What is your political affiliation? All new for Dude!

What is your political affiliation?

  • Green Rainbow

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Republican

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Democratic

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Libertarian

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Independent

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    0
Independent in theory, but I always find myself leaning more toward the left on the majority of political issues. Any vote other than republican or democratic is a waste, unfortunately.
 
I'm a Dem but I really have no faith in most of the Democratic leaders in Washington.

Richardson '08!
 
I'm conservative on economic issues and liberal on social issues. I would not vote for one of today's Republicans because they are the exact opposite of my beliefs - they are social conservatives and economic liberals - and they are also ridiculously bad at governing. While I may align more as a moderate conservative on foreign policy, the Dems seem to understand how to use the military properly - covert ops, strategic strikes, nimble forces, asserting authority while also being reasonably diplomatic - not invasions, tanks, occupations, pissing off the rest of the world without purpose.

I want Clinton back (but NOT Hillary) because I miss having a conservative as president.
 
How old were you when Clinton was in office, ten?

But seriously, all kidding aside, your post above is right on.
 
I'm basically same as dude. Liberal on social beliefs (Esp. stem cell research.) Conservative on economic issues (i think we need to get spending under control asap) and hawkish on Iran/etc.
:wink:
 
^ so you are hawkish on iran, meaning you support taking a proactive position much like we have tried to do with iraq......but how could we do both this as well as bring spending under control? it seems, besides tax cuts, that the war in Iraq is the biggest cost this country has had since 2003.

I think we should leave Iran alone for now, and if and when it comes down to it, I think full scale action should be avoided, as Iran would be a much more formidable foe than Iraq.
 
I know, how funny is that!



I would only support a multilateral stance on Iran involving nato et al. because we certainly do not need another Iraq mess. From what I have heard, aren't the younger Iranian students mostly against the government as well?
 
palindrome said:
I know, how funny is that!

I would only support a multilateral stance on Iran involving nato et al. because we certainly do not need another Iraq mess. From what I have heard, aren't the younger Iranian students mostly against the government as well?
Click to expand...

Ok that makes more sense...multilateral action is the only way to go.

Im not sure about the younger students....students always tend to be more liberal, but from what I understand iran is pretty pro-propaganda and low tolerance for dissent. did you hear about what it just did to the U.K. Marines, though? you can tell they are not to be taken seriously, they just want more bargaining power.
 
I'm un-enrolled liked the majority of people in Massachusetts.
 
Patrick said:
^ so you are hawkish on iran, meaning you support taking a proactive position much like we have tried to do with iraq......but how could we do both this as well as bring spending under control? it seems, besides tax cuts, that the war in Iraq is the biggest cost this country has had since 2003.

I think we should leave Iran alone for now, and if and when it comes down to it, I think full scale action should be avoided, as Iran would be a much more formidable foe than Iraq.
Click to expand...

Maybe wars shouldn't cost that much. Personally, I think that the Iraq war, done correctly, should have cost a tenth or less of what we've paid. use covert ops to support locals in uprisings, sneak in Delta Force to take out Saddam, take over his government but keep basic systems - electricity, food, water, etc - in place and running. GET RID OF NO BID CONTRACTS. I'm all for the free market, but these contracts are the opposite of the free market. Basic services such as food need to be provided for by US military personnel, not contractors. The military is one place in government that can run its operations more effectively and efficiently than contractors.
 
In New Hampshire I'm a Democrat all the way -- we need some taxes! Many services are lacking - public transportation!? Support healthcare and social reforms that the Dems are pushing up there.

In Massachusetts, I'm Independant, but would lean towards Republicans to shake things up a bit. Mass. seems annoyingly set in its ways - Blue Laws, early T closing times, 6 traffic cops at every single pot-hole repair, car insurance, the evil excise tax - I'm all for reforming these things, and it doesn't seem like the current gov't is going to do much.

Nationally, I lean much more towards the Democrats.
 
I find it ironic that Bush and Cheney, who love giving speeches with military personnel framing their background, never saw combat. Cheney, the biggest, big-mouthed hawk of this century received at least 3 deferments (I'm in college, I have children) and our brave president, who challenged the enemy to "bring it on!" seemed to be AWOL for most of his national guard duty. Imagine a President of the United States sending out that sort of challenge to the enemy! I think anyone who is a hawk when it comes to invading other countries without absolute justification, should go right out and sign up in whatever branch of the military they choose. If you're so hell bent on us getting involved a war, then get out there and fight for what you believe!
 
^ They'd probably end up in the path of some friendly fire.
 
registered republican, but now most libertarian.

Everything's free in a-merica
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top