Which issue is the most important to you?

Just as the title says. Which issue is the most important for you? Abortion and homosexual rights apply to people of either side (pro-life, pro-choice, pro homosexual marriage, against homosexual marriage). The same goes for the war (for or against).

The economy/jobs will recover as part of a natural cycle. The war on terror is going fairly well. Abortion is where I want it to be and homosexual marriage will happen.

The BIG one is the debt and deficit. We are adding trillions a year to the debt. We are spending way too much and a lot of that comes in entitlements. We have to do something about it and it will not be easy. Healthcare just adds to the problem.

Abortion

That one is a done deal. The state doesn't have the right to choose, the woman does. End of story, no changes needed there. The Supreme Court has spoken.


Homosexual rights

While this one doesn't really affect me one way or the other, it would be fair for the gays to have the same rights the rest of us enjoy. It wouldn't threaten my heterosexual marriage one bit to have a gay couple tie the knot. Compared to the real issues, however, this one is definitely a back burner item.

The War on Terror (all fronts)


This one is perhaps #3. The truth is, terrorism is not the huge threat that it is being made out to be. Further, we can't wage a war on a tactic of warfare, that is just nonsense. We do need to keep tabs on the crazies in the Mid East, however, and we should go and get Bin laden and his cockroaches. They should have been apprehended years ago, but, then, we did have an incompetent at the helm of the nation.


Economy/Jobs


By orders of magnitude, the most important issue is getting the economy back on track, no question.

The National Debt

is the number two issue, and is closely related to the economy.

Other (please state)

Secure the border, cut back the size and power of the federal government, repeal the Patriot Act and asset forfeiture, end the war on drugs. All of those issues are more important than abortion and gay rights that occupy so much of our time.

Education by far. Kids are the future and I want them to be as smart as they possibly can be so they don't have to go through a recession when they are older like the current generation is now. Hopefully they will be smart enough to fix many problems and even prevent some too.

pro-bipartisan said:

Education by far. Kids are the future and I want them to be as smart as they possibly can be so they don't have to go through a recession when they are older like the current generation is now. Hopefully they will be smart enough to fix many problems and even prevent some too.

Click to expand...

Education should absolutely be the number one priority at the state level. At the natinonal level, not so much.

Dittohead not! said:

Education should absolutely be the number one priority at the state level. At the natinonal level, not so much.

Click to expand...

Oh, I didn't know this was a national level only questions.

I went with economy/jobs, thought it is hard to say really which is how important. They are all important, and not necessarily mutually exclusive. We can work on the economy at the same time as working on abortion rights, at the very same time as working on gay rights, at the very same time working to reduce the deficit and debt, and so on. Some even are complimentary. Improve the economy, and removing the deficit is easier.

edit: by the way, good poll, no slanting or loaded questions, very even handed. Nicely done.

pro-bipartisan said:

Oh, I didn't know this was a national level only questions.

Click to expand...

I suppose it isn't. I interpreted it that way, and so left off education.

If we're talking about local issues, then police and fire protection should be right up there. In fact, the state and local should fund schools, fire, and police first, then, if there is money left, go for the other stuff.

:doh

I'm undecided.

The economy because you cant work on the others if you have no money.

Electoral reform is my most important issue. I want Instant Run-off Voting to be used so more third-party candidates have a better chance of getting elected into office. Until we get more voices in Congress having more of a say on how our laws are written, no other issue, I believe, will be adequately resolved.

samsmart said:

Electoral reform is my most important issue. I want Instant Run-off Voting to be used so more third-party candidates have a better chance of getting elected into office. Until we get more voices in Congress having more of a say on how our laws are written, no other issue, I believe, will be adequately resolved.

Click to expand...

Wouldn't it be more effective for third parties to actually attract voters?

Both our long term and short term is directly related upon our budget and our national debt.
You can't effectively improve anything long term without addressing those 2 things first.

Harry Guerrilla said:

Both our long term and short term is directly related upon our budget and our national debt.
You can't effectively improve anything long term without addressing those 2 things first.

Click to expand...

Fiscally true, but things like abortion and gay rights are for the most part revenue neutral.

Redress said:

Fiscally true, but things like abortion and gay rights are for the most part revenue neutral.

Click to expand...

I hate to say it but if the U.S. defaulted on it's debts, those things would fall even further on the list of important things to deal with.

We are already on the edge of losing our AAA credit rating right now.

Harry Guerrilla said:

I hate to say it but if the U.S. defaulted on it's debts, those things would fall even further on the list of important things to deal with.

We are already on the edge of losing our AAA credit rating right now.

Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying, and I did go woth the economy as my choice, but congress and the pres are not going to work 100 % of the time on the economy and debt. There is time to work on things that don't cost anything.

Redress said:

I understand what you are saying, and I did go woth the economy as my choice, but congress and the pres are not going to work 100 % of the time on the economy and debt. There is time to work on things that don't cost anything.

Click to expand...

I would agree with that as long as it doesn't cost anything.

I'm really worried about the debt though, it's getting to much.
If we slip on our AAA, interest rates will change which will increase what we owe.
We're also facing a pension fund bailout which should add another 500 billion to 1 trillion.

Harry Guerrilla said:

I would agree with that as long as it doesn't cost anything.

I'm really worried about the debt though, it's getting to much.
If we slip on our AAA, interest rates will change which will increase what we owe.
We're also facing a pension fund bailout which should add another 500 billion to 1 trillion.

Click to expand...

People find it hard to believe, but I am a real balanced budget fanatic. I think you can have deficits, but only short term. If we had been running a balanced budget when this meltdown occurred, the spending now would be a non issue.

Redress said:

People find it hard to believe, but I am a real balanced budget fanatic. I think you can have deficits, but only short term. If we had been running a balanced budget when this meltdown occurred, the spending now would be a non issue.

Click to expand...

I agree, no matter who is in control I want it balanced and everything paid for.

I can accept a smaller short term debt but not the insanity of the last 20 years.
They keep pushing it off to the next Congress/President.

Harry Guerrilla said:

I agree, no matter who is in control I want it balanced and everything paid for.

I can accept a smaller short term debt but not the insanity of the last 20 years.
They keep pushing it off to the next Congress/President.

Click to expand...

Well now, 10 years ago we were pretty close to balanced...

Redress said:

Well now, 10 years ago we were pretty close to balanced...

Click to expand...

The yearly budget was but not total debt, we have to calculate both external and internal debt.
We've had a national debt ever since Andrew Jackson but it has accelerated in the past 20 years.

Edit: I should say 30 years, I forget that it's not 2000 anymore.

Redress said:

Wouldn't it be more effective for third parties to actually attract voters?

Click to expand...

Well, here's what happens with regards to third-parties in our two-party system.

Usually, third-parties form around a few issues. For instance, the Libertarian Party is centered around deregulation while the Green Party is centered around environmentalism. Once such an issue becomes a major issue, one of the two major parties takes up that cause to nab those voters, while the other major party becomes opposed to that cause just to nab those voters who are against it. In this way, the two parties hope to prevent spoiler votes and keep as many voters in their party as they can.

Whether or not either of those parties actually do anything on those issues is irrelevant, as the platforms of the two parties become so bloated that very little can get done by the government.

It's also why we have libertarians and Christian dominionists in the Republican Party despite their differences and labor unions and socially liberal business owners in the Democratic Party despite their differences. The two parties are not really two parties but rather a collection of factions that have vaguely unified in order to prevent spoilers because of our plurality voting system.

The only problem with this is that we never know which faction is in power in either of the two major parties. A libertarian GOP is going to vote differently than a neoconservative.

Which is why I'd prefer we use IRV to allow formal third-party candidates to get voted into office. Instead of having two broad parties made up of factions, why not just allow the factions to become parties and let them get voted into office through the use of IRV? That way, the people has a pretty good stance on the political atmosphere of how government will operate. It will also allow Congress to form coalitions on certain issues. It will also lead to compromise candidates which will allow more moderation in politics, rather than the duality political pendulum we have now.

So that's my answer - third parties can't attract voters because the two major parties always steal their positions on issues.

Harry Guerrilla said:

I should say 30 years, I forget that it's not 2000 anymore.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I do that all the time. It's no wonder, this decade has been so crappy I think our memories blur it out as a defense mechanism.

samsmart said:

Yeah, I do that all the time. It's no wonder, this decade has been so crappy I think our memories blur it out as a defense mechanism.

Click to expand...

I grew up in the 90's, which were awesome.
i think my brain isn't wanting to let go of it.

Harry Guerrilla said:

Both our long term and short term is directly related upon our budget and our national debt.
You can't effectively improve anything long term without addressing those 2 things first.

Click to expand...

That's why I voted for the National Debt. Why didn't you? I am feeling all alone...