I have changed also. But damn... the libertarian party leadership is like the special ed class in school with all the internal arguing

The libertarian party rolls in on the short bus every four years - like they empty out Alice's rabbit hole. The concept is good, but I've yet to meet a sane libertarian (and I met my first dedicated libertarian in 1971). "Idealism" (giving them a lot of latitude here) only goes so far in the real world.

 

[utvolpj]

The libertarian party rolls in on the short bus every four years - like they empty out Alice's rabbit hole. The concept is good, but I've yet to meet a sane libertarian (and I met my first dedicated libertarian in 1971). "Idealism" (giving them a lot of latitude here) only goes so far in the real world.

Because the 2 party system has us in such a good place right now? Would we be in a better place of we had followed that idealism to limit govt, follow the constitution, non-interventionist foreign policy, controlled spending, etc? Guess that's just insane to think

 

[hog88]

Because the 2 party system has us in such a good place right now? Would we be in a better place of we had followed that idealism to limit govt, follow the constitution, non-interventionist foreign policy, controlled spending, etc? Guess that's just insane to think

The Libertarian party doesn't want to put in the work to start at the ground level and get local, state and house members elected. If the party truly wanted to be taken seriously they would start there instead of popping it's head up every 4 years and shooting for the big prize.

 

[utvolpj]

The Libertarian party doesn't want to put in the work to start at the ground level and get local, state and house members elected. If the party truly wanted to be taken seriously they would start there instead of popping it's head up every 4 years and shooting for the big prize.

Has nothing to do with idealism they're being accused of after watching the 2 parties try and see who can destroy us faster. If their ideals were followed would we be in a better or worse place right now?

The irony of the L party is they have to get further involved in govt/politics to remove govt/politics from their lives. It's hard to force people to get more involved when they simply want to be left alone

 

[lukeneyland]

I just want minimal government interference in our lives. I want fiscal responsibility and I want the Fed to stop manipulating our currency for the gain of the powerful banks. I want us to quit being world police, I’m tired of seeing Americans butchered in the Middle East because our powers that be somehow think they can civilize the Muslim world. Leave them be! I’ve never been in love with the Republican Party, but it’s a better option to the mob of Marxist Democrats that will dig our national grave even deeper. I’m also in favor of lowering our corporate tax rate to whatever it needs to be for us to bring back American companies, Detroit is a trash can because we taxed the automotive companies out of the country

 

[hog88]

Has nothing to do with idealism they're being accused of after watching the 2 parties try and see who can destroy us faster. If their ideals were followed would we be in a better or worse place right now?

The irony of the L party is they have to get further involved in govt/politics to remove govt/politics from their lives. It's hard to force people to get more involved when they simply want to be left alone

I question an organizations ideals when they won't put in the work to spread those ideals. The problem with the Libertarians is they like to (almost) preach about their ideals, their altruism and how bad the 2 main parties are. They deride people because they vote for one of the two parties candidates and come back with "it's not my fault, I didn't vote for either".

They are never going to be taken seriously until they start winning elected positions.

 

[McDad]

Because the 2 party system has us in such a good place right now? Would we be in a better place of we had followed that idealism to limit govt, follow the constitution, non-interventionist foreign policy, controlled spending, etc? Guess that's just insane to think

As someone more in tune with Libertarians than ever before, he makes a valid point. The ideals and concepts are better than our current 2 party corruption but if those ideals are not carried by someone seen as grounded or stable, then people are not going to have confidence in the ideals.
One thing the 2 parties understand is the image of a candidate. They work and hone that image so it is appealing to voters. We mostly vote for the person, not the person's agenda. 2016 with Trump is the notable exception when it comes to image. 2016 is the same old when it comes to voting for the person and not the ideas.

 

[McDad]

Has nothing to do with idealism they're being accused of after watching the 2 parties try and see who can destroy us faster. If their ideals were followed would we be in a better or worse place right now?

The irony of the L party is they have to get further involved in govt/politics to remove govt/politics from their lives. It's hard to force people to get more involved when they simply want to be left alone

I completely agree with the irony aspect. How hard it must be to decide to work your butt off to win a seat at the table you inherently wish to dismantle.