|
|
For what ever the reason our thread has been tossed, so let's keep it going!! If you could choose the top dogs to run the White House, who and what position? My cabinet is as follows: - President: B. Obama - V.P.: John Edwards - Secretary of Defense: Joe Biden - Secretary of State: Hillary Clinton - Secretary of Treasury Dept.: Ron Paul - Head of Environmenntal Protection Agency: Al Gore -- THE TRUTH ll: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zG4sOyfoOg&feature=related
|
Posts:
4,723
Registered:
3/25/07
|
|
(7944 of 7959)
Dec 2, 2009 5:33 PM
|
> > > > Probably the best democracy would be
> one
> > where
> > > > politcal parties were constantly
> rising up
> > and
> > > then
> > > > dying out all the time.
> > >
> > > And dead ones that we now realize were
> right
> > all
> > > along are resurrected.......
> > >
> > > I will start by bringing back the Bull
> Moose
> > > Party.....
> >
> > Yeah. A party with basic ideas that lasts until
> it
> > attracts too many people who differ with respect
> to
> > other issues. Once the party gets to the point
> that
> > to be a member includes having to sign on to
> > disagreeable other issues, its time for a new
> party
> > to emerge.
>
> > > > Probably the best democracy would be
> one
> > where
> > > > politcal parties were constantly
> rising up
> > and
> > > then
> > > > dying out all the time.
> > >
> > > And dead ones that we now realize were
> right
> > all
> > > along are resurrected.......
> > >
> > > I will start by bringing back the Bull
> Moose
> > > Party.....
> >
> > Yeah. A party with basic ideas that lasts until
> it
> > attracts too many people who differ with respect
> to
> > other issues. Once the party gets to the point
> that
> > to be a member includes having to sign on to
> > disagreeable other issues, its time for a new
> party
> > to emerge.
>
> Kind of like Muslims splitting into Shia and Sunni.
> Maybe have Shia West and Shia East battling it out in
> the future once they have their own land.
>
> And Sunni splitting into on their own lol.
>
> This is why I find this stupid. Individuals are
> individuals, nobody sees things the same. As a voter,
> the best you can do is find somebody that's the most
> compatible to your beliefs. Or somebody who can argue
> their points effectively about solving certain
> problems, and convince you that his way can work and
> that he will do it.
>
> Thinking that they will do all this because they have
> the same Gang affilliation as you shouldn't be the
> way to go.
Yes, True. A hefty chunk of people dont even take the time to really formulate an opinion, though. They just get their belief system "off the rack".
An example of getting roped into something that you dont like due to having chosen the person that you trust most on a particular issue of importance is the 2004 election. Many independents went towards "W" because it made them feel safer, but under normal circumstances wouldn't have been able to vote for him due to not agreeing with the fetus saving and gay bashing agendas. Of course, in the 2006 and 2008 elections, there was an opportunity to correct the cognitive dissonance that those voters likely felt, and people seized it.
Politics is about marketing. The more you get draw in, the more viable you become. So, its only natural that a political party that wants to actually get some people into office will eventually evolve into a big mess of issues that cause riffs within. That's when you hope a new party emerges that preserves particular main beliefs, and brings with it the side issue beliefs that match up with your own. Then, it comes down, as always, to "may the party that attracts the most members win".
|
|
|
Posts:
3,436
Registered:
2/23/08
|
|
(7943 of 7959)
Dec 2, 2009 5:07 PM
|
>
> That philosophy is generally thought to libertarian
> though......that is what I consider myself.
Yes but you also claim to be a Republican don't you? You're registered to a group where the majority of your members, according to you aren't going by the TRUE Republican principals.
Your principals, because who's to tell anybody how they should be, to be considered real Republicans.
Now you take away the labels, and the arguement/problem is pretty much over isn't it? Do all self-proclaimed libertarians see it your way? Doesn't Glen Beck say that he is a Libertarian?
|
|
|
Posts:
3,436
Registered:
2/23/08
|
|
(7942 of 7959)
Dec 2, 2009 5:00 PM
|
> > > Probably the best democracy would be one
> where
> > > politcal parties were constantly rising up
> and
> > then
> > > dying out all the time.
> >
> > And dead ones that we now realize were right
> all
> > along are resurrected.......
> >
> > I will start by bringing back the Bull Moose
> > Party.....
>
> Yeah. A party with basic ideas that lasts until it
> attracts too many people who differ with respect to
> other issues. Once the party gets to the point that
> to be a member includes having to sign on to
> disagreeable other issues, its time for a new party
> to emerge.
> > > Probably the best democracy would be one
> where
> > > politcal parties were constantly rising up
> and
> > then
> > > dying out all the time.
> >
> > And dead ones that we now realize were right
> all
> > along are resurrected.......
> >
> > I will start by bringing back the Bull Moose
> > Party.....
>
> Yeah. A party with basic ideas that lasts until it
> attracts too many people who differ with respect to
> other issues. Once the party gets to the point that
> to be a member includes having to sign on to
> disagreeable other issues, its time for a new party
> to emerge.
Kind of like Muslims splitting into Shia and Sunni. Maybe have Shia West and Shia East battling it out in the future once they have their own land.
And Sunni splitting into on their own lol.
This is why I find this stupid. Individuals are individuals, nobody sees things the same. As a voter, the best you can do is find somebody that's the most compatible to your beliefs. Or somebody who can argue their points effectively about solving certain problems, and convince you that his way can work and that he will do it.
Thinking that they will do all this because they have the same Gang affilliation as you shouldn't be the way to go.
|
|
|
Posts:
14,693
Registered:
2/19/02
|
|
(7941 of 7959)
Dec 2, 2009 4:54 PM
|
> I once heard Jessie Ventura say that he is a social
> liberal and a fiscal conservative.
> That's not centrist, moderate, liberal or
> conservative. That's independent. You might like
> thing about him and not the other. Then again you
> might like both.
That philosophy is generally thought to libertarian though......that is what I consider myself.
> I don't see how they could start a one-issue party,
> wouldn't that just be like interest groups, which we
> already have now. Anti-War groups, Health reform
> groups etc,. Abortion.
>
> Unless you are a single-issue voter and don't care
> about anything else, then it could work.
There are plenty of single issue lobbying groups. They sound like that.....
|
|
|
Posts:
4,723
Registered:
3/25/07
|
|
(7940 of 7959)
Dec 2, 2009 4:53 PM
|
> > Probably the best democracy would be one where
> > politcal parties were constantly rising up and
> then
> > dying out all the time.
>
> And dead ones that we now realize were right all
> along are resurrected.......
>
> I will start by bringing back the Bull Moose
> Party.....
Yeah. A party with basic ideas that lasts until it attracts too many people who differ with respect to other issues. Once the party gets to the point that to be a member includes having to sign on to disagreeable other issues, its time for a new party to emerge.
|
|
|
Posts:
14,693
Registered:
2/19/02
|
|
|
Posts:
3,436
Registered:
2/23/08
|
|
(7938 of 7959)
Dec 2, 2009 4:51 PM
|
\Given that people are drawn to groups, and in
> consideration of what you were saying about
> independent lines of thought, rather than lock,
> stock, and barrel type belief conformity, starting a
> political party that focuses on issues one at a time,
> and expressly from a functional standpoint, wouldnt
> be a bad idea.
I once heard Jessie Ventura say that he is a social liberal and a fiscal conservative.
That's not centrist, moderate, liberal or conservative. That's independent. You might like one thing about him and not the other. Then again you might like both.
I don't see how they could start a one-issue party, wouldn't that just be like interest groups, which we already have now. Anti-War groups, Health reform groups etc,. Abortion.
Unless you are a single-issue voter and don't care about anything else, then it could work.
|
|
|
Posts:
14,693
Registered:
2/19/02
|
|
(7937 of 7959)
Dec 2, 2009 4:47 PM
|
> Probably the best democracy would be one where
> politcal parties were constantly rising up and then
> dying out all the time.
And dead ones that we now realize were right all along are resurrected.......
I will start by bringing back the Bull Moose Party.....
|
|
|
Posts:
4,723
Registered:
3/25/07
|
|
(7936 of 7959)
Dec 2, 2009 4:45 PM
|
|
Probably the best democracy would be one where politcal parties were constantly rising up and then dying out all the time.
|
|
|
Posts:
4,723
Registered:
3/25/07
|
|
(7935 of 7959)
Dec 2, 2009 4:35 PM
|
|
Lieberbag
|
|
|
Posts:
4,723
Registered:
3/25/07
|
|
(7934 of 7959)
Dec 2, 2009 4:32 PM
|
> > > > > Do you realize that you're
> starting
> > to
> > > sound
> > > > like a
> > > > > elitist liberal snob right? I
> talked
> > to Ron
> > > Paul
> > > > and
> > > > > even he told me to take your
> public
> > option
> > > with
> > > > you
> > > > > to the democratic side.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Edited by Conservative101 at
> > 12/02/2009
> > > 12:16 PM
> > > > PST
> > > >
> > > > I don't know what elitist liberal
> snobs
> > sound
> > > like,
> > > > please post a quote from one and
> explain
> > what
> > > makes
> > > > them liberal, elitist and a snob.
> > > >
> > > > I know thats what congressman Paul
> > said.....but
> > > > former President Teddy Roosevelt and
> Ludwig
> > Von
> > > Mises
> > > > (the Economic theorist Ron Paul
> favors)
> > says
> > > there is
> > > > NOTHING wrong with a public option.
> > > >
> > > > Even if there was NO Republican figure
> who
> > ever
> > > > entertained the idea of the
> government
> > helping
> > > to
> > > > fund healthcare so what?
> > > >
> > > > Diversity of thought with in any group
> is
> > a
> > > good
> > > > thing.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Edited by Fudo_Maiyo at 12/02/2009
> 12:47 PM
> > PST
> > >
> > > Hence why imo there shouldn't be any
> labels
> > attached
> > > to anybody. It would be much simpler if
> there
> > were no
> > > political parties and just people with
> ideas.
> > >
> > > Not only can you be diverse that way,
> without
> > anybody
> > > accusing you of straying away from your
> parties
> > > principals (and who's to say what those
> are)...
> > > BUT... those who are thinking about doing
> > something
> > > that they think is right won't have to
> choose
> > between
> > > Party Loyalty and doing the right thing.
> > >
> > > Also there wouldnt' be any preconceived
> notions
> > about
> > > you without the "R" and "D" or whatever
> next to
> > your
> > > name.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Edited by CroatianSensation at 12/02/2009
> 1:15
> > PM PST
> >
> > Problem is that people categorize by nature and
> are
> > attracted to groups. People feel more secure
> about
> > themselves and their ideas in groups.
>
> I guess you're right. I just find it funny every time
> I watch a segment on the cable news about
> Conservative Democrats this, Liberal Republicans
> that.
>
> This guy is centrist, that guy is Moderate. Much
> easier without all that.
>
> And then the people considered far-right can just be
> known as idiots, and those who are far-left known as
> naive.
Given that people are drawn to groups, and in consideration of what you were saying about independent lines of thought, rather than lock, stock, and barrel type belief conformity, starting a political party that focuses on issues one at a time, and expressly from a functional standpoint, wouldnt be a bad idea.
|
|
|
Posts:
14,693
Registered:
2/19/02
|
|
(7933 of 7959)
Dec 2, 2009 4:28 PM
|
croat
I think there should be two labels.....Douchebag or not.
Example.....Joe Lieberman = DOUCHEBAG!
(Insert the name of a politician you disagree with but have no doubt that they vote their conscience) = NOT.
--
Edited by Fudo_Maiyo at 12/02/2009 1:30 PM PST
|
|
|
Posts:
3,436
Registered:
2/23/08
|
|
(7932 of 7959)
Dec 2, 2009 4:27 PM
|
> > > > Do you realize that you're starting
> to
> > sound
> > > like a
> > > > elitist liberal snob right? I talked
> to Ron
> > Paul
> > > and
> > > > even he told me to take your public
> option
> > with
> > > you
> > > > to the democratic side.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Edited by Conservative101 at
> 12/02/2009
> > 12:16 PM
> > > PST
> > >
> > > I don't know what elitist liberal snobs
> sound
> > like,
> > > please post a quote from one and explain
> what
> > makes
> > > them liberal, elitist and a snob.
> > >
> > > I know thats what congressman Paul
> said.....but
> > > former President Teddy Roosevelt and Ludwig
> Von
> > Mises
> > > (the Economic theorist Ron Paul favors)
> says
> > there is
> > > NOTHING wrong with a public option.
> > >
> > > Even if there was NO Republican figure who
> ever
> > > entertained the idea of the government
> helping
> > to
> > > fund healthcare so what?
> > >
> > > Diversity of thought with in any group is
> a
> > good
> > > thing.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Edited by Fudo_Maiyo at 12/02/2009 12:47 PM
> PST
> >
> > Hence why imo there shouldn't be any labels
> attached
> > to anybody. It would be much simpler if there
> were no
> > political parties and just people with ideas.
> >
> > Not only can you be diverse that way, without
> anybody
> > accusing you of straying away from your parties
> > principals (and who's to say what those are)...
> > BUT... those who are thinking about doing
> something
> > that they think is right won't have to choose
> between
> > Party Loyalty and doing the right thing.
> >
> > Also there wouldnt' be any preconceived notions
> about
> > you without the "R" and "D" or whatever next to
> your
> > name.
> >
> > --
> > Edited by CroatianSensation at 12/02/2009 1:15
> PM PST
>
> Problem is that people categorize by nature and are
> attracted to groups. People feel more secure about
> themselves and their ideas in groups.
I guess you're right. I just find it funny every time I watch a segment on the cable news about Conservative Democrats this, Liberal Republicans that.
This guy is centrist, that guy is Moderate. Much easier without all that.
And then the people considered far-right can just be known as idiots, and those who are far-left known as naive.
|
|
|
Posts:
4,723
Registered:
3/25/07
|
|
(7931 of 7959)
Dec 2, 2009 4:18 PM
|
> > > Do you realize that you're starting to
> sound
> > like a
> > > elitist liberal snob right? I talked to Ron
> Paul
> > and
> > > even he told me to take your public option
> with
> > you
> > > to the democratic side.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Edited by Conservative101 at 12/02/2009
> 12:16 PM
> > PST
> >
> > I don't know what elitist liberal snobs sound
> like,
> > please post a quote from one and explain what
> makes
> > them liberal, elitist and a snob.
> >
> > I know thats what congressman Paul said.....but
> > former President Teddy Roosevelt and Ludwig Von
> Mises
> > (the Economic theorist Ron Paul favors) says
> there is
> > NOTHING wrong with a public option.
> >
> > Even if there was NO Republican figure who ever
> > entertained the idea of the government helping
> to
> > fund healthcare so what?
> >
> > Diversity of thought with in any group is a
> good
> > thing.
> >
> > --
> > Edited by Fudo_Maiyo at 12/02/2009 12:47 PM PST
>
> Hence why imo there shouldn't be any labels attached
> to anybody. It would be much simpler if there were no
> political parties and just people with ideas.
>
> Not only can you be diverse that way, without anybody
> accusing you of straying away from your parties
> principals (and who's to say what those are)...
> BUT... those who are thinking about doing something
> that they think is right won't have to choose between
> Party Loyalty and doing the right thing.
>
> Also there wouldnt' be any preconceived notions about
> you without the "R" and "D" or whatever next to your
> name.
>
> --
> Edited by CroatianSensation at 12/02/2009 1:15 PM PST
Problem is that people categorize by nature and are attracted to groups. People feel more secure about themselves and their ideas in groups.
|
|
|
Posts:
3,436
Registered:
2/23/08
|
|
(7930 of 7959)
Dec 2, 2009 4:07 PM
|
> > Do you realize that you're starting to sound
> like a
> > elitist liberal snob right? I talked to Ron Paul
> and
> > even he told me to take your public option with
> you
> > to the democratic side.
> >
> > --
> > Edited by Conservative101 at 12/02/2009 12:16 PM
> PST
>
> I don't know what elitist liberal snobs sound like,
> please post a quote from one and explain what makes
> them liberal, elitist and a snob.
>
> I know thats what congressman Paul said.....but
> former President Teddy Roosevelt and Ludwig Von Mises
> (the Economic theorist Ron Paul favors) says there is
> NOTHING wrong with a public option.
>
> Even if there was NO Republican figure who ever
> entertained the idea of the government helping to
> fund healthcare so what?
>
> Diversity of thought with in any group is a good
> thing.
>
> --
> Edited by Fudo_Maiyo at 12/02/2009 12:47 PM PST
Hence why imo there shouldn't be any labels attached to anybody. It would be much simpler if there were no political parties and just people with ideas.
Not only can you be diverse that way, without anybody accusing you of straying away from your parties principals (and who's to say what those are)... BUT... those who are thinking about doing something that they think is right won't have to choose between Party Loyalty and doing the right thing.
Also there wouldnt' be any preconceived notions about you without the "R" and "D" or whatever next to your name.
--
Edited by CroatianSensation at 12/02/2009 1:15 PM PST
|
|
|
|
|
