• 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!

How many liberals to you actually know?

What % of people you know personally would self-ID as liberal?


  • Total voters
    66
Liberal: believing that government should be active in supporting social and political change : relating to or supporting political liberalism...: not opposed to new ideas or ways of behaving that are not traditional or widely accepted...... associated with ideals of individual especially economic freedom, greater individual participation in government, and constitutional, political, and administrative reforms designed to secure these objectives

Conservative: believing in the value of established and traditional practices in politics and society : relating to or supporting political conservatism...: not liking or accepting changes or new ideas a : tending or disposed to maintain existing views, conditions, or institutions : traditional
...c : marked by or relating to traditional norms of taste, elegance, style, or manners

adapted from Websters online.
 
We've spent $trillions since the 60's and have little to show for it, and no one ever wants to try anything else. Anyone that even suggests something different is labeled a hater. That's all I have to say about that.

Many of the people who want to eliminate or significantly alter government programs addressing poverty and expanding opportunities for the poor are motivated by dislike of the poor and/or minorities, are ideological opposed to government taking that role and/or have a financial interest in a privatized alternative. That is why their proposed alternative "solutions" to poverty are not trusted by those with genuine concern for the people at the bottom.
 
Last edited:
Many of the people who want to eliminate or significantly alter government programs addressing poverty and expanding opportunities for the poor are motivated by dislike of the poor and/or minorities, are ideological opposed to government taking that role and/or have a financial interest in a privatized alternative. That is why their proposed alternative "solutions" to poverty are not trusted by those with genuine concern for the people at the bottom.

Some of those are valid reasons, but that's not even the point I was making. Liberals will never improve the programs that fail, just put more and more money into them.
 
The above is so general as to be completely meaningless. All government activity involves "giving away other people's money to other people."

And BTW, solving problems isn't an either/or deal. Lots of solutions make things less worse, but are still much better than nothing.

Meaningless to you, but someone else responded just fine so don't worry about it.
 
Of, course .. Define liberal .
Social or economic , or both ?
And then there are moderate and extreme ones ..
Other( my vote) ; as I do not know than many people, and few openly reveal this ..
 
Some of those are valid reasons, but that's not even the point I was making. Liberals will never improve the programs that fail, just put more and more money into them.

Then, American the Conservative, name one liberal program that has failed .
For me, Affirmative Action comes to mind , IMO, this has NOT failed.
 
Then, American the Conservative, name one liberal program that has failed .
For me, Affirmative Action comes to mind , IMO, this has NOT failed.

You make my point, a liberal can never find anything wrong with any of their programs. Typical the results don't matter, it's whether they cared about the problem or not. Affirmative action has promoted people not based on qualifications for a job but because of race.
 
Then, American the Conservative, name one liberal program that has failed .
For me, Affirmative Action comes to mind , IMO, this has NOT failed.


i can name quite a few

but this article may be of interest

CLARKE: Liberal policies have destroyed the black family


The latest attempt by liberals to help black people is underway in our K-12 urban public schools.

These do-gooders are now defining down socially acceptable behavior for black students in school. Bad behavior is being excused and attempts to hold black kids accountable by enforcing codes of conduct are called racist.

Having a sense of discipline has always been considered a virtue, a redeeming quality, but now its roots are claimed to lie in racism.

White liberal elites have chimed in about school codes of conduct.

The Capital Times newspaper of Madison, Wis., recently chronicled bad behavior by black students in its public schools. In the story, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said that racial discrimination in school discipline codes “is a real problem today.”

The white superintendent of the Madison public schools believes that “we need to address head-on our racial bias and the assumptions we make of students who are in the classroom.”

Really? Where I come from, bad behavior has always been unacceptable and is codified not by race but by societal norms to keep chaos from reigning.

These watered-down student codes of conduct sweeping across urban public school systems will not help black parents, kids or communities. Like every other display of liberal empathy, they will have a reverse effect, and it will not be positive.

All anti-social behavior and social pathology is normalized, and to disagree is racial stereotyping.

What these race provocateurs do not want to admit is the reason we are seeing more disruptive behavior in schools is because of poor and ineffective parenting, manifested by liberal policies.

There is a government program today for everything in the black community that used to be the responsibility of the individual, such as parenting. Because of this system, many parents have abdicated what is their most important responsibility and turned it over to the government.

Uncle Sam is now raising their kids.

We take kids out of the home with early childhood education programs, and the government feeds them breakfast, lunch and dinner, and provides after-school programs.

CLARKE: Liberal policies have destroyed the black family - Washington Times


war on race (another article on that)

How the left’s embrace of busing hurt the cause of integration.

it might be easier to list liberal programs you believe have succeeded.......
 
Then, American the Conservative, name one liberal program that has failed .
For me, Affirmative Action comes to mind , IMO, this has NOT failed.


WHAT’S more important to how your life turns out: the prestige of the school you attend or how much you learn while you’re there? Does the answer to this question change if you are the recipient of affirmative action?

From school admissions to hiring, affirmative action policies attempt to compensate for this country’s brutal history of racial discrimination by giving some minority applicants a leg up. This spring the Supreme Court will decide the latest affirmative action case, weighing in on the issue for the first time in 10 years.

The last time around, in 2003, the court upheld the University of Michigan Law School’s affirmative action plan. A divided court ruled, 5 to 4, that “student body diversity is a compelling state interest that can justify the use of race in university admissions.” Writing for the majority, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor said, “We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.”

In the intervening period, scholars have been looking more closely at how affirmative action works in practice. Based on how they interpret the data that have been collected, some of these scholars have come to believe that affirmative action doesn’t always help the students it’s supposed to. Why? Because some minority students who get into a top school with the help of affirmative action might actually be better served by attending a less elite institution to which they could gain admission with less of a boost or no boost at all.

The idea that affirmative action might harm its intended beneficiaries was suggested as early as the 1960s, when affirmative action, a phrase introduced by the Kennedy administration, began to take hold as government and corporate policy. One long-simmering objection to affirmative action was articulated publicly by Clarence Thomas years before he joined the Supreme Court in 1991. Mr. Thomas, who has opposed affirmative action even while conceding that he benefited from it, told a reporter for The New York Times in 1982 that affirmative action placed students in programs above their abilities. Mr. Thomas, who was then the 34-year-old chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, didn’t deny the crisis in minority employment. But he blamed a failed education system rather than discrimination in admissions. “I watched the operation of such affirmative action policies when I was in college,” he said, “and I watched the destruction of many kids as a result.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/17/o...on-do-what-it-should.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

maybe....maybe not
 
Some of those are valid reasons, but that's not even the point I was making. Liberals will never improve the programs that fail, just put more and more money into them.

If you consider some of those valid reasons, it proves my point that the people who want to cut benefits can not be trusted.

I support genuinely making these programs more effective and few other people, liberal or not, have a problem with that. However, many politicians have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo due to support and donations from those who benefit from it. That is not ideological and can be seen throughout the political spectrum.
 
Last edited:
I dont know if this helps but about half the people I shoot with would describe themselves as 'liberals'
 
I dont know if this helps but about half the people I shoot with would describe themselves as 'liberals'

Plenty of liberals aren't anti-gun. Plenty of conservatives aren't pro-life. You can definitely find all kinds of stereotype-defying people among the moderates on either side of the spectrum.
 
If you consider some of those valid reasons, it proves my point that the people who want to cut benefits can not be trusted.

I support genuinely making these programs more effective and few other people, liberal or not, have a problem with that. However, many politicians have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo due to support and donations from those who benefit from it. That is not ideological and can be seen throughout the political spectrum.

You can support it all you want, but they will continue to fail as long as incompetent boobs and ideologues are elected.
 
Back
Top Bottom