• 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!

Political Classifiation

Your Political Classification

  • Total voters
    48
I chose "Other" because I am just an American who votes for the person I feel would best suit the job. I stand pretty much in the middle of everything...Party politics is pretty one-sided, no matter which party it is and then everything seems to drone-on, and on, and on until you would go nuts from listening to the same old dribble...we need more Partys, but the Dems and Repubs won't allow it because then they would lose power...both sides are corrupt which is why I NEVER vote for an incumbant, no matter who they are because after one term, they have gone to the dark side.
 
coolwalker said:
I chose "Other" because I am just an American who votes for the person I feel would best suit the job. I stand pretty much in the middle of everything...Party politics is pretty one-sided, no matter which party it is and then everything seems to drone-on, and on, and on until you would go nuts from listening to the same old dribble...we need more Partys, but the Dems and Repubs won't allow it because then they would lose power...both sides are corrupt which is why I NEVER vote for an incumbant, no matter who they are because after one term, they have gone to the dark side.
Click to expand...

Though I'm more socially conservative, this is how I feel. Disillusioned with the Democrats, the Republicans, and a majority of the Tea Partiers for their redundant assaults on whether Obama was born in the US or not.
 
I don't like the idea of being pigeon-holed by a label. As soon as a person says they're This or That, others begin making assumptions often as not incorrect... As others here have suggested, better to ignore the Label and pay attention to the message...
 
Easy Rider said:
I don't like the idea of being pigeon-holed by a label. As soon as a person says they're This or That, others begin making assumptions often as not incorrect... As others here have suggested, better to ignore the Label and pay attention to the message...
Click to expand...

So would you then take away your Independent Lean?

People are complex and can be quite interesting. What really interests me is the hidden "why" behind their beliefs. Rarely, very rarely, am I told that "why". Why is someone a socialist? What hidden set of "whys" are common among socialists/liberal/conservatives/etc?
 
Wake said:
Though I'm more socially conservative, this is how I feel. Disillusioned with the Democrats, the Republicans, and a majority of the Tea Partiers for their redundant assaults on whether Obama was born in the US or not.
Click to expand...

Well...I believe many people are curious about why he (Obama) hides so much all the time...be it his place of birth or his college transcripts. They are legitimate questions and deserve legitimate answers, not stone walls. He is also a bit arrogant about most everything. He's not exactly presidential.
 
Well...I believe many people are curious about why he (Obama) hides so much all the time...be it his place of birth or his college transcripts. They are legitimate questions and deserve legitimate answers, not stone walls. He is also a bit arrogant about most everything. He's not exactly presidential.
Click to expand...

He doesn't hide everything. I swear to God, he's on TV more than Leno.
 
Wake said:
So would you then take away your Independent Lean?

People are complex and can be quite interesting. What really interests me is the hidden "why" behind their beliefs. Rarely, very rarely, am I told that "why". Why is someone a socialist? What hidden set of "whys" are common among socialists/liberal/conservatives/etc?
Click to expand...

I don't consider "independent" to be any sort of political party but rather an individual that chooses to think for themself. Or as Merriam-Webster puts it... not dependent... not subject to control by others... not affiliated with a larger controlling unit... The Why is obvious considering the current state of our politics...

But I did change my "lean" to Other so as not to confuse anybody... :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
It would be nice if there was a way to differentiate between political classification and personal classification. It irritates me that candidates always assume (maybe rightly so) that everyone wants to vote for someone who agrees with their personal beliefs.

I'd like a Presidential candidate to say (and mean): "I support and will diligently defend states' rights. I will support and diligently pursue shrinking the role and the expense of the federal government. And, I support being actively involved in world affairs, but I prioritize control of our own borders and domestic issues over small international issues". If they can prove they're serious, I'll like them. Their personal beliefs and lifestyles wouldn't much to me if they'd get the federal government out of everyone's business.

I'd like a Congressional candidate to say (and mean): The same things as the President except that while they are pursuing those things, they'll also actively work on behalf of my individual state. If the law exists, I want my state to be well represented in taking advantage of it. No state should have more rights than any other state.

I'd like a State candidate to try to keep the state government fairly small, but to be more involved in issues of choice.

I'd like a local candidate who reflects the will of their community. And, I would support much more spending at this level if the Federal government was much more out of the picture.

So, I'd be slightly liberal locally (fiscally and socially), somewhat conservative (fiscally and socially) at a state level, and very conservative (fiscally) federally with no tolerance for social agendas.

Personally, I'm fairly conservative socially.
 
lpast said:
Truth be told I dont know what I am anymore...I think im looking for a description of the way I feel and what I believe in right now...who'd a thought after all these years....
Click to expand...

I feel the same way.
 
I consider myself a Republican (Conservative first) but politically lean Libertarian-Right.
 
I'm generally a Progressive, but I have some views that would be considered very Moderate if not Conservative.
 
I love the way the left gets "progressive" and "liberal" to chose from. Hahah, six of one or half a dozen of the other. Think real careful before chosing guys. :lamo
 
Last edited:
American said:
I love the way the left gets "progressive" and "liberal" to chose from. Hahah, six of one or half a dozen of the other. Think real careful before chosing guys. :lamo
Click to expand...

Just a one man comedy show in your hollow head isn't it?
 
I've chosen "liberal", "moderate" and "other".

I'm not American, so I am certainly neither Republican nor Democrat.

I'm more or less in the center, or slightly left of center by German standards, so I say "moderate". That would make me "liberal" by American standards, as the center in America is more to the right.

Another reason for chosing "moderate" is that I disagree with many on the left about radical change. I'm no fan of radical change, I prefer evolution within the system. Because chances are when you change too much fundamentally, you throw out the baby with the bathwater and end up with a worse situation than the one you wanted to improve.

Also, I don't like too strong partisanship and polemics, or aggressive debate culture. I think that makes me "moderate" too. At least that's my ideal, I may not always live up to it.
 
I was forced to choose moderate....simply because you grouped independent/libertarian, and these things have very little in common.

I think myself an independent, because I think they all have major issues in one way or another, thus I vote by issue, instead of party.


I am Independent of party!
 
Liberal. Socially, and fiscally.

It's what the cool kids are doing.
 
Fiddytree said:
Moderate with some issues being to the left, many to the strict center, others to the right. To many on the left I would be a very moderate conservative.
Click to expand...

I think most have some varience. Liberal on some issues, more conservative on others, and sometimes quite moderate. The discussion often is blind to this reality.
 
American said:
I love the way the left gets "progressive" and "liberal" to chose from. Hahah, six of one or half a dozen of the other. Think real careful before chosing guys. :lamo
Click to expand...

thats okay. In real life - where it really counts - the right gets "conservative", "fascist" and "reactionary" as their menu.
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
thats okay. In real life - where it really counts - the right gets "conservative", "fascist" and "reactionary" as their menu.
Click to expand...


reactionary works well for the left too. Supporting the status quo is reactionary
 
TurtleDude said:
reactionary works well for the left too. Supporting the status quo is reactionary
Click to expand...

I see much reactionary politics in the left, as so many people simply decide what they are against, ball up their little hands into fists and support whatever is the opposite.

Supporting the status quo is not reactionary in and of itself, however, as those who support the status quo do so out of a desire to conserve the prevailing orthodoxy rather than react against it.

When I think of reactionary leftists, I think more of the reflexively anti-American posters who are the flip side of the coin from a jingoist -- the "we are always in the wrong" crowd that offers their tacit support to just about anything anti-American.
 
TurtleDude said:
reactionary works well for the left too. Supporting the status quo is reactionary
Click to expand...

That is a unique definition. How do you figure that?

Wikipedia disagrees with you

The term reactionary refers to viewpoints that seek to return to a previous state (the status quo ante) in a society. The term is meant to describe one end of a political spectrum whose opposite pole is "radical".
Click to expand...

Your usage is not the standard usage.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom