A Poll for Conservatives (and Libertarians)

Please mark all that are true. Do not vote unless you are conservative or libertarian.

Libertarian....

none of the above....not in the form they are presented, anyways.

Thrilla said:

Libertarian....

none of the above....not in the form they are presented, anyways.

Click to expand...

****! I forgot that I was supposed to make one option "I am a Conservative or Libertarian" so it would show that you voted but did not vote for anything else. Oh well, this poll is now a failure.

*Edit: I just sent a message to a mod and hopefully he'll edit the last option to say that.

whysoserious said:

****! I forgot that I was supposed to make one option "I am a Conservative or Libertarian" so it would show that you voted but did not vote for anything else. Oh well, this poll is now a failure.

*Edit: I just sent a message to a mod and hopefully he'll edit the last option to say that.

Click to expand...

I voted for all except 2nd and last option.

digsbe fixed the poll so now everyone is counted whether they agree with any of the options or not. Thanks again, digsbe.

meh, no biggie.. people who want to participate will let their opinions be known regardless.

the problem with polls presented by one side of the political spectrum, and aimed at the other side, is that there will be bias present... and even a few strawmen-like options.
for example , your last option..
"If we removed all regulations, the free market would benefit everyone." is a not an accurate representation of conservative or libertarian dogma.. it's representative of anarchy.
neither libertarians nor conservatives espouse the desire to remove all regulations.
proponents of fewer regulations, who are primarily conservatives and libertarians, can't honestly vote for your last option.

it's also not good form to offer an option that entails a preset cause.
for example..
"Most universities and institutions of science are liberal leaning because of grant money."
what if a person thinks these universities are liberal for a reason other than "....because of grant money"?

it's imperative to present the options in the most unbiased fashion possible

Thrilla said:

"If we removed all regulations, the free market would benefit everyone." is a not an accurate representation of conservative or libertarian dogma.. it's representative of anarchy.
neither libertarians nor conservatives espouse the desire to remove all regulations.
proponents of fewer regulations, who are primarily conservatives and libertarians, can't honestly vote for your last option.

Click to expand...

That's why I didn't vote for that option. I want fewer, even much less regulation in the market, but certainly not no regulation at all.

Also, "AGW is not real" in the context of how libs sell it. The climate is changing, but it's not the apocalypses liberals propheci.

I know population wasn't on th list, but folks will discover that we could actually be in a low-population crisis within a couple hounded years.

"Abortion is murder". Not always, as homicide can and frequently is justified. I went ahead and agreed with it because abortion today is being used irresponsibly.

Thrilla said:

Libertarian....

none of the above....not in the form they are presented, anyways.

Click to expand...

Agreed. I had to give a second thought over the votes I did make.

whysoserious said:

digsbe fixed the poll so now everyone is counted whether they agree with any of the options or not. Thanks again, digsbe.

Click to expand...

No problem, I'm glad I could help.

Absolutely. While a few of the options were fine, most were so ridiculously biased as written that I couldn't, in good conscience, vote for them.

Thrilla said:

meh, no biggie.. people who want to participate will let their opinions be known regardless.

the problem with polls presented by one side of the political spectrum, and aimed at the other side, is that there will be bias present... and even a few strawmen-like options.
for example , your last option..
"If we removed all regulations, the free market would benefit everyone." is a not an accurate representation of conservative or libertarian dogma.. it's representative of anarchy.
neither libertarians nor conservatives espouse the desire to remove all regulations.
proponents of fewer regulations, who are primarily conservatives and libertarians, can't honestly vote for your last option.

it's also not good form to offer an option that entails a preset cause.
for example..
"Most universities and institutions of science are liberal leaning because of grant money."
what if a person thinks these universities are liberal for a reason other than "....because of grant money"?

it's imperative to present the options in the most unbiased fashion possible

Click to expand...

I tried to make them as straightforward as possible. I am a biased person, as we all are, so I wouldn't be surprised if there was some hint in there, but I also tried to only include things I have read on this board. For instance, as far as removing regulations, a few days ago I had this argument with a libertarian on this board:

Henrin on removing regulations

As I argued before there is no need for regulations. There is merely a need for courts with access and punishments.

Click to expand...

Now I see your point about the universities and scientific institutions option, but I did not want the question to only be them being liberal. I think we'd all agree that most universities are liberal, but there is definitely a group of people who believe that these political leanings are a direct result of the funding received. I am fine with the fact that none of these options don't fit you, but I think almost every one of these options will fit someone's point of view on this board.

Jerry said:

That's why I didn't vote for that option. I want fewer, even much less regulation in the market, but certainly not no regulation at all.

Also, "AGW is not real" in the context of how libs sell it. The climate is changing, but it's not the apocalypses liberals propheci.

I know population wasn't on th list, but folks will discover that we could actually be in a low-population crisis within a couple hounded years.

"Abortion is murder". Not always, as homicide can and frequently is justified. I went ahead and agreed with it because abortion today is being used irresponsibly.

Click to expand...

Yes, but AGW is the belief that man causes the climate change. As far as the "Abortion is murder" option, do you not think there are some that agree? If you don't agree then don't mark it.

*Edit to add:

By the way, so far there is only one choice that hasn't been picked out of 5 voters, so they cannot be that poorly written (and that choice will obviously be selected eventually judging by the threads currently open on the subject).

Thrilla said:

Libertarian....

none of the above....not in the form they are presented, anyways.

Click to expand...

yeah, this seems a way to reduce a paragraph argument into a bullet point strawman.

If you are poor it is your own fault.

Click to expand...

generally poverty is the result of behavior - the most common cause of poverty is divorce or not marrying the parent of your children. according to Pew Research, the next most likely indicator is if you have used crack. the fourth is if you failed to graduate high school. certainly not all poor are poor because of their decisions, but the wide majority who remain poor are poor because of their behaviors.

The poor should not be able to vote or their vote should count less.

Click to expand...

we've addressed this in the other thread. those who live off the subsistence of others should not be given the ability to wield the coercive power of the state to threaten those others with retribution if they do not give them ever-increasing amounts.

We should institute a flat tax, remove unions, remove minimum wage, and cut welfare.

Click to expand...

flat tax with a floor -yes, remove unions - only government ones, remove minimum wage - yes, reduce welfare expenditures in reforms of the system that produce superior results at less cost - yes.

Abortion is murder.

Click to expand...

A baby is a baby. Killing babies because they are inconvenient, yes, is murder.

Most universities and institutions of science are liberal leaning because of grant money.

Click to expand...

yes and no - grant money pulls, but most universities are liberal leaning because of the faculty.

The United States is a Christian nation.

Click to expand...

we are a faithful agnostic nation within the general historical framework of Christianity.

The death penalty is an important part of the justice system.

Click to expand...

yes and should be applied much more rapidly and publicly.

AGW is not real.

Click to expand...

certainly we have learned that the "overwhelming science behind it" seems to have been all-too-often the product of book-cooking or expulsion of contradicting evidence and interpretations of data. i would say that we have nothing near the kind of certainty or ability to effect any AGW that is going on to wreck our economy based off of...

We should not invest in alternative energy but should instead focus on fossil fuels and drilling.

Click to expand...

we should allow the private market to fully invest in all of these things, and tell government to stay the F out of the business of picking winners and losers.

I am a conservative or libertarian

Click to expand...

naturally

too many absolutes. there are some poor people who are poor through no fault of their own. a flat tax is not the best option. The USA has no official religion. The death penalty is not carried out properly, abortion by definition cannot be murder, and we should look for other forms of energy. The AGW bit is still undeterminable and finally people should not have a say in raising taxes they don't pay but I don't think the absolute about the poor makes sense

I could only vote for Abortion is murder.... the rest of the options had one or more things in them where I couldn't vote for it... the unions item for example. If people want unions they should be allowed to create them... if the union item was out of that option I could have voted for it.

Perhaps "abortion is homicide" would be a better choice than simply "murder."

If you are poor it is your own fault.

Click to expand...

Sometimes.
There are a lot of differing circumstances in life.

The poor should not be able to vote or their vote should count less.

Click to expand...

Nah, they don't vote anyway, for the most part.

We should institute a flat tax, remove unions, remove minimum wage, and cut welfare.

Click to expand...

Depends.
Too much in this to really make a straight, yes or no.

Abortion is murder.

Click to expand...

I don't care if people get abortions.
Although personally I think it's dumb.
If you wish to voluntarily remove your potential progeny from the gene pool, you're probably doing the rest of us a favor.

Most universities and institutions of science are liberal leaning because of grant money.

Click to expand...

I'd say that the staff tends to lean liberal, not necessarily because of grant money.

The United States is a Christian nation.

Click to expand...

Most people observe some form of Christianity, whether they are practicing or non practicing.
Although I don't think the U.S. should be exclusively Christian.

The death penalty is an important part of the justice system.

Click to expand...

I don't approve of it.

AGW is not real.

Click to expand...

I'm fine with reasonable environmental regulation.
AGW, don't know and really don't care.

We should not invest in alternative energy but should instead focus on fossil fuels and drilling.

Click to expand...

Alternative energy "investment" has cost consumers a lot for very little, in my opinion.
I prefer the market it sort out what is best.

I am a conservative or libertarian.

Click to expand...

I don't like being grouped with conservatives because our motivations can be very different, even if we have some similarities.

Abortion is murder is the only one I could vote for, too much grey area in the others.

whysoserious said:

Yes, but AGW is the belief that man causes the climate change. As far as the "Abortion is murder" option, do you not think there are some that agree? If you don't agree then don't mark it.

Click to expand...

I marked it because the earth has survived much worse then Man.

right libertarian, and I voted for a couple of things, but most of the options I chose have ifs, ands, and buts.

Can't click many of them as currently written:

If you are poor it is your own fault.

Not in all cases, but in a large number of cases their own actions and choices are a large factor in the reason and potentially the largest factor. There are some cases where circumstance is the largest, or only portoin. I'd say the majority likely fall in the range where its about 60/40 or 70/30 in regards to "individual decisions and choices / circumstance".

The poor should not be able to vote or their vote should count less.

I don't agree with this. However, I think we need a tax system where all brackets are connected so that one group can push to simply tax another group for their own benefit without any issues done to themselves. I also think that everyone should pay some amount of income tax in such a system, so that everyone has it affecting them to some degree.

We should institute a flat tax, remove unions, remove minimum wage, and cut welfare.

Disagree on a Flat Tax. I'm okay with a progressive tax up to a certain point and as I said, if all brackets are connected. I do like the notion of reducing the income tax on everyone significantly while implimenting a flat sales tax on non-food, non-medical items.

I think Unions do have a purpose but I think there needs to be significant look at potential reform as they've expanded beyond that purpose.

I am split on removing the minimum wage, but either way would like the minimum wage to stop being looked at as a mechanism to impliment a "livable" wage. Minimum Wage SHOULDN'T be a wage that is, by itself, comfortably livable.

Abortion is murder.

Its not illegal, so its not murder.

Personally I do think its a human life. That said, I realize that's my opinion...as is anyone elses view on it in either direciton...and there's no honest and objective way to determine it as its simply a societal decision. If you asked me on a personal level, I'd rather it be illegal, but practically I think if it doesn't become a state issue I'd simply like it reformed to make it doable but much more limited and monitored in scope.

Most universities and institutions of science are liberal leaning because of grant money.

I think that's one of a number of reasons, and putting it primarily on that is wrong. I think academia is generally liberal to a degree anyways, which breeds itself to continue that way as it makes it an unattractive work environment or goal for conservative minded individuals generally. In regards to grant money, I think its less of a purpoesful political bend as much as it is just a side effect of current political thought and focus.

The United States is a Christian nation.

I think the United States in its earliest days could be considered a Christian Nation, in the technical definition of a nation. I would say currently that the United States is a predominantly Christian Nation, in the technical sense of the word, but the percentage of Christians within the population and the percentage of those people whose religion significantly impacts their life, is lower now than in the past when I would simply consider it a Christian Nation through and through.

Now, speaking more in the common vernacular, which I imagine you're meaning....no, the United States of America isn't a Christian "Nataion" (ie State), but rather a secular one.

The death penalty is an important part of the justice system.

Its a part of the justice system, and a useful part imho, but I'm not sure I'd go important. I think our justice system would work fine without it, though I don't think it works poorly with it.

AGW is not real.

I believe its real. I don't believe its as significant of a deal or as big of an effect by us as its made out to be. I also don't necessarily think its reason to significantly change our lives forcefully or expand government power.

We should not invest in alternative energy but should instead focus on fossil fuels and drilling.

As a government, I'm not sure we should be investing in power all together and if we are I think it should be across the board with both improving proven sources and persuing hypothetical or unproven ones. I don't think we should forgo fossiel fuels and drilling in the name of alternative eneryg, and I think Nuclear Energy should be part of that alternative energy.