Debate Now Is it possible to be a moderate in today's political climate?

Rubrik I: Financial

Liberal economic policies (bottom up) CONTRA
Conservative economic policies (trickle-down) PRO


Healthcare: Obamacare, pure-single-payer, undoing Obamacare, complete private-health care, etc. STRONGLY CONTRA - Obamacare must go

Debt reduction. How to reduce, how long it should take? My position on this is a thread unto itself. Briefly, enforce our trade agreements and give nations that do not conform to those agreements the same treatment they give us. Adjust corporate tax policy to allow for increased production so that exports exceed imports. Hold government accountable for irresponsible, wasteful spending. Lot's more.

Budget/Deficit: balanced budget amendment? PRO

Trade agreements, like NAFTA from the past, the pacific pact from today, also the large trade agreement with India, for instance. Nothing wrong with a trade agreement provided it works to our best interests and we actually enforce the terms.


Rubrik II: National defense / foreign policy

Military spending: up the spending, maintain the spending, reduce the spending (thoughts about the War on Terror are probably best written here, imo)? STRONGLY PRO

Isolationistic foreign policy vs. Interventionistic foreign policy?
INTERVENTIONIST - Preserve the petro-dollar at ALL costs. Global economics is one big game of King of the Mountain. Right now we are on top. We want to stay there. :lol:

"Nation Building" - does it work, or not? It works if we install a puppet government. If we build a nation up and then leave it to their own devices, it's a disaster and a total waste of money.

NATO? PRO

Israel / Iran ...STRONGLY PRO-ISRAEL


Rubrik III: Social Issues / Constitutional issues

Net Neutrality INITIALLY PRO but far from decided. Not an issue I am very knowledgeable about.

Marriage Equality (aka "gay" marriage vs. "traditional" marriage) STRONG PRO. It's s simple question of equal rights. Denying homosexuals the right to marry is flat-out discrimination.

abortion - pro-life? Pro-choice? PRO-CHOICE. Oppose the principle of abortion, but banning it won't stop the practice. It will just create a black-market for it and create a lot of new criminals. Abortion will die out on it's own when we, as a society, choose something different.

Legalization of Marijuana STRONGLY PRO. Great way to generate tax revenue, reduce crime, and clear out an over-crowded prison system.

2nd amendment vs. Gun Control PRO 2nd Amendment. "An armed population is a polite population". "When seconds count, the police are just minutes away". All that rhetoric, I agree with.

Prison system: death penalty PRO DEATH PENALTY

Legal system: tort reform STRONGLY PRO TORT REFORM

Cops: body-cams? OH HELL YEAH!!! Cops are sometimes just as bad as the criminals

Term limits for Congress and/or Judges? PRO for Congress, UNDECIDED for judges

Drones, droning, privacy issues PRO DRONE!

Electoral college: pro, contra? PRO
Voting, voting-rights, elections Well I am in favor of all legal and eligible citizens being able to vote. I see no harm in having to prove your legal status

Race-Racism: too much discussion, not enough, or just right? Problems get solved through discussion. What we need is more discussion and less bitching and finger-pointing

Immigration, Immigration reform STRONGLY PRO BOR
DER SECURITY AND EXPORTATION



So I am a Republican-leaning moderate. I am also strongly in favor of stem-cell research and animal testing which wasn't addressed above. Moderate on environmental issues (should be good stewards of the planet, but no need to get carried away and return to living in caves).
 
Rubrik I: Financial

Liberal economic policies (bottom up) CONTRA
Conservative economic policies (trickle-down) PRO


Healthcare: Obamacare, pure-single-payer, undoing Obamacare, complete private-health care, etc. STRONGLY CONTRA - Obamacare must go

Debt reduction. How to reduce, how long it should take? My position on this is a thread unto itself. Briefly, enforce our trade agreements and give nations that do not conform to those agreements the same treatment they give us. Adjust corporate tax policy to allow for increased production so that exports exceed imports. Hold government accountable for irresponsible, wasteful spending. Lot's more.

Budget/Deficit: balanced budget amendment? PRO

Trade agreements, like NAFTA from the past, the pacific pact from today, also the large trade agreement with India, for instance. Nothing wrong with a trade agreement provided it works to our best interests and we actually enforce the terms.


Rubrik II: National defense / foreign policy

Military spending: up the spending, maintain the spending, reduce the spending (thoughts about the War on Terror are probably best written here, imo)? STRONGLY PRO

Isolationistic foreign policy vs. Interventionistic foreign policy?
INTERVENTIONIST - Preserve the petro-dollar at ALL costs. Global economics is one big game of King of the Mountain. Right now we are on top. We want to stay there. :lol:

"Nation Building" - does it work, or not? It works if we install a puppet government. If we build a nation up and then leave it to their own devices, it's a disaster and a total waste of money.

NATO? PRO

Israel / Iran ...STRONGLY PRO-ISRAEL


Rubrik III: Social Issues / Constitutional issues

Net Neutrality INITIALLY PRO but far from decided. Not an issue I am very knowledgeable about.

Marriage Equality (aka "gay" marriage vs. "traditional" marriage) STRONG PRO. It's s simple question of equal rights. Denying homosexuals the right to marry is flat-out discrimination.

abortion - pro-life? Pro-choice? PRO-CHOICE. Oppose the principle of abortion, but banning it won't stop the practice. It will just create a black-market for it and create a lot of new criminals. Abortion will die out on it's own when we, as a society, choose something different.

Legalization of Marijuana STRONGLY PRO. Great way to generate tax revenue, reduce crime, and clear out an over-crowded prison system.

2nd amendment vs. Gun Control PRO 2nd Amendment. "An armed population is a polite population". "When seconds count, the police are just minutes away". All that rhetoric, I agree with.

Prison system: death penalty PRO DEATH PENALTY

Legal system: tort reform STRONGLY PRO TORT REFORM

Cops: body-cams? OH HELL YEAH!!! Cops are sometimes just as bad as the criminals

Term limits for Congress and/or Judges? PRO for Congress, UNDECIDED for judges

Drones, droning, privacy issues PRO DRONE!

Electoral college: pro, contra? PRO
Voting, voting-rights, elections Well I am in favor of all legal and eligible citizens being able to vote. I see no harm in having to prove your legal status

Race-Racism: too much discussion, not enough, or just right? Problems get solved through discussion. What we need is more discussion and less bitching and finger-pointing

Immigration, Immigration reform STRONGLY PRO BOR
DER SECURITY AND EXPORTATION



So I am a Republican-leaning moderate. I am also strongly in favor of stem-cell research and animal testing which wasn't addressed above. Moderate on environmental issues (should be good stewards of the planet, but no need to get carried away and return to living in caves).


Outstanding.
 
Now that I have posted my positions, I will opine on the title question (assuming that's within the rules). Yes I think you can be a moderate in today's political climate, but I think it is becoming harder for a moderate to associate with the party they lean toward, and I think both parties treat their moderates in such a way that they are becoming alienated. That's probably why we are seeing more Libertarians and registered Independents these days. As a moderate, I am often slandered and attacked by the more conservative members of my own party simply because I don't think the Democrats are wrong 100% of the time. I have certainly been tempted to leave the party and go Independent myself at times...and some Republicans would tell me not to let the door hit my ass on the way out.

My guess is that, if the trend of political polarization continues, both parties will be severely damaged in the next couple decades because moderates on both sides will say "screw it" and leave their party.
 
Now that I have posted my positions, I will opine on the title question (assuming that's within the rules). Yes I think you can be a moderate in today's political climate, but I think it is becoming harder for a moderate to associate with the party they lean toward, and I think both parties treat their moderates in such a way that they are becoming alienated. That's probably why we are seeing more Libertarians and registered Independents these days. As a moderate, I am often slandered and attacked by the more conservative members of my own party simply because I don't think the Democrats are wrong 100% of the time. I have certainly been tempted to leave the party and go Independent myself at times...and some Republicans would tell me not to let the door hit my ass on the way out.

My guess is that, if the trend of political polarization continues, both parties will be severely damaged in the next couple decades because moderates on both sides will say "screw it" and leave their party.


Actually, that is the kind of input we are looking for. I will be looking over all of the introspective responses over the next days and then will ask some more questions.

I concur with you that a viable middle can and should exist.
 
I concur with you that a viable middle can and should exist.

Well honestly, I tend to believe that most people are actually moderates. I think both parties get hijacked by their extremist element and, because our media is customized to target audiences, the perception of each party by the opposing party is the extreme view. In other words, if you watch MSNBC or listen to NPR, they are going to focus on the extremists of the right-wing. Thus, listeners/watchers will assume that the extreme element is actually the norm when, in fact, it isn't. The same thing happens if you flip it and watch Sean Hannity or listen Rush Limbaugh or Dennis Prager. I actually had a very close friend years ago, shortly after 9/11, who was a true-blue liberal and she asked me once how I could be pro-choice and support the war in Iraq at the same time. She was looking at me like I was an alien with three heads. When I asked her what one had to do with the other, she simply couldn't grasp the concept that my party does not determine my views, my views determine the degree of allegiance I have to my party.

In my view, an eagle with one wing can't fly. The eagle needs both its left wing and its right wing to work in harmony if it wants to soar.
 
Moderation is the path to nirvana aka sanity :) That is why my attitude on all major issues is fairly moderate. I try not to swing to either extreme. But of course, there are some issues where one has to take firm stand.
 
Rubrik I: Financial


Liberal economic policies (bottom up): Contra in the main. But I do think we need a basic safety net for the elderly, children, cripples, retards, etc…


Conservative economic policies (trickle-down) : Pro in the main. But agree we need to tax the top 1% at a slightly higher rate. Not as a hand out to losers, but to reduce debt. If you earn a $1,000,000 a year or more, you can afford to pay an extra $10,000 tax to pay down the debt. We need to scrap our tax code and move to a simple tiered system with no deductions or special incentives.

Healthcare: Obamacare, pure-single-payer, undoing Obamacare, complete private-health care, etc.- : Obamacare is Clusterfuck of epic proportions – you cannot fix a government created problem with another government plan. I prefer better Health Savings accounts , Insurance reform, and better access to catastrophic type policies.

Debt reduction. How to reduce, how long it should take? : Cap federal spending at 18% of GDP (that is what we take in) Balance the budget by growing the economy.


Budget/Deficit: balanced budget amendment? We'll never control our debt if we keep adding to it.A balanced budget should be our NUMBER 1 PRIORITY and make it very hard to get around (2/3 majority vote in House and Senate) . Government must live within its means.

Trade agreements, like NAFTA from the past, the pacific pact from today, also the large trade agreement with India, for instance. Depends on the details. I prefer FREE trade, these deals usually have so many strings attached you need to be a puppeteer to navigate them…..I don’t trust bureaucrats to negotiate trade agreements. Send in Warren Buffet and other business leaders.



Rubrik II: National defense / foreign policy



Military spending: up the spending, maintain the spending, reduce the spending (thoughts about the War on Terror are probably best written here, imo)? Cut spending by 5-10 % by eliminating fraud waste and abuse. Then Cap military spending at 4%-5% of GDP. We should also charge other nations for defense. If the wealthy nations of the EU want the US to defend them against Russian aggression, send a (large) check!

Isolationistic foreign policy vs. Interventionistic foreign policy? A combination of both but leaning more towards isolationism. We need to protect our interests abroad, but stay the hell out of “foreign entanglements”. Need the US to protect you? Fine, Pay us !

"Nation Building" - does it work, or not? No, it’s time to focus on domestic issues.

NATO? – . Let the Euro’s defend themselves. Or SEND A CHECK!

Israel / Iran ...-Israel is the only stable democracy in the mid-east. But they need to stand on their own two feet. Wean them off of the tit.... Iran is a shitstain on a snot rag. They will destroy themselves.



Rubrik III: Social Issues / Constitutional issues



Net Neutrality- Keep government out of the internet. PERIOD.

Marriage Equality (aka "gay" marriage vs. "traditional" marriage)- Pro

abortion - pro-life? Pro-choice? – Pro choice in principle, pro-life in reality. It actually sickens me to think about it. I am sure the women who “choose” to get abortions carry a heavy enough burden. They should have the choice, (If I were a woman I couldn’t do it!) I do oppose 3rd term abortions unless the life of the mother is truly at risk.

Legalization of Marijuana – Pro

2nd amendment vs. Gun Control – From my cold dead hands!! An armed society is a polite society.

Prison system: death penalty – Pro- but with DNA evidence only

Legal system: tort reform - On the main -PRO

Cops: body-cams? PRO

Term limits for Congress and/or Judges? Both. Public “service” should not be a “career”.

Drones, droning, privacy issues – End the patriot act, end illegal surveillance

Electoral college: pro, contra? Pro.


Voting, voting-rights, elections – Voter ID is a no brainer. You need an ID for everything, except voting? fuck you.

Race-Racism: too much discussion, not enough, or just right? The issue has been hijacked by race hustlers. Blacks do face challenges, but they are not insurmountable. This is a very complicated issue.





 
Rubrik I: Financial


Liberal economic policies (bottom up): Contra in the main. But I do think we need a basic safety net for the elderly, children, cripples, retards, etc…


Conservative economic policies (trickle-down) : Pro in the main. But agree we need to tax the top 1% at a slightly higher rate. Not as a hand out to losers, but to reduce debt. If you earn a $1,000,000 a year or more, you can afford to pay an extra $10,000 tax to pay down the debt. We need to scrap our tax code and move to a simple tiered system with no deductions or special incentives.

Healthcare: Obamacare, pure-single-payer, undoing Obamacare, complete private-health care, etc.- : Obamacare is Clusterfuck of epic proportions – you cannot fix a government created problem with another government plan. I prefer better Health Savings accounts , Insurance reform, and better access to catastrophic type policies.

Debt reduction. How to reduce, how long it should take? : Cap federal spending at 18% of GDP (that is what we take in) Balance the budget by growing the economy.


Budget/Deficit: balanced budget amendment? We'll never control our debt if we keep adding to it.A balanced budget should be our NUMBER 1 PRIORITY and make it very hard to get around (2/3 majority vote in House and Senate) . Government must live within its means.

Trade agreements, like NAFTA from the past, the pacific pact from today, also the large trade agreement with India, for instance. Depends on the details. I prefer FREE trade, these deals usually have so many strings attached you need to be a puppeteer to navigate them…..I don’t trust bureaucrats to negotiate trade agreements. Send in Warren Buffet and other business leaders.



Rubrik II: National defense / foreign policy




Military spending: up the spending, maintain the spending, reduce the spending (thoughts about the War on Terror are probably best written here, imo)? Cut spending by 5-10 % by eliminating fraud waste and abuse. Then Cap military spending at 4%-5% of GDP. We should also charge other nations for defense. If the wealthy nations of the EU want the US to defend them against Russian aggression, send a (large) check!


Isolationistic foreign policy vs. Interventionistic foreign policy? A combination of both but leaning more towards isolationism. We need to protect our interests abroad, but stay the hell out of “foreign entanglements”. Need the US to protect you? Fine, Pay us !


"Nation Building" - does it work, or not? No, it’s time to focus on domestic issues.


NATO? – . Let the Euro’s defend themselves. Or SEND A CHECK!


Israel / Iran ...-Israel is the only stable democracy in the mid-east. But they need to stand on their own two feet. Wean them off of the tit.... Iran is a shitstain on a snot rag. They will destroy themselves.


Rubrik III: Social Issues / Constitutional issues



Net Neutrality- Keep government out of the internet. PERIOD.

Marriage Equality (aka "gay" marriage vs. "traditional" marriage)- Pro

abortion - pro-life? Pro-choice? – Pro choice in principle, pro-life in reality. It actually sickens me to think about it. I am sure the women who “choose” to get abortions carry a heavy enough burden. They should have the choice, (If I were a woman I couldn’t do it!) I do oppose 3rd term abortions unless the life of the mother is truly at risk.

Legalization of Marijuana – Pro

2nd amendment vs. Gun Control – From my cold dead hands!! An armed society is a polite society.

Prison system: death penalty – Pro- but with DNA evidence only

Legal system: tort reform - On the main -PRO

Cops: body-cams? PRO

Term limits for Congress and/or Judges? Both. Public “service” should not be a “career”.

Drones, droning, privacy issues – End the patriot act, end illegal surveillance

Electoral college: pro, contra? Pro.


Voting, voting-rights, elections – Voter ID is a no brainer. You need an ID for everything, except voting? fuck you.

Race-Racism: too much discussion, not enough, or just right? The issue has been hijacked by race hustlers. Blacks do face challenges, but they are not insurmountable. This is a very complicated issue.






I knew I liked you for some reason Zander. Now I know why.

Need the US to protect you? Fine, Pay us !

Trump, and others, talked about this a couple years ago and I agree 100%. Some people protested that it would make us mercenaries. As far as I am concerned, label us whatever you want as long as the check clears. I have no problem telling Japan, Germany, et al. "you can pay us to defend you or you can pay to defend yourselves. Either way you are going to pay so which will it be?" because no matter what they choose we either save or make money.

I would propose that foreign nations pay us full expenses for their defense plus a $1 billion a year defense fee, plus $1,000,000 to the family of any of our service people who die protecting a foreign country.
 
Great idea for a debate, Stat.




Rubrik I: Financial

Liberal economic policies (bottom up)
PRO

Conservative economic policies (trickle-down) CONTRA

Healthcare: Obamacare, pure-single-payer, undoing Obamacare, complete private-health care, etc. PRO

I think it is a pro in the sense that it fixes many of the problems with the system prior to it's implementation, but I still feel it's, overall, less effective than it could be.

I'm a pragmatist, and I believe that trial and error is a great way to learn what works, and what doesn't.

We KNOW the previous system was simply NOT working, so trying something new (Obamacare) is a step in the right direction. I think that, as a country, we are too afraid of experimentation. Not being afraid to try new systems is the only way we'll progress.

Debt reduction. How to reduce, how long it should take?

It's going to be a long process..

So what?

Defunding our country is not a smart way to reduce debt. We need to GAIN money through a better economy, trade, and work with our allies, not BORROW money from America's domestic needs to pay for money we already BORROWED elsewhere.

Budget/Deficit: balanced budget amendment?
INBETWEEN

A balanced budget amendment is a great idea in theory, because it promotes fiscal responsibility of the government, but it also boxes you into a corner. The country can survive without a balanced budget, but if we are forced to balance the budget because a mandate and domestic policies suffer because of it, was it really a 'win'?


Trade agreements, like NAFTA from the past, the pacific pact from today, also the large trade agreement with India, for instance.

I feel the same way about all trade: As long as we are trading with countries that uphold our economic and humanitarian standards, then I am personally alright with it so long as it does not negatively effect our workforce at home..


Rubrik II: National defense / foreign policy

Military spending: up the spending, maintain the spending, reduce the spending?
PRO

I am 100% for military spending. I would even be alright with spending increasing, so long as it was at a time when we could afford it without taking away from our domestic policies.

The Defense is VERY important to me. As long as defense spending is being used on technological advancements that put us ahead of the rest of the world, and not on the 4 millionth battleship, built based on a 1976 design, then I am all for it. Anything that is an 'old', or 'out of date' idea, we need to concentrate a LOT less on. Like 99% less on.

If we are going to spend so much on defense, it better be damn worth it.


The money MUST be spent on major
technological advancements.
I can't stress that enough.


Isolationistic vs. interventionalist

A healthy balance of the two is what is needed.
We should not be afraid to interact with the rest of the world when it comes to their conflicts. We should always be a pragmatic voice in the discussion. I have no problem with our leaders sticking their noses in the business of other countries' disputes.

BUT, when it comes to actually sending in American lives to 'support' a cause, we HAVE to be more isolationist.

The way I see it is, this isn't 1860 any more.
There is no need to waste human lives. We have flying machines called "drones" that can 'support' a cause well enough.
Troops should only be sent in to PROTECT us when we are IN NEED OF PROTECTION. Not a moment before.

"Nation Building"
CONTRA

A nation will only build itself. We cannot build it for them.

We can help set up the plans with spoken diplomacy, but once again, we can NOT continue to throw living Americans in the middle of a rundown country and tell them to "build it."

NATO? PRO

I am all for working closely with other nations to better the world we share. I don't see it as a sign of weakness to be willing to compromise with others for the betterment of everyone. Still though, nobody should be in command of American troops except American military leadership, just as nobody should be in charge of French troops except French leadership.


Israel / Iran PRO / CONTRA

Iran should NOT have nuclear weapons, period. they cannot be trusted.
Israel is an ally, but we CANNOT put their interests before ours. Simple as that. As long as the interests of both their country and ours are congruent, they should have nothing to worry about.


Rubrik III: Social Issues / Constitutional issues

Net Neutrality
PRO

It just makes sense.


Marriage Equality (aka "gay" marriage vs. "traditional" marriage)
PRO

If you have the ability to separate your personal views from your political views, it just makes sense.


abortion - pro-life? Pro-choice?
Pro choice, within reason.

I personally do not believe abortions should happen past a certain point, but who am I to make that call? I am not in their shoes, and that is not my body.

As long as there are no horrors of partial birth abortions allowed for mere convenience reasons, I am pro-choice, though the mother should be well aware of ALL available options, including adoption.



Legalization of Marijuana CONTRA

Only think it should be allowed for medicinal purposes, though I do believe in decriminalization.



Gun Control
PRO, within reason.

Common sense regulations and strong background checks are a must, though I don't know if banning certain kinds of clips will help.


Prison system: death penalty
PRO, within reason.

The only time someone should be sentenced to death is when there is undeniable, scientific DNA proof that incriminates the suspect without a shadow of a doubt. I do believe that the serial murderers/rapists don't deserve to be 'rehabilitated' on the taxpayers' dime. That money could go towards helping people who actually DESERVE IT.



Cops: body-cams? PRO

Why be afraid to try something new? It could possibly make a huge positive difference.

And if it doesn't, oh well. At least we tried it. Now we know.


Term limits for Congress and/or Judges?
PRO

It gives them the incentive to make their limited time in office matter.
It just makes sense.




Drones, droning, privacy issues

Drones are the future. I personally LOVE drones. Every drone out there is a troop that gets to be ALIVE, home with his/her family.
I don't believe they should be used domestically to police our citizens though.



Electoral college:
CONTRA..ish

I've heard some good arguments for both sides and can understand the different view points, though I lean more towards the National Popular Vote side of the argument.

Voting, voting-rights, elections

NO VOTER SUPPRESSION.

Race-Racism: too much discussion, not enough, or just right?
Not enough in the correct way.

I feel that it isn't talked about very intelligently from either side. The 'PC' police are so pretentious and annoying, than I can understand why there is such a divide (well that, and because there are racists out there still. Some on this board, though I won't name names..).

I feel that if people worried less about what is rude, and more about what is just wrong, there would be more done to help the issue.



Immigration, Immigration reform
PRO

Sending everybody here illegally back over the border is stupid and unrealistic.
I support both a pathway to citizenship for the people here already, and A LOT of increased border security to stop the problem.


___________________________________________________________________________________



Well, there are my answers.

I feel I am traditionally progressive on the majority of economic and social issues, but more conservative on issues such as the defense budget, the death penalty, and marijuana legalization. I feel that my positions on abortion and gun control are both pretty centrist, themselves.

In my politics, I ALWAYS try to put pragmatism first.
I feel that the best way to make our country better is to try new things. If they don't work, move on to the next grand idea.


I feel this result I got from an online political quiz but sums up where I stand.


s060_010.gif



I'm not quite in the moderate square, but I'm only a space or so off.

Definitely not "COMMUNIST RADICAL LEFTIST DRONE", like I get called here multiple times DAILY haha.



Well, that's all I got. Thanks, guys.





EDIT: Just looked at this post..

"That's all I got"?!?
Holy shit, that's a novel. I can't believe I wrote so much. My apologies to anybody who decides to dive in, the shear size of this post alone must look pretty ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
I concur with you that a viable middle can and should exist.

Well honestly, I tend to believe that most people are actually moderates. I think both parties get hijacked by their extremist element and, because our media is customized to target audiences, the perception of each party by the opposing party is the extreme view. In other words, if you watch MSNBC or listen to NPR, they are going to focus on the extremists of the right-wing. Thus, listeners/watchers will assume that the extreme element is actually the norm when, in fact, it isn't. The same thing happens if you flip it and watch Sean Hannity or listen Rush Limbaugh or Dennis Prager. I actually had a very close friend years ago, shortly after 9/11, who was a true-blue liberal and she asked me once how I could be pro-choice and support the war in Iraq at the same time. She was looking at me like I was an alien with three heads. When I asked her what one had to do with the other, she simply couldn't grasp the concept that my party does not determine my views, my views determine the degree of allegiance I have to my party.

In my view, an eagle with one wing can't fly. The eagle needs both its left wing and its right wing to work in harmony if it wants to soar.

The bolded and enlarged: I have encountered this as well.

Sometimes, extreme partisans forget that most people are not single-issue voters. There has never yet been a Gubernatorial, Senatorial or Presidential nominee for whom I have voted where I agreed with every single plank in his or her platform. In fact, there have been points where I have strongly agreed on some very important issues, but the most important one of all, the economy, was the deciding factor for me.

I do find it very interesting, when we compare your responses to mine, that on some social issues, you appear to clock in more on the Left than I, and yet, you are a Republican and I am a Democrat.

I think that both you and I prove that Heinz-57 lives!
 
Rubrik I: Financial


Liberal economic policies (bottom up): Contra in the main. But I do think we need a basic safety net for the elderly, children, cripples, retards, etc…


Conservative economic policies (trickle-down) : Pro in the main. But agree we need to tax the top 1% at a slightly higher rate. Not as a hand out to losers, but to reduce debt. If you earn a $1,000,000 a year or more, you can afford to pay an extra $10,000 tax to pay down the debt. We need to scrap our tax code and move to a simple tiered system with no deductions or special incentives.

Healthcare: Obamacare, pure-single-payer, undoing Obamacare, complete private-health care, etc.- : Obamacare is Clusterfuck of epic proportions – you cannot fix a government created problem with another government plan. I prefer better Health Savings accounts , Insurance reform, and better access to catastrophic type policies.

Debt reduction. How to reduce, how long it should take? : Cap federal spending at 18% of GDP (that is what we take in) Balance the budget by growing the economy.


Budget/Deficit: balanced budget amendment? We'll never control our debt if we keep adding to it.A balanced budget should be our NUMBER 1 PRIORITY and make it very hard to get around (2/3 majority vote in House and Senate) . Government must live within its means.

Trade agreements, like NAFTA from the past, the pacific pact from today, also the large trade agreement with India, for instance. Depends on the details. I prefer FREE trade, these deals usually have so many strings attached you need to be a puppeteer to navigate them…..I don’t trust bureaucrats to negotiate trade agreements. Send in Warren Buffet and other business leaders.



Rubrik II: National defense / foreign policy




Military spending: up the spending, maintain the spending, reduce the spending (thoughts about the War on Terror are probably best written here, imo)? Cut spending by 5-10 % by eliminating fraud waste and abuse. Then Cap military spending at 4%-5% of GDP. We should also charge other nations for defense. If the wealthy nations of the EU want the US to defend them against Russian aggression, send a (large) check!


Isolationistic foreign policy vs. Interventionistic foreign policy? A combination of both but leaning more towards isolationism. We need to protect our interests abroad, but stay the hell out of “foreign entanglements”. Need the US to protect you? Fine, Pay us !


"Nation Building" - does it work, or not? No, it’s time to focus on domestic issues.


NATO? – . Let the Euro’s defend themselves. Or SEND A CHECK!


Israel / Iran ...-Israel is the only stable democracy in the mid-east. But they need to stand on their own two feet. Wean them off of the tit.... Iran is a shitstain on a snot rag. They will destroy themselves.


Rubrik III: Social Issues / Constitutional issues



Net Neutrality- Keep government out of the internet. PERIOD.

Marriage Equality (aka "gay" marriage vs. "traditional" marriage)- Pro

abortion - pro-life? Pro-choice? – Pro choice in principle, pro-life in reality. It actually sickens me to think about it. I am sure the women who “choose” to get abortions carry a heavy enough burden. They should have the choice, (If I were a woman I couldn’t do it!) I do oppose 3rd term abortions unless the life of the mother is truly at risk.

Legalization of Marijuana – Pro

2nd amendment vs. Gun Control – From my cold dead hands!! An armed society is a polite society.

Prison system: death penalty – Pro- but with DNA evidence only

Legal system: tort reform - On the main -PRO

Cops: body-cams? PRO

Term limits for Congress and/or Judges? Both. Public “service” should not be a “career”.

Drones, droning, privacy issues – End the patriot act, end illegal surveillance

Electoral college: pro, contra? Pro.


Voting, voting-rights, elections – Voter ID is a no brainer. You need an ID for everything, except voting? fuck you.

Race-Racism: too much discussion, not enough, or just right? The issue has been hijacked by race hustlers. Blacks do face challenges, but they are not insurmountable. This is a very complicated issue.






Outstanding input. Really outstanding. Thanks for taking the time to do this.
 
Great idea for a debate, Stat.




Rubrik I: Financial

Liberal economic policies (bottom up)
PRO

Conservative economic policies (trickle-down) CONTRA

Healthcare: Obamacare, pure-single-payer, undoing Obamacare, complete private-health care, etc. PRO

I think it is a pro in the sense that it fixes many of the problems with the system prior to it's implementation, but I still feel it's, overall, less effective than it could be.

I'm a pragmatist, and I believe that trial and error is a great way to learn what works, and what doesn't.

We KNOW the previous system was simply NOT working, so trying something new (Obamacare) is a step in the right direction. I think that, as a country, we are too afraid of experimentation. Not being afraid to try new systems is the only way we'll progress.

Debt reduction. How to reduce, how long it should take?

It's going to be a long process..

So what?

Defunding our country is not a smart way to reduce debt. We need to GAIN money through a better economy, trade, and work with our allies, not BORROW money from America's domestic needs to pay for money we already BORROWED elsewhere.

Budget/Deficit: balanced budget amendment?
INBETWEEN

A balanced budget amendment is a great idea in theory, because it promotes fiscal responsibility of the government, but it also boxes you into a corner. The country can survive without a balanced budget, but if we are forced to balance the budget because a mandate and domestic policies suffer because of it, was it really a 'win'?


Trade agreements, like NAFTA from the past, the pacific pact from today, also the large trade agreement with India, for instance.

I feel the same way about all trade: As long as we are trading with countries that uphold our economic and humanitarian standards, then I am personally alright with it so long as it does not negatively effect our workforce at home..


Rubrik II: National defense / foreign policy

Military spending: up the spending, maintain the spending, reduce the spending?
PRO

I am 100% for military spending. I would even be alright with spending increasing, so long as it was at a time when we could afford it without taking away from our domestic policies.

The Defense is VERY important to me. As long as defense spending is being used on technological advancements that put us ahead of the rest of the world, and not on the 4 millionth battleship, built based on a 1976 design, then I am all for it. Anything that is an 'old', or 'out of date' idea, we need to concentrate a LOT less on. Like 99% less on.

If we are going to spend so much on defense, it better be damn worth it.


The money MUST be spent on major
technological advancements.
I can't stress that enough.


Isolationistic vs. interventionalist

A healthy balance of the two is what is needed.
We should not be afraid to interact with the rest of the world when it comes to their conflicts. We should always be a pragmatic voice in the discussion. I have no problem with our leaders sticking their noses in the business of other countries' disputes.

BUT, when it comes to actually sending in American lives to 'support' a cause, we HAVE to be more isolationist.

The way I see it is, this isn't 1860 any more.
There is no need to waste human lives. We have flying machines called "drones" that can 'support' a cause well enough.
Troops should only be sent in to PROTECT us when we are IN NEED OF PROTECTION. Not a moment before.

"Nation Building"
CONTRA

A nation will only build itself. We cannot build it for them.

We can help set up the plans with spoken diplomacy, but once again, we can NOT continue to throw living Americans in the middle of a rundown country and tell them to "build it."

NATO? PRO

I am all for working closely with other nations to better the world we share. I don't see it as a sign of weakness to be willing to compromise with others for the betterment of everyone. Still though, nobody should be in command of American troops except American military leadership, just as nobody should be in charge of French troops except French leadership.


Israel / Iran PRO / CONTRA

Iran should NOT have nuclear weapons, period. they cannot be trusted.
Israel is an ally, but we CANNOT put their interests before ours. Simple as that. As long as the interests of both their country and ours are congruent, they should have nothing to worry about.


Rubrik III: Social Issues / Constitutional issues

Net Neutrality
PRO

It just makes sense.


Marriage Equality (aka "gay" marriage vs. "traditional" marriage)
PRO

If you have the ability to separate your personal views from your political views, it just makes sense.


abortion - pro-life? Pro-choice?
Pro choice, within reason.

I personally do not believe abortions should happen past a certain point, but who am I to make that call? I am not in their shoes, and that is not my body.

As long as there are no horrors of partial birth abortions allowed for mere convenience reasons, I am pro-choice, though the mother should be well aware of ALL available options, including adoption.



Legalization of Marijuana CONTRA

Only think it should be allowed for medicinal purposes, though I do believe in decriminalization.



Gun Control
PRO, within reason.

Common sense regulations and strong background checks are a must, though I don't know if banning certain kinds of clips will help.


Prison system: death penalty
PRO, within reason.

The only time someone should be sentenced to death is when there is undeniable, scientific DNA proof that incriminates the suspect without a shadow of a doubt. I do believe that the serial murderers/rapists don't deserve to be 'rehabilitated' on the taxpayers' dime. That money could go towards helping people who actually DESERVE IT.



Cops: body-cams? PRO

Why be afraid to try something new? It could possibly make a huge positive difference.

And if it doesn't, oh well. At least we tried it. Now we know.


Term limits for Congress and/or Judges?
PRO

It gives them the incentive to make their limited time in office matter.
It just makes sense.




Drones, droning, privacy issues

Drones are the future. I personally LOVE drones. Every drone out there is a troop that gets to be ALIVE, home with his/her family.
I don't believe they should be used domestically to police our citizens though.



Electoral college:
CONTRA..ish

I've heard some good arguments for both sides and can understand the different view points, though I lean more towards the National Popular Vote side of the argument.

Voting, voting-rights, elections

NO VOTER SUPPRESSION.

Race-Racism: too much discussion, not enough, or just right?
Not enough in the correct way.

I feel that it isn't talked about very intelligently from either side. The 'PC' police are so pretentious and annoying, than I can understand why there is such a divide (well that, and because there are racists out there still. Some on this board, though I won't name names..).

I feel that if people worried less about what is rude, and more about what is just wrong, there would be more done to help the issue.



Immigration, Immigration reform
PRO

Sending everybody here illegally back over the border is stupid and unrealistic.
I support both a pathway to citizenship for the people here already, and A LOT of increased border security to stop the problem.


___________________________________________________________________________________



Well, there are my answers.

I feel I am traditionally progressive on the majority of economic and social issues, but more conservative on issues such as the defense budget, the death penalty, and marijuana legalization. I feel that my positions on abortion and gun control are both pretty centrist, themselves.

In my politics, I ALWAYS try to put pragmatism first.
I feel that the best way to make our country better is to try new things. If they don't work, move on to the next grand idea.


I feel this result I got from an online political quiz but sums up where I stand.


s060_010.gif



I'm not quite in the moderate square, but I'm only a space or so off.

Definitely not "COMMUNIST RADICAL LEFTIST DRONE", like I get called here multiple times DAILY haha.



Well, that's all I got. Thanks, guys.





EDIT: Just looked at this post..

"That's all I got"?!?
Holy shit, that's a novel. I can't believe I wrote so much. My apologies to anybody who decides to dive in, the shear size of this post alone must look pretty ridiculous.


Outstanding input. Thanks for taking the time, that is exactly what we are looking for.
 
Rubrik I: Financial

Liberal economic policies (redistribution hand-outs, big government involvement in nearly everything everyone does, zero taxation for the middle class and lower, heavy taxation for the income from the upper middle class, even though the 1% don't have much in the way of income they have assets; anti-liberty pro-authoritarian) Contra
Conservative economic policies (redistribution hand-ups, big government involvement in mostly everything everyone does, zero taxation for the middle class, medium taxation for the income from the the upper middle class, hand waving about the fact that the 1% don't have much in the way of income they have assets; anti-liberty pro-authoritarian) Contra

Libertarian economic policies (redistribution hand-ups, government involvement primarily in police, fire, and rescue, but also in other "necessary" government functions, liberty for all economically, no matter what group you are in, so long as your liberty does not take away the liberty of others) Pro

Healthcare: Obamacare Contra, pure-single-payer Contra, undoing Obamacare Pro, complete private-health care, etc. Contra
Wrt health care people should be free to choose what health care they want, who they get it from, and how they pay for it. As for the people who don't have the money to pay for what they want / need, medicaid is a fine program that they can sign up for once they have spent their own assets. Why should we have to sell our homes, and fork over our income so that you can live in your fancy home and drive your fancy car while I pay for your health care?


Debt reduction. How to reduce, how long it should take? Paying off the debt... Easy. Print money. Say 2t a year till it's gone.

Budget/Deficit: balanced budget amendment? Yes. Eliminate un-necessary government programs, and limit the necessary ones till there is no deficit. Hard choices have to be made. Borrowing money against your children's income is theft.

Trade agreements, like NAFTA from the past, the pacific pact from today, also the large trade agreement with India, for instance. Trade agreements are necessary, our government needs to make sure they are fair and benefit the American worker, not just American corporations. In short, our government needs to do it's job, not just do what benefits CEO bonus checks.


Rubrik II: National defense / foreign policy

Military spending: up the spending, maintain the spending, reduce the spending (thoughts about the War on Terror are probably best written here, imo)? End the war on that which we fear (aka. terror) bring them home. Reduce military spending to that which is necessary to defend us and fight necessary wars against armies. Being the worlds police force is too expensive.

Isolationistic foreign policy vs. Interventionistic foreign policy? Neither. Must have balance.

"Nation Building" - does it work, or not? Works for civilized countries like Europe, Japan, South Korea not work for the middle east that has been fighting for thousands of years.

NATO? Must have balance and that requires allies.

Israel / Iran ... Are two countries in the middle east, our interventionist policies have not worked in the middle east have they?


Rubrik III: Social Issues / Constitutional issues

Net Neutrality - Ill defined. Some people's idea of net neutrality is the opposite of what other people's idea of net neutrality is. IOW it's not neutral at all. Liberty is good, NSA snooping our messages and email, ... bad. My messages are my private papers, stay out. My internet provider is my internet provider. Break up monopolies, instead of creating them so we have more choices. Let the market decide what it wants.

Marriage Equality (aka "gay" marriage vs. "traditional" marriage) Marriage should not be managed by governments. Not at the federal level, nor the state level. Marriage should only be seen as a contract from the government perspective. Laws limiting the freedom of gays to marry, plural marriages, should be stricken. As with other contracts, as long as the people are consensual adult (humans) and no laws are being broken, why not?

abortion - pro-life? Pro-choice? After there is a heartbeat and/or brainwave activity the child should be protected as any other person should who is living in the USA. Just because you are small and insignificant to some should not be reason enough to get away with murder of the living person. That said if the mother is at risk, that is a different situation.

Legalization of Marijuana Pro

2nd amendment vs. Gun Control 2nd amendment

Prison system: death penalty Pro

Legal system: tort reform Pro

Cops: body-cams? Pro

Term limits for Congress and/or Judges? Pro

Drones, droning, privacy issues Liberty

Electoral college: pro, contra? Pro
Voting, voting-rights, elections Pro fixing what we have by allowing people to vote for their favorite and second favorite, so that their vote will not go to waste if their favorite does not get more vote than their second favorite.

Race-Racism: too much discussion, not enough, or just right? Ghetto culture in America today is extremely racist. IMO the racism is coming only from welfare mentality groups and people who benefit from racism. Once people get out of the ghettos the democrats have built for them, they stop being racist.

Immigration, Immigration reform Pro immigration reform. Don't let any more illegals in. Give the illegals here who want to stay here and have proof that they have been fantastic citizens for 3-5 years temporary work visa's and a path to citizenship similar to the one Rubio proposed. Boot the rest out.

(Many of these above issues seem to tie-in with the issue of "Religious Liberty", so some may want to combine answers for a number of issues and bring in "Religious Liberty" as well, but would need to define it first. I myself am refraining from the religious aspect as could be applied to most of these issues, just because I feel that is the right way for me to proceed.) See first amendment.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Those appear to me to be the leading issues of our day. If I missed something and you think it is important, then feel free to add it. No, I have not forgotten the 10th, 14th, 15th or 17th amendments, but they can gladly mentioned on your part pertaining to issues of the day.

The goal of this is for each person to discover for himself exactly how far to the Right or to the Left he is, generally speaking, or if he is maybe more in the middle.


3.) At the end of your posting, make a self-assessment.

I'm libertarian. I believe, firmly, that if we measure our political decisions based on life, liberty, and justice for all... we will all be better off in the end.
 
Now that I've posted the self assessment, I'll give my 2 cents on being a moderate in today's political climate.



I think it's possible, and that most people inherently ARE more moderate, but our political system makes it very hard to feel like the moderates' voices are being heard.

You have essentially two choices, if we're being honest here: Left or Right.

For me, who has a slight tilt to the left on the majority of issues, it's easy to pick between the parties, but there could be a time when the Democratic party becomes too left for me to vote for them.
I may hold less conservative views than progressive in total, but those conservative views are some of the most important to me, such as defense spending or capital punishment.
If the Democratic party starts pushing too hard for the defense budget to fall, or for scientifically convicted mass murderers and child rapists to be 'rehabilitated', I would feel COMPLETELY alienated.

I also feel worse for right leaning moderates, because I feel they are even less represented by the Republicans than I could ever imagine I am by the Democrats.
It's my personal opinion that the Republican party in more recent years has INTENTIONALLY started to weed out moderates and pragmatists to better build a coalition of 'true believers.'
I don't feel the Democratic party has hit that stage yet, and I hope they don't. There are a few 'true believer' types in the leadership, but left-of-center moderates (such as myself), and pragmatic liberals are still highly represented in the party, when you look at the numbers.


If there was ever a way to go back to the old days, where the Democratic Party had a legitimate moderate and conservative
faction, and the Republicans had a liberal/centrist one, I think moderates would feel more a part of the system.

One of my biggest regrets with politics in America is the Republican party edging out their Northeastern moderate/progressive wing, the faction that brought us great, pragmatic thinkers like T. Roosevelt and Nelson Rockefeller.
 
Last edited:
For me, who has a slight tilt to the left on the majority of issues, it's easy to pick between the parties, but there could be a time when the Democratic party becomes too left for me to vote for them.
I may hold less conservative views than progressive in total, but those conservative views are some of the most important to me, such as defense spending or capital punishment.
If the Democratic party starts pushing too hard for the defense budget to fall, or for scientifically convicted mass murderers and child rapists to be 'rehabilitated', I would feel COMPLETELY alienated.

I feel exactly the same way. On the issues, I am about 65% Republican and 35% Democrat but the way that the Republican party has been moving in the last several years makes it harder and harder for me to maintain my allegiance. I base my vote on what is the most important to me at the time. The last few elections that has been the economy and, as such, my vote has gone strongly Republican. When the economy was good, I had the luxury of voting on issues of a social nature. I have actually voted for Democrats in my life because the nation was either in a place where what was most important to me at the time was something the Democrats were better on or because the Republican candidate was simply a worm that I just couldn't bring myself to vote for. It's rare, but it has happened. :lol:

It's my personal opinion that the Republican party in more recent years has INTENTIONALLY started to weed out moderates and pragmatists to better build a coalition of 'true believers.'

I don't think it's leadership so much as the ultra-conservative base and the media propagandists (Limbaugh, Hannity, Prager, etc). Leadership will accept whoever wants to vote Republican. They are happy with any vote they can get. The real right-wing radicals though would love nothing more than for me to leave the party and take the rest of the moderates with me. The fact that they are cutting off their nose to spite their face is lost on them. Without the moderates, they would never win an election again. That's true of the Democrats too, but I agree that the Democrats alienate their moderates far less than the Republicans do.
 
For me, who has a slight tilt to the left on the majority of issues, it's easy to pick between the parties, but there could be a time when the Democratic party becomes too left for me to vote for them.
I may hold less conservative views than progressive in total, but those conservative views are some of the most important to me, such as defense spending or capital punishment.
If the Democratic party starts pushing too hard for the defense budget to fall, or for scientifically convicted mass murderers and child rapists to be 'rehabilitated', I would feel COMPLETELY alienated.

I feel exactly the same way. On the issues, I am about 65% Republican and 35% Democrat but the way that the Republican party has been moving in the last several years makes it harder and harder for me to maintain my allegiance. I base my vote on what is the most important to me at the time. The last few elections that has been the economy and, as such, my vote has gone strongly Republican. When the economy was good, I had the luxury of voting on issues of a social nature. I have actually voted for Democrats in my life because the nation was either in a place where what was most important to me at the time was something the Democrats were better on or because the Republican candidate was simply a worm that I just couldn't bring myself to vote for. It's rare, but it has happened. :lol:

It's my personal opinion that the Republican party in more recent years has INTENTIONALLY started to weed out moderates and pragmatists to better build a coalition of 'true believers.'

BTW.....It's odd because you would think the extremists on each side would be ultra-sweet to moderates because they need their vote, but it's not the case.
 
Now that I've posted the self assessment, I'll give my 2 cents on being a moderate in today's political climate.



I think it's possible, and that most people inherently ARE more moderate, but our political system makes it very hard to feel like the moderates' voices are being heard.

You have essentially two choices, if we're being honest here: Left or Right.

For me, who has a slight tilt to the left on the majority of issues, it's easy to pick between the parties, but there could be a time when the Democratic party becomes too left for me to vote for them.
I may hold less conservative views than progressive in total, but those conservative views are some of the most important to me, such as defense spending or capital punishment.
If the Democratic party starts pushing too hard for the defense budget to fall, or for scientifically convicted mass murderers and child rapists to be 'rehabilitated', I would feel COMPLETELY alienated.

I also feel worse for right leaning moderates, because I feel they are even less represented by the Republicans than I could ever imagine I am by the Democrats.
It's my personal opinion that the Republican party in more recent years has INTENTIONALLY started to weed out moderates and pragmatists to better build a coalition of 'true believers.'
I don't feel the Democratic party has hit that stage yet, and I hope they don't. There are a few 'true believer' types in the leadership, but left-of-center moderates (such as myself), and pragmatic liberals are still highly represented in the party, when you look at the numbers.


If there was ever a way to go back to the old days, where the Democratic Party had a legitimate moderate and conservative
faction, and the Republicans had a liberal/centrist one, I think moderates would feel more a part of the system.

One of my biggest regrets with politics in America is the Republican party edging out their Northeastern moderate/progressive wing, the faction that brought us great, pragmatic thinkers like T. Roosevelt and Nelson Rockefeller.


Even Ronald Reagan, in 1976, in a procedural move designed to make the convention look like a 2nd ballot convention, announced that Richard Schweiker (R-PA), a liberal Republican, would be his running mate in the case of his nomination and brought forth a floor-vote to force Pres. Gerald Ford to do likewise - to announce his running mate before the actual convention balloting for President. Even as a self-avowed Conservative, he was willing to select arguably one of the four most Liberal Republicans out there at the time to be his running mate, were he to have secured the nomination.

I suspect that Hillary Clinton, should she be nominated (and I am 100% sure she will), will select a running mate who is to the Left of her, for instance, Julian Castro.
 
Where I stand:

Rubrik I: Financial

Liberal economic policies (bottom up)
-PRO
Conservative economic policies (trickle-down) - CONTRA

I am pro-Liberal economic policies because statistically, the economy has done better under Democratic presidents than under Republican presidents, on the whole, or has recovered from a Democratic administration that inherited an economic mess from a Republican administration.


Healthcare: Obamacare, pure-single-payer, undoing Obamacare, complete private-health care, etc.

I am for pure-single payer, because I have experience with such a system and know first-hand that it works like a top. This puts me to the Left of Obamacare.

Debt reduction. How to reduce, how long it should take.
-strongly PRO.

Slight economic diet for over 70 years. We must spend less than we bring in, enough to completely erase the interest on the debt and then some. Do it over 70 years time, and then the debt should be at such a small level that it is insignificant. Our Republic has lived from debt every single year since it's exception, excluding one single year in the 1830s. Notice that I never wrote "Debt elimination".

Budget/Deficit: balanced budget amendment?
strongly PRO, enacted in three or four parts, over 16 years, or 4 presidential terms. For instance, in the first 4 years, the deficit is allowed to go only so and so much % over budget, in the next four 4 years, less, in the next four years, less and so on.

Trade agreements, like NAFTA from the past, the pacific pact from today, also the large trade agreement with India, for instance.
DEPENDS.

Not all trade agreements are equal. Most on the Right loved NAFTA when it first went through. In fact, Bill Clinton got it passed with Republican votes in the 1990s. Now, practically everyone says they hate it, that it caused Ross Perot's "giant sucking sound". Who knows for sure. I think the trade agreement with India ( Vikrant ) is one of the smartest moves of the Obama administration and obviously, with Asian partners growing in strength, we must protect our interests there. We cannot hide from trade agreements.

Rubrik II: National defense / foreign policy

Military spending: up the spending, maintain the spending,
reduce the spending (thoughts about the War on Terror are probably best written here, imo)

Reduce, slowly but surely, over 50 years time.

Isolationistic foreign policy vs. Interventionistic foreign policy?
NEITHER NOR

We live in a world where being isolationistic is physically impossible, but constant interventions have cost us TRILLIONS of dollar. It's time for interventionism to stop. I also think it's time to slowly phase out most of our presence in Europe, without leaving NATO.

"Nation Building" - does it work, or not?
NO, it does not. It needs to stop.

NATO -
PRO, but with a reduced presence.

Israel / Iran -
strongly PRO-Israel!

On Iran, conflicted. Not sure that any solution will work, but that 10 years of behind-the-scenes diplomacy on the part of 7 nations has earned the right to be at least tried out.

Rubrik III: Social Issues / Constitutional issues

Net Neutrality -
must be maintained. The Internet should stay as free as possible.

Marriage Equality (aka "gay" marriage vs. "traditional" marriage)

For me, it is not a religious issue, it is a legal issue. Traditional marriage, as it has been called, as been altered many times over the last 2,000 years. This is just another step in the evolution of marriage. All it does is to grant same-sex partners the same protections and financial benefits under the law as it already does hetero married couples. And I am speaking as a straight man who has a child.

abortion: pro-life, pro choice?

I am pro-life. I believe that abortion is inherently wrong and that only in the most extreme of cases (incest, rape, miscarriage is highly likely and a direct threat to the life of the mother) should abortions be performed. For me, it is not a religious issue, but it is an ethical one and deals with the life of the unborn life-form within the mother. Whether or not you want to call a fetus a "human being" or not, it is still a life-form, one that was created through human sexual activity, on cannot protect itself, and if we are going to claim to be a fair and benevolent society, then we must protect the lives of unborn life-forms. For me, the life of the more vulnerable has 1st priority in this case. But I am also strongly pro-contraception. There is no reason in the world to not use contraception to avoid having children before one is willing and ready to have one. On this issue, I separate myself strongly from most Liberals.


Legalization of Marijuana -
STRONGLY CONTRA

I believe that the marijuana legalization movement is wrong, that this substance is far more dangerous when used as a recreational drug as people want to admit. I am for use of medical marijuana, under the control of a licensed physician. On this issue, I separate myself strongly from most Liberals.

2nd amendment vs. Gun Control -
PRO 2nd Amendment, but..

...and this is an important but: I am against semi-automatic weapons of any sort on the streets and do not believe this was the intent of our Founders, that were they to see what is happening today, they would recoil in horror. I also do not believe that there is any justification for any kind of armed insurrection within the USA against the Federal Governement, using the 2nd amendment as a basis. It is just a matter of decades before mini-nuclear weapons will be available, the size of wrist-watches. Are we going to cover them as protected under the 2nd amendment, too? On this issue, I am in the mddle.

Prison system: death penalty -
PRO, in the most extreme of cases

But, the standards need to be uniform and this should NOT be a states-rights issue. Calling the death penalty "barbaric" doesn't cut it with me. Tell that to the family of murder victims. And tell that to the family of murder victims where perps deliberately picked a state that does NOT have the death penalty in order to commit mass murder. Mass murder should always be punished with the death penalty, as a strong deterrent to cause the next potential mass murderer to think twice. If putting a mass murderer to death, keeps another group of 10 people somewhere else from being murdered, even just once, then the death penalty has served its purpose, imo. On this issue, I separate myself strongly from most liberals.

Legal system: tort reform -
PRO

Cops: body-cams? -
strongly PRO

protects the cops against false accusations, helps the cops to remember to always behave themselves properly, provides clarity in establish and exact time-line of event in each and every criminal case and adds neutral evidence in every case. Video cams cannot lie. Body-cams for all cops is a win-win situation for everybody. This should easily be a 100% vote in the US Congress, should a bill to mandate this come up.

Term limits for Congress and/or Judges -

CONTRA for Congress, PRO for Judges who are non-elected. For elected officials, we already have term-limits, they are called "elections".

Drones, droning, privacy issues -
this is juristic new-land for all of us, entering an age where drones down to the size of small birds can photogaph and film pretty much every aspect of a person's life, or drop a bomb on/ shoot a missile at people. This is plain old inhuman. But the Pandora's box is now opened, I see no hope of it ever closing. On this one, the Libertarians who have been screaming very loudly about the growing danger of this are right, imo.

Electoral college: pro, contra?
Voting, voting-rights, elections

Don't end the Electoral college: mend it! I made a huge thread on this in the CDZ more than one year ago, covering my own recommendations for electioneering:

Electioneering US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

The OP is so large, it encompasses 5 postings, and the one pertinent to the EC is in posting number 3.


Race-Racism: too much discussion, not enough, or just right?

We have a problem with racism, to be sure. We are talking about it far too much and not doing enough. We are stoking emotions without actually doing tangible things. In doing so, we excacerbate an already bad situation and give racists even more verbal ammunition.

Immigration, Immigration reform -
PRO immigration reform.

To use the words of a very Conservative friend of mine:

1.) you are never going to be able to root out all 11 million who are here illegally
2.) it will cost far more to do it than it is worth to do it
3.) it will cause a shadow economy to crash, a shadow economy that should actually be adding to our economy.


So, I say: close the border with a physical fence, an underground "moat" and an electronic fence. Pass Obama's immigration reform and be done with it.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Self assesment: I'm more of a Heinz 57 than most people would think. I am certainly not a pure-Liberal but far enough away from Conservativism that I would never be considered a Conservative.

I consider myself in the middle to the Left of middle on economic issues, in the middle to the Right of middle on national defense issues, but either strongly to the left or strongly to the right on social/constitutional issues, and in one case, strongly Libertarian.

Specifically, on Israel, marijuana legalization, trade agreements, NATO, abortion, death penalty, tort reform, term-limits, it is fair to say that I am strongly on the RIGHT.

But on Immigration Reform, Healthcare, bottom-up economic policy, interventionism, nation-building, marriage equality - there is no doubt I come in strongly on the LEFT.

On droning, I come in squarely on the Libertarian side of the issue.

On the other issues, it's harder to define. Because humans are complex beings.

In sum-total, when I look at my own responses, I am therefore more of a moderate than I realize.
I suppose one would have called me a Blue-Dog Democrat in Bill Clinton's day. Maybe, maybe not.

So, yes, I do think it's possible to be a "Moderate" in today's political climate and that many of us are more moderate more of the time than we realize. I see no reason for a person who have to subscribe in part and parcel to every aspect of any ideology. That's just bunk.

And it is the MIDDLE in the USA that decides elections, and by extension, the direction of the Union for the next four years, each time.

Ok, who is next?

Rubrik I: Financial

Liberal economic policies (bottom up)
-PRO
Conservative economic policies (trickle-down) - CONTRA

Republican economics have been hijacked by the Libertarians and as such are exceptionally bad for this nation. That doesn't mean I support out of control spending either. I believe in a balance where spending equals revenues and if you can't raise the revenues you can't spend but if you have to spend then you must raise revenues.


Healthcare: Obamacare, pure-single-payer, undoing Obamacare, complete private-health care, etc.

I am for pure-single payer because it is the best overall for average people. I am open to a high end market based private healthcare system to satisfy those with more money than sense.

Debt reduction. How to reduce, how long it should take.
-strongly PRO.

I want a national debt tax of 75% on all income over $1 million irrespective of the source of the income. This tax will only be in effect as long as there is a national debt. Funds from this tax are used for no other purpose but to pay down the debt. If the national debt is zero then this tax ceases to take effect. If the national debt grows again it automatically kicks in. This national debt tax can only be repealed or altered with a supermajority in both houses.

Budget/Deficit: balanced budget amendment?
strongly PRO,

A balanced budget is a myth and it will always fluctuate. The national debt tax will take care of any budget overexpenditures and I don't foresee politicians not spending every penny they can.

Trade agreements, like NAFTA from the past, the pacific pact from today, also the large trade agreement with India, for instance.
Strong trade agreements only.

No trade agreements without equality of all factors, such as wages, environmental impact, working conditions, etc. Furthermore all corporations, foreign and domestic must file full disclosures and pay the appropriate taxes for all trade under the agreement. If these cannot be enforced then no trade agreement can be reached.

Rubrik II: National defense / foreign policy

Military spending: up the spending, maintain the spending,
reduce the spending (thoughts about the War on Terror are probably best written here, imo)

Reduce the US military to a maximum of 20% of the budget only, no exceptions in peace time. War time expenditure is subject to the national debt tax.

Isolationistic foreign policy vs. Interventionistic foreign policy?
Peaceful coexistence

Lose the delusion that the USA is the "world's policeman". If other people want to kill each other then let them sort out their differences by themselves. All others are welcome to share in the benefits of peaceful coexistence

"Nation Building" - does it work, or not?
NO

Waste of time and money. Built America first.


NATO -
PRO

Support the good programs and stay away from the rest

Israel / Iran -
Whatever

Israel needs to grow up and come to a realistic working relationship with it's neighbors. The Israelis have to live there so they need to come to terms with what it takes to coexist. That is Israel's problem and they are smart enough to figure it out for themselves.


Rubrik III: Social Issues / Constitutional issues

Net Neutrality -
must be maintained. The Internet should stay as free as possible.

Marriage Equality (aka "gay" marriage vs. "traditional" marriage)

14 Amendment applies to all. Everyone should have the opportunity to marry the consenting adult of their choice.

abortion: pro-life, pro choice?

I am pro-Choice. I can make a very strong argument for providing free contraception as a means of reducing the incidence of abortions. Yes, they will still happen because no one is perfect. But it is a private matter for the woman concerned. She makes the choice. The rest of us must just butt out.


Legalization of Marijuana -
STRONGLY PRO

Marijuana is no more harmful than alcohol or tobacco. Just apply all the same laws and enforce them. The damage done to this nation by the phony war on drugs needs to be stopped once and for all. Prohibition gave us gang warfare and drug prohibition is no different. There are better ways to handle it than pretending that we can regulate human nature.

2nd amendment vs. Gun Control -
PRO 2nd Amendment

No one wants to take away anyone's guns but the proliferation is a major problem. Eliminating the war on drugs will reduce the proliferation. Holding gun owners accountable for the safe storage and handling of their guns is a no brainer IMO.

Prison system: death penalty -
PRO, in the most extreme of cases

Mass murderers and serial killers deserve the DP. For the rest it is cheaper to simply incarcerate them and then no mistakes are made that can't be remediated.

Legal system: tort reform -
ANTI

This is hobby horse of the Right because they keep on losing in the courts when they are caught violating the law and causing harm.

Cops: body-cams? -
strongly PRO

Overdue and should be standard equipment since it will eliminate the need for "eye witnesses" when it comes to how the cops do their jobs. 99% of cops do a great job and the cameras will prove it. The other 1% don't deserve to be cops IMO.

Term limits for Congress and/or Judges -

Term limits are a band aid. Eliminate the problem by outlawing the Campaign Industrial Complex that has completely corrupted the system.

Electoral college: pro, contra?
Voting, voting-rights, elections

I support Stat's redistricting based upon 1000 representatives and districts crossing state lines and equal in size.

Race-Racism: too much discussion, not enough, or just right?

Time to bring this out into the open and have an honest debate.

Immigration, Immigration reform -
PRO immigration reform.

We are a nation of immigrants. They come here with the intention of working hard to make a better life for their families. We should be encouraging that because it is the same spirit that built this nation.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Self assesment: I am a fiscally conservative and socially moderate pragmatist. We the People deserve what works best for everyone. Failed dogma on either side just hurts everyone and causes divisions. This nation was founded on a compromise and we should keep that in mind going forward.
 

Forum List

Back
Top