• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are your politics motivated by principle?

Are your politics motivated by principle(s)?

  • Total voters
    60
DifferentDrummr said:
It's well known that there's a significant proportion of American voters who identify strongly with one major party or the other because their closest friends and relatives do. The percentage is higher than in most other countries.

Of course, all voters have the right to rely on a party to shape their politics, but I'm more interested in those voters who shape their opinions on other ideas and philosophies.

So if you answer "yes" to the question, tell us what the three or four most important ideas are (to you) when it comes to your politics.
Click to expand...

Sure, I vote on principles. I've stated before that my number one voting decision is to be pro-abortion and anti-religious zealots. That usually throws me in the D category, although it did not used to be that clear cut, like when Reagan ran for office. At that time religion and abortion was not front and center because the greater concern was concern about communism and the bad economy left by Carter.

I do however have serious problems with Democrats, primarily over the PC Progressive crap and their tendency to reward failure while punishing success in business and life. I see Democrats as the enablers of bad decision making who refuse to talk about the real reason people are falling behind: bad decisions. But, those issues are not as important to me as is opposing the crap being sold by the TaliBornAgains in the Republican party.
 
SocialD said:
definition I see for Price Fixing is - Establishing the price of a product or service, rather than allowing it to be determined naturally through free-market forces
Click to expand...

Almost, but not totally correct.

When private companies conspire to fix prices, they do it for the purpose of eliminating (or weakening) competition in the free market. That's price fixing.

When a government establishes prices, it's called price controls, and the purpose is often to promote competition. Or keep the supply of a commodity stable, or several other things. In general, it isn't done for the purpose of hurting competition.
 
principle - the purpose of government is to protect individual rights.
 
DifferentDrummr said:
You proved no such thing, sport. You're dismissed.
Click to expand...

LOL!!

No problem. I don't mind being dismissed by someone who claims to have posted proof of his claims...but won't tell me where he posted them.

Toodles...
 
Gardener said:
In Robin Hood.

You appear to know nothing about the story at all or even what the term feudalism means.
Click to expand...
I thought that Robin Hood was simply about one's relationship to the government. The government in this case is the feudal lord put there by the king to provide safety and security to his people while paying taxes in return. These are the people that Robin Hood robbed, the government lackeys who became rich. Robin Hood wasn't bothering other rich people who got their wealth by other means, i.e. by earning it. He went after government rich people. Kinda like the Clintons today.

Did Robin Hood ever rob anyone other than government officials who got rich off of taxes?
 
DifferentDrummr said:
Almost, but not totally correct.

When private companies conspire to fix prices, they do it for the purpose of eliminating (or weakening) competition in the free market. That's price fixing.

When a government establishes prices, it's called price controls, and the purpose is often to promote competition. Or keep the supply of a commodity stable, or several other things. In general, it isn't done for the purpose of hurting competition.
Click to expand...

Price control or price fixing perhaps different .. but not that much different. yes sometimes its done to promote competition or to keep a commodity stable as you say. it may not be done for the 'purpose' of hurting competition, but it sometimes does and in the case of stabilizing a commodity it sometimes hurts instead of stabilizes.. example the California power price controls in the early 2000s that was implemented. Even though the population had grown , if I remember right, about 46% in 20 years the power output capacity had only grown 4%. this was mostly due to heavy regulation. providers had raised prices, the put in price controls and then there was an even greater reason not to increase the supply of energy.

Also the prop 13 rent controls have been kicked around. Although economists pretty much agree that it would reduce availability and quality.

I am sure there have been some controls that have worked but for the most party I don't see price controls as much different than price fixing as far as the result.
 
SocialD said:
Price control or price fixing perhaps different .. but not that much different. yes sometimes its done to promote competition or to keep a commodity stable as you say. it may not be done for the 'purpose' of hurting competition, but it sometimes does and in the case of stabilizing a commodity it sometimes hurts instead of stabilizes.. example the California power price controls in the early 2000s that was implemented. Even though the population had grown , if I remember right, about 46% in 20 years the power output capacity had only grown 4%. this was mostly due to heavy regulation. providers had raised prices, the put in price controls and then there was an even greater reason not to increase the supply of energy.

Also the prop 13 rent controls have been kicked around. Although economists pretty much agree that it would reduce availability and quality.

I am sure there have been some controls that have worked but for the most party I don't see price controls as much different than price fixing as far as the result.
Click to expand...

Hey, I'll be the first to tell you that stupidly implemented price controls can hurt market competition.

That still doesn't make them price fixing. There has to be intent for that.
 
DifferentDrummr said:
It's well known that there's a significant proportion of American voters who identify strongly with one major party or the other because their closest friends and relatives do. The percentage is higher than in most other countries.

Of course, all voters have the right to rely on a party to shape their politics, but I'm more interested in those voters who shape their opinions on other ideas and philosophies.

So if you answer "yes" to the question, tell us what the three or four most important ideas are (to you) when it comes to your politics.
Click to expand...

I like to think I'm principled but when I talk to politicians I feel the same way I do when I'm talking to a used car salesman or a guy trying to convince me to let him clean my carpet. Principle doesn't enter into it.
 
Centrehalf said:
I like to think I'm principled but when I talk to politicians I feel the same way I do when I'm talking to a used car salesman or a guy trying to convince me to let him clean my carpet. Principle doesn't enter into it.
Click to expand...

Once in a while you'll come across a politician who truly believes the stuff he's saying, but I'll grant that it's more the exception than the rule these days.
 
DifferentDrummr said:
It's well known that there's a significant proportion of American voters who identify strongly with one major party or the other because their closest friends and relatives do. The percentage is higher than in most other countries.

Of course, all voters have the right to rely on a party to shape their politics, but I'm more interested in those voters who shape their opinions on other ideas and philosophies.

So if you answer "yes" to the question, tell us what the three or four most important ideas are (to you) when it comes to your politics.
Click to expand...

Yep, 110%. The unprincipled never get my vote.
 
DifferentDrummr said:
It's well known that there's a significant proportion of American voters who identify strongly with one major party or the other because their closest friends and relatives do. The percentage is higher than in most other countries.

Of course, all voters have the right to rely on a party to shape their politics, but I'm more interested in those voters who shape their opinions on other ideas and philosophies.

So if you answer "yes" to the question, tell us what the three or four most important ideas are (to you) when it comes to your politics.
Click to expand...

that natural rights of the people come before law

that the constitution be strictly adhered to

the power of law making must always be divided among several interest, and never placed in 1 person or 1 single entity.

federalism must be maintained to preserve our federation, that the u.s. NEVER becomes a unitary state
 
Last edited:
Why, the usual libertarian stuff: (a) The primacy of the freedom of choice (The old Golden Rule, really: "Do not onto others that you wish not upon yourself" - and nobody wishes to be coerced, by definition), and (b) The realization that nobody is really capable of understanding complex, living systems, like an economy or a society, and of predicting their behavior (those claiming that they can are either delusional or power-grabbing frauds)
 
Last edited:
DifferentDrummr said:
Once in a while you'll come across a politician who truly believes the stuff he's saying, but I'll grant that it's more the exception than the rule these days.
Click to expand...

And even in such rare case, what he or she believes will be either terrifying or utterly idiotic.
 
DifferentDrummr said:
It's well known that there's a significant proportion of American voters who identify strongly with one major party or the other because their closest friends and relatives do. The percentage is higher than in most other countries.

Of course, all voters have the right to rely on a party to shape their politics, but I'm more interested in those voters who shape their opinions on other ideas and philosophies.

So if you answer "yes" to the question, tell us what the three or four most important ideas are (to you) when it comes to your politics.
Click to expand...

Interesting question and interesting reading.
Seems like such a broad question and it's hard to pick where to start. Some people seem to apply it to a candidate and some just answered in general. For me it's about rights and luckily for me in this country I agree with out rights and freedoms pretty much 90+% As a country we have some catching up to do but we are fine. Other principles would be integrity, facts/science and greater good. Though to me greater good is basically rights. I'm a christian but those values don't motivate me politically in anyway really. I really don't understand how they ever could. Don't get me wrong there are many common values that all of share that are in Christianity but i don't consider them to be Christian per say. Honesty, be kind etc etc are all shared by most people. Some are bad at them but those are commonly shared. I feel the ones I identify as Christian probably have no place in politics because they don't represent rights in anyway.
 
I find it interesting that I am the only partisan person on DP.

I love the smell of fibs in the morning.

Either that or y'all are the most remarkable group that I have ever encountered on the webz.
 
d0gbreath said:
I find it interesting that I am the only partisan person on DP.

I love the smell of fibs in the morning.

Either that or y'all are the most remarkable group that I have ever encountered on the webz.
Click to expand...

I believe a lot of people who responded are using a narrow definition of "partisan." At least, narrower than I would define it.
 
DifferentDrummr said:
I believe a lot of people who responded are using a narrow definition of "partisan." At least, narrower than I would define it.
Click to expand...

They should use Parisian instead.

Le frogge bait monsieur.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom