Political Affiliation

[JUGGERNAUT]

Where do you stand politically?

Liberterian, GOP (Republican), DEM (Democrat)

So often those of us who weigh in on politics are misunderstood or stereo-typed based on a single post on a single issue. I thought it would be helpful to provide a thread

that would help clear that up.

 

Personally speaking, at present I am an UnHappy GOP voter. I'm not happy with the party on some issues but content with it on other.

 

Generally speaking I am more of a LIB but they don't allow room in their platform for compromise or transition from where we are now to what they desire. Until they do I can't take them serious. You can provide a transition platform without compromising general principles as long as you define it as such. The party refuses to do this.

 

That gives me a choice between GOP & DEM. I was born a DEM voter based on group association in the neighborhood I group up in. But as I have grown older I have moved closer to the GOP.

 

If you asked why it's because of the shift in platforms between the 2 parties.

If you compared the GOP & DEM platforms to that of the LIB platform the GOP

has more in common with it. Both desire smaller less intrusive government in the every day lives of people. The anti-socialist design.

 

The general principle of the libertarian platform is that socially majority rules.

Not politically or government wise, but socially. That means that government should be set up such that the majority opinion of most citizens direct the social behavior of the society.

 

There is no such thing as the tyranny of the majority in a democracy. It's an imaginary foe created solely to push socialism. Socialism is the engineering of society based on a minority group's idea of a universal code of behavior. It is analogous to organized religion enriched with political power. With respect to Europe moral relativism has replaced religion as the main factor in driving it's socialism. It's simply an exchange of one group's views for another. Europe used to discriminate against heathens or others who shared a different philosophy of life. Now it's replaced heathens with Christians.

 

The reason there is no such thing as the tyranny of the majority in a democracy is because as long as a government provides a free speech right & a right to be heard to every individual then no one can claim not having the opportunity to influence the majority. If the majority of persons control the government through a democratic voting process then tyranny can only exist if a minority group control the ability to influence that vote such that any other voice is silenced. As long as any individual as a right to free speech & a right to be heard by the masses tyranny can not exist.

 

Let me likewise distinguish between the majority & mob rules. Majority opinion is arrived at through commerce & peaceful debate. Mob rules is not. Mob rules is achieved through coercion with fear of consequences so severe that free speech & right to be heard are suspended w/in the mob. That is not government. That is coercive anarchy. It is ridiculous to define government based on the grievous history of mob rules.

 

I can go on & on, but I think you get the point. In summary both LIB's & GOP's

hold the same philosophy: government is best served & implemented at a local level.

The federal level should only exist for that which is trully essential & neccessary for society to function. DEM's/socialists believe in just the opposite.

 

It's sad really, because there is no party devoted to strengthening the power & influence of unions. This was the primary reason why the DEM party became dominant in the urban cities. Without the union of DEM's & labor we would not have any where near the benefits we have today. But today the DEMs have sold their souls to global capitalism & moral relativism. The unions are simply along for the ride with a rapid rate of decline in both their power & influence. Meanwhile in most emerging markets or markets experience growth of 5%+ unions are all but non-existant. How many DEM's without power have spoken out about that in the last 15 yrs?

 

There was one. Gephardt. In his campaign against Bush he spoke about it & won my vote. Too bad he didn't get the nomination. But in 2004 even he said nothing. If there is no growth in unions overseas then they will continue to decline here & when they are gone for good democracy will be a myth. It will be a lesser of evils controlled by capitalists who care nothing about the standard of living or quality of life of most Americans. Much worse than it is today.

[AngelasDaddy0427]

I'm an Unhappy GOP because I hate Bush with a passion and everything he stands for, like fiscal irresponsibility and hypocritical values. Plus I've never liked puppets.

God I wish John McCain won...

[SuperSteve]

Content Republican.

[Chisoxfn]

Content Republican...boarding on Happy but I want to see the economy to continue to rise.

[WilliamTell]

I'm a pretty happy GOP. Our party keeps increasing the number of Senate and Reps every 2 years. Pretty good times right now.

[YASNY]

I don't claim any party affiliations other than US citizen. I believe in the GOP stance that gov't works better on the local level. I also believe that the unions need to regain their power base. I hate the fact that the House-Senate-White House are all controlled by the same party. I believe our judicial system needs to swing back to conservatism, but at this point in time that is dangerous with the GOP contolling all other branches of federal gov't.

 

I vehemently distrust both major political parties and don't think either one has the best interests of the US and her citizens at heart. They have the best interests of the party at heart. We NEED a strong moderate ticket to run in '08. I'd bust my ass to get a McCain-Leiberman ticket elected.

[Texsox]

I don't claim any party affiliations other than US citizen.  I believe in the GOP stance that gov't works better on the local level.  I also believe that the unions need to regain their power base.  I hate the fact that the House-Senate-White House are all controlled by the same party.  I believe our judicial system needs to swing back to conservatism, but at this point in time that is dangerous with the GOP contolling all other branches of federal gov't. 

 

I vehemently distrust both major political parties and don't think either one has the best interests of the US and her citizens at heart.  They have the best interests of the party at heart.  We NEED a strong moderate ticket to run in '08.  I'd bust my ass to get a McCain-Leiberman ticket elected.

 

/\ what he said /\

 

Thanks YAS, saved me a bunch of typing.

[CanOfCorn]

I am abstaining in my vote because since Reagan was president what I've heard from people voting is, "i voted for the lesser of two evils." This isn't a way to run a country. I tend to vote Democrat because socially, I am.

 

As for a smaller government, it seems odd to me that Clinton cut government programs and jobs to try to balance the budget, but the Bushes, Sr. and Jr. had and have big deficits. Although, 9/11 and Afghanistan screwed that up to some extent, so I don't blame Dubya for that part.

 

Also, Cheney, as much as I dislike that sourpuss, I did like what he said about gay marriage...it should be up to the states. Now, THAT is a Republican way of thinking. Bush, on the other hand, would probably rip the paper the bill is printed on, he would be so excited to sign it into law.

 

Juggs, i just don't think the GOP and Dems mean or represent what they originally were set up for anymore. They don't worry about us, they worry about keeping their jobs. I believe it was Andrew Sheppard in The American President who said,

 

"I was so busy trying to KEEP my job, that I forgot to DO my job."

 

And yes, I know, he was a Dem.

[jasonxctf]

Content Democrat... while I'm unhappy with my party on a National Basis, I'm very happy with how my party has been doing here on a State Basis in Illinois.

 

It could be better, but it certainly could be worse.

[mreye]

Content Democrat... while I'm unhappy with my party on a National Basis, I'm very happy with how my party has been doing here on a State Basis in Illinois.

 

It could be better, but it certainly could be worse.

 

Just a question. Not trying to spark an arguement.

 

Do you really think the Dems are doing well in Illinois, or is it that George Ryan so screwed the GOP that people want nothing to do with the Republicans?

[YASNY]

Just a question. Not trying to spark an arguement.

 

Do you really think the Dems are doing well in Illinois, or is it that George Ryan so screwed the GOP that people want nothing to do with the Republicans?

 

Considering the GOP ran ANOTHER governor candidate nameds Ryan, and had to "import" a candidate for the senate, I'd say the Illinois GOP is so screwed up that there is only one effective political party in Illinois.

[mreye]

Considering the GOP ran ANOTHER governor candidate nameds Ryan, and had to "import" a candidate for the senate, I'd say the Illinois GOP is so screwed up that there is only one effective political party in Illinois.

I absolutely agree. I think the GOP is done in Illinois for a long time. The only way to speed up the recovery would be for the National party to come in and clean house, but not put in their own people. I'm glad I live in Indiana, but I still care about what's happened to the Illinois GOP. I hope King George rots in jail.

[jasonxctf]

i think it's a combination of both the Ryan screw-up and the strength of the party.

 

I think the Ryan issue might have a greater effect on statewide races such as Govenor or Senate.. but even in local Congressional Races (Bean vs Crane) the Dems have been doing a great job of getting out the vote.

 

On a side note, I also think the great Suburban sprawl will help the party a lot. Younger people like myself that are buying their first house are moving to areas that were typically solid Republican areas. (Batavia-area, Round Lake-area, Plainfield-area, etc) Thus I would expect races in these heavily Republican areas to get closer and closer each year.

[mreye]

i think it's a combination of both the Ryan screw-up and the strength of the party.

 

I think the Ryan issue might have a greater effect on statewide races such as Govenor or Senate.. but even in local Congressional Races (Bean vs Crane) the Dems have been doing a great job of getting out the vote.

 

On a side note, I also think the great Suburban sprawl will help the party a lot. Younger people like myself that are buying their first house are moving to areas that were typically solid Republican areas. (Batavia-area, Round Lake-area, Plainfield-area, etc) Thus I would expect races in these heavily Republican areas to get closer and closer each year.

You're probably right. Good anaylis.

[Jake]

happy GOP

[Texsox]

On a side note, I also think the great Suburban sprawl will help the party a lot. Younger people like myself that are buying their first house are moving to areas that were typically solid Republican areas. (Batavia-area, Round Lake-area, Plainfield-area, etc) Thus I would expect races in these heavily Republican areas to get closer and closer each year.

 

Interesting you mentioned Round Lake (Lake County). Lake County was the most solidly Republican county in Illinois for most of the last century. They did not re-elect a Democrate to any office between 1900 and 1995. Micky Babcox was coroner for decades despite not being a Doctor. When the laws changed and he was no longer eligible to be coroner, they elected him Sherrif :headshake

 

What a machine.

[jasonxctf]

wow 95 years... I always wondered, why do we elect a coronor? How is that position a political one?

[Queen Prawn]

wow 95 years... I always wondered, why do we elect a coronor? How is that position a political one?

 

I asked the same thing to a few friends when I saw election posters for a coroner...that was just the oddest thing to me.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

Happy Republican.

 

 

I like what Bush wants to do with SS & tort reform and I also like the fact that the national party is as strong as it has ever been. Too bad the Illinois party is a flaming wreck though.

[Texsox]

Happy Republican. 

I like what Bush wants to do with SS & tort reform and I also like the fact that the national party is as strong as it has ever been.  Too bad the Illinois party is a flaming wreck though.

Nuke, you must not have gotten the memo. Starting in 1994 Pat Buchanan mandated that the GOP could not be described as flaming in any context. It was part of a family values, Moral Majority, thing.

 

I kind because I care ™

[JUGGERNAUT]

Should I bash my fellow GOP brethren for being happy? Na. I'll just say I envy you. I can not share your sentiments.

 

We are losing the war on drugs, the war on terror, & war on capitalism.

All wars we could never win in the first place but dedicate billions each yr to attacking supply rather than address demand.

Our kids & some of their parents are becoming ADD drug addicts.

A new phenomenon that the capitalist machine that infiltrates our schools

choose to ignore.

We are losing are capacity to supply basic goods & services such as vaccines.

Our health care industry is falling apart with individual insurance rates growing at better than 10% a year.

Our unions are losing the ability to fight for the most basic of all benefits to workers: health insurance.

Our unions are weakening in numbers each year.

 

I can go on & on but there is a clear trend of decline in America under basically GOP leadership. The separation of wealth has never been greater in this country. That includes the industrial revolution. Now I'm not saying that there is anything better on the other side of the aisle but there is certainly not enough good on our side of the aisle to be happy about.