Lefties, Righties, Who's Who?

[KevinKohler]

I can relate to the not supporting 100% of party ideology. At midterms a couple tears ago, I voted straight Repub as a protest against Obama, and there was a Repub landslide. It was all very exciting at first, and then I figured out that these Repubs who I just voted in were not really on my side! They did not do what they said they would, and I learned a very important lesson about towing the party line.

Yep. I learned that lesson on a local level in CT, and I've pretty much been angry ever since. People criticize my support of Trump, but frankly, how else to make the point heard? Stop giving us lying sacks of **** for candidates, or people like me are going to continue to vote for people like him.

 

[Captain America]

Thanks, and a Happy New Year to you as well. Hopefully, we get a chance to butt heads this coming year. I won't be able to get you with copying and pasting Russian translations, but I am sure we will debate.

Sure thing. Just tell me which side in the debate I'm supposed to take and I'll kick your butt with it. LOL!

 

[EvMetro]

Libertarianism is defintely a very wide political spectrum.

Since I claim that the furthest right dot on the political line says "EvMetro", it only makes sense that I would change the spelling of libertarian to "liberaltarian". <righty humor...>

 

[TheGoverness]

Sure thing. Just tell me which side in the debate I'm supposed to take and I'll kick your butt with it. LOL!

Take the "Lefty" side! Join us cap'n!

 

[Fiddytree]

Is this a dominant hand competition? In that case, I am in favor of oligarchy, because there's roughly only 10% of us left-handers. We are wiser than the masses.

 

[TheGoverness]

Is this a dominant hand competition? In that case, I am in favor of oligarchy, because there's roughly only 10% of us left-handers. We are wiser than the masses.

Yes! Let the DP Oligarchy reign across the world!

All will bow down to us!

 

[Captain America]

Take the "Lefty" side! Join us cap'n!

The last time I went tree hugging I got ticks. LOL!

 

[AlbqOwl]

Libertarianism is defintely a very wide political spectrum.

It is, but the capital "L" version of it would force its ideology on all of us every bit as much as the Republicans or Democrats would. Gary Johnson lost a LOT of votes when he advocated a federal legalization of recreational drugs rather than leave that decision to the states. And when he advocated that religious groups merited no legal protection and in fact should be prohibited from influencing government, he lost even more votes. Neither stance is libertarian (little "L") but is shared by some if not many Libertarians (capital "L"). When he advocated open borders, he consigned himself absolutely to small single digits in the vote pretty much everywhere.

And I say that as somebody who knows Gary Johnson personally--he is from my state and town--and thinks the world of him as a person. But I sure wouldn't want him for a President.

Libertarians (little "L") and classical liberals are pretty much the same animal and consistently hold the view that the federal government is given no authority whatsoever to regulate drug policy within the various states or religion in any respect.

 

[Fiddytree]

Yes! Let the DP Oligarchy reign across the world!

All will bow down to us!

The first bill that comes across our desks will be to replace all right-handed scissors with a pair that only work for left-handers. Retribution be swift!

 

[EvMetro]

Sure thing. Just tell me which side in the debate I'm supposed to take and I'll kick your butt with it. LOL!

This could be interesting, since I am a lefty on some political forums, and can argue strongly from a progressive liberal position. I have often thought it would be interesting to encounter another person like myself who can debate from the other side, and then actually have a debate where we each are arguing from our opposing political position.

 

[Hawkeye10]

I have told this story before but I will put it here....I have been not interested in Politics since about the time of the 60 minutes interview with Clinton Corp post Lewinsky, because I become convinced that the poltical system is too corrupt and too weak to move the ball. I decided that we need to dig deeper in the renovation of this thing called the U S of A, that we needed to do something about the extreme spiritual sickness that afflicts us, which is strongly connected to the moral sickness and the mental illness problem (mass mental illness, the illness of the collective). I am a Zen Socialist you see, maybe the only one.

But I never figured on a Trump coming along. I watched him from about mid Aug to Sept 10 of 2015, and decided that he is the real deal, that maybe he could get something done.

So I jumped back into caring about politics after all that time out.

I have not been disappointed so far.

 

[Captain America]

This could be interesting, since I am a lefty on some political forums, and can argue strongly from a progressive liberal position. I have often thought it would be interesting to encounter another person like myself who can debate from the other side, and then actually have a debate where we each are arguing from our opposing political position.

I think exercises in thinking from the alternate viewpoint should be mandatory to those who aspire to be well regarded in the discipline of critical thought.

 

[Captain America]

I have told this story before but I will put it here....I have been not interested in Politics since about the time of the 60 minutes interview with Clinton Corp post Lewinsky, because I become convinced that the poltical system is too corrupt and too weak to move the ball. I decided that we need to dig deeper in the renovation of this thing called the U S of A, that we needed to do something about the extreme spiritual sickness that afflicts us, which is strongly connected to the moral sickness and the mental illness problem (mass mental illness, the illness of the collective). I am a Zen Socialist you see, maybe the only one.

But I never figured on a Trump coming along. I watched him from about mid Aug to Sept 10 of 2015, and decided that he is the real deal, that maybe he could get something done.

So I jumped back into caring about politics after all that time out.

I have not been disappointed so far.

You, being a Trump supporter and all, tell us. How long did it take you to watch 60 Minutes?

J/K!! Bwahahahahaha!!!!

 

[Kal'Stang]

I am still pretty new, but I have successfully stirred the pot in the few threads that I have posted here. I am familiar with some of the lefties who have debated with me in my few threads, but was hoping to get a who's who picture of what everybody stands for politically. Are you a lefty, righty, Democrat, establishment Repub, anti establishment Repub, commie, progressive, liberal, conservative, etc?

My aim is to be known as the furthest right point on the line, where the left most dot says "far left", and the far right dot says "EvMetro". I voted for Trump and I identify as anti establishment Repub, conservative, and primarily as a "righty".

How about the rest of you? I would love to get a better idea of who is who, and maybe pick a few arguments. What political term(s) do you identify with, and how did you vote?

As my lean says, I'm an Independent. I belong to no party, political or otherwise, nor have any wish to. My arguments are based upon two things only. The merits of a subject. And Individual Rights. It is my view that basing an argument upon political ideology is foolish, short sighted, and the sign of a closed mind.

 

[Ikari]

The last time I went tree hugging I got ticks. LOL!

So long as you didn't get Lyme, it's but a momentary annoyance.

 

[Ikari]

It is, but the capital "L" version of it would force its ideology on all of us every bit as much as the Republicans or Democrats would. Gary Johnson lost a LOT of votes when he advocated a federal legalization of recreational drugs rather than leave that decision to the states. And when he advocated that religious groups merited no legal protection and in fact should be prohibited from influencing government, he lost even more votes. Neither stance is libertarian (little "L") but is shared by some if not many Libertarians (capital "L"). When he advocated open borders, he consigned himself absolutely to small single digits in the vote pretty much everywhere.

And I say that as somebody who knows Gary Johnson personally--he is from my state and town--and thinks the world of him as a person. But I sure wouldn't want him for a President.

Libertarians (little "L") and classical liberals are pretty much the same animal and consistently hold the view that the federal government is given no authority whatsoever to regulate drug policy within the various states or religion in any respect.

Rather Johnson than Clinton or Trump.

 

[Hawkeye10]

I think exercises in thinking from the alternate viewpoint should be mandatory to those who aspire to be well regarded in the discipline of critical thought.

As well a decent human being.

 

[AlbqOwl]

Rather Johnson than Clinton or Trump.

Well most of America disagrees I'm afraid as I don't believe he won a single precinct even though he got 9% of New Mexico's vote--without him Trump might have gotten New Mexico--no way to know for sure. But mostly he was in the low single digits everywhere.

 

[Ikari]

Well most of America disagrees I'm afraid as I don't believe he won a single precinct even though he got 9% of New Mexico's vote--without him Trump might have gotten New Mexico--no way to know for sure. But mostly he was in the low single digits everywhere.

Most America falls into the "you have to vote for R or D" mentality, which is how we get saddled with Clinton v. Trump in the first place.

 

[AlbqOwl]

Most America falls into the "you have to vote for R or D" mentality, which is how we get saddled with Clinton v. Trump in the first place.

Americans are saddled with an establishment made up of Rs and Ds who are almost all lawyers and professional politicians and bureaucrats who form a permanent political class that has no intention of giving up its power. It exists to increase its own power, prestige, influence, and personal wealth and it absorbs more and more of the national resources year by year. Unless we break the vicious cycle it creates, nobody who is truly worthy to hold high office is likely to be able to break in.

But we've come very close and may in fact have accomplished a way to do that with the election of Donald Trump, however. He is beholden to neither party and in fact has no allegiance to either party. He is no ideologue brainwashed into believing that the far right conservative or the far left progressive way is the only way. He has every reason to do a good job in reforming the government and getting the nation back on the right track and no motive to hinder that in any way.

His election was not because people love Donald Trump. It was a huge **** you to the establishment permanent political class by electing the only person running who was not part of it and has no love of it.

 

[EvMetro]

I think exercises in thinking from the alternate viewpoint should be mandatory to those who aspire to be well regarded in the discipline of critical thought.

This is a lot of what my lefty media thread was about in the media bias section. I added lots of fluff that was designed to get lefties really stirred up, but most of the point was exactly what we are talking about here with the alternate viewpoint.

The alternative viewpoint can be difficult to reach sometimes, since we are trying to objectively look through a subjective lens. I find that if I pretend that I am an attorney who is being paid a fee to represent a client's lefty perspective, it is easier to step away from my own. Then I can assemble the most powerful defense of the opposing position, or in the case of the recreational political forums where I am a lefty, some strong lefty posts.

 

[EvMetro]

Americans are saddled with an establishment made up of Rs and Ds who are almost all lawyers and professional politicians and bureaucrats who form a permanent political class that has no intention of giving up its power. It exists to increase its own power, prestige, influence, and personal wealth and it absorbs more and more of the national resources year by year. Unless we break the vicious cycle it creates, nobody who is truly worthy to hold high office is likely to be able to break in.

But we've come very close and may in fact have accomplished a way to do that with the election of Donald Trump, however. He is beholden to neither party and in fact has no allegiance to either party. He is no ideologue brainwashed into believing that the far right conservative or the far left progressive way is the only way. He has every reason to do a good job in reforming the government and getting the nation back on the right track and no motive to hinder that in any way.

His election was not because people love Donald Trump. It was a huge **** you to the establishment permanent political class by electing the only person running who was not part of it and has no love of it.

I got burned pretty good when I voted straight Rs at midterms. I think that the failure of the R's to deliver on what they campaigned for at midterms was the beginning of Trump. I was so angry with the R's who did not deliver, after winning a landslide, that I was dreaming of a candidate Trump. It was the perfect storm for Trump, and it started with me just after midterms. Those Rs who failed to deliver were the first huge cracks in the foundation of the establishment. I called them traitors, and vowed to do anything in my power to destroy the R establishment.

 

[AlbqOwl]

I got burned pretty good when I voted straight Rs at midterms. I think that the failure of the R's to deliver on what they campaigned for at midterms was the beginning of Trump. I was so angry with the R's who did not deliver, after winning a landslide, that I was dreaming of a candidate Trump. It was the perfect storm for Trump, and it started with me just after midterms. Those Rs who failed to deliver were the first huge cracks in the foundation of the establishment. I called them traitors, and vowed to do anything in my power to destroy the R establishment.

Precisely. A whole bunch of us were sick to death of the permanent political class promising us the sun, moon, and stars to get campaign contributions and our vote, and then once in office take it for granted that we have very short memories and those campaign promises go right out the window. For them it is going right back to feathering their own nests and throwing us just enough bones to keep us quiet.

Enter Donald Trump who is no part of all that and who is a strong enough person and also a rich enough person that he is unlikely to have any temptation to succumb to all that. And who wants to do his damndest to make government work for the people instead of the permanent political class. We gave him a GOP controlled Congress who are beholden to those of us who put Trump in the White House and therefore are more likely to work with him than the Democrats who almost certainly won't.

If together they don't produce some positive results by 2020, there will be the devil to pay. Unless the Democrats give us candidates as pathetic as Hillary and then it's anybody's guess what will happen in 2020.

 

[Perotista]

I got burned pretty good when I voted straight Rs at midterms. I think that the failure of the R's to deliver on what they campaigned for at midterms was the beginning of Trump. I was so angry with the R's who did not deliver, after winning a landslide, that I was dreaming of a candidate Trump. It was the perfect storm for Trump, and it started with me just after midterms. Those Rs who failed to deliver were the first huge cracks in the foundation of the establishment. I called them traitors, and vowed to do anything in my power to destroy the R establishment.

A lot of people look at exactly as you. But it is a numbers game. For a Republican congress to accomplish something such as the repeal of Obamacare for example, numbers matter. In the house, the GOP had them. In the senate, the magic number is 60. That gets you cloture, the Republicans had 54. So without some Democratic senators help, nothing the Democrats didn't want passed would be passed.

If by some miracle, say the repeal of Obamacare did pass both chambers of congress, the magic number changes to 2/3rds to over ride a sure presidential veto. That is 292 House members and 67 senators would have to vote to over ride.

Politics is the art of the possible. A Republican congress without the proper numbers isn't going to run the country unless there is also a Republican President that goes along with the Republican congress. But then it is usually the president who is running congress and telling them what to do or don't.

 

[Jack Hays]

I am still pretty new, but I have successfully stirred the pot in the few threads that I have posted here. I am familiar with some of the lefties who have debated with me in my few threads, but was hoping to get a who's who picture of what everybody stands for politically. Are you a lefty, righty, Democrat, establishment Repub, anti establishment Repub, commie, progressive, liberal, conservative, etc?

My aim is to be known as the furthest right point on the line, where the left most dot says "far left", and the far right dot says "EvMetro". I voted for Trump and I identify as anti establishment Repub, conservative, and primarily as a "righty".

How about the rest of you? I would love to get a better idea of who is who, and maybe pick a few arguments. What political term(s) do you identify with, and how did you vote?

[FONT=&quot]Political tags - such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth - are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. --Robert A. Heinlein[/FONT]