a new party

norwegen

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
8,986
Reaction score
3,747
Points
390
Location
Ormond Beach, FL
i didnt say “policies”

i said the party itself has moved too far right

anti gay rights

the war on pot

advocating violence against their enemies

indulging a dictatorial traitor

agreeing that the only good democrat is a dead one
Yea, we agree that the only good Democrat is a dead one.

One out of five ain't bad.
Nah...Democrats keep us conservatives in check.

Im OK with that.

It is how it works.
Democrats have been the sole reason for compromise. The sole reason.
Thats doesnt make sense. It take a minimum of two to compromise.
I see you have never negotiated before.
I know it takes two to compromise.

The right is the side that always caves.

Democrats have been the sole reason for compromise.
so the one who caves is not the one who compromises?

Am I missing something here?

Yes, I am.

I am no idiot. One who compromises ensures the opposite doesnt cave. Instead those that compromise makes sure no one caves and both sides get some of what they want.

That is compromise.

I have absolutely no idea what you are saying.

Just to clarify...one side makes the other side cave and that is compromise?

Wow.
I did not say the right does not compromise. That's their problem. They always compromise. They've compromised so much in the last 250 years that now the country is divided, that now socialism is a big part of our economy.

Democrats are always the reason for compromise. The right always caves. Enough said.
 
Last edited:

SC Patriot

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2020
Messages
955
Reaction score
594
Points
873
democrats are moving too far left

republicans have gone too far right

i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days

we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates
conservatives are mainstream, the Dems are far left wing extremist who are attempting create a one Party banana republic
right wingers are not mainstream

REAL conservatives might be but right wingers are not
I am a conservative as it applies to how I live my life. I follow an ideology that helps me make decisions for myself, my family , my community and my business.
Does that make me a right winger?
Lets do the check box.

Personal responsibility....check
Learn from my mistakes....check
do not blame others for my decisions.....check
Do not count on others to help me.....check
Do not ask others to help me.....check
Never count on government to help me other than national security which I am not allowed to be a prat of....check
Abortion....dont believe in it as I was supposed to be an aborted baby....and instead I am 35 years married, well educated, a couple of married kids and a business that survivied COVID....BUT....I will always support a SCOTUS decision....check
I am not a fan of welfare but my human emotion allows me to respect it and support it....albeit. no fan at all. I never took it and trust me...at the age of 22 and homeless, I needed it.

SO am I a right winger?

You tell me.
no


i respect all of your positions

and i want pot legal and equal rights for gays, atheists, nonchristians

and i dont want the bible used as law of the land

am i a leftwinger?
what rights do gays, atheists and nonchristians not have?
They have them all as they should as the constitution guided our legislators and justices to agree to it.

But as I listen to the narrative...it seems Gays, athiests and minorities should have MORE rights than the rest of us.
And THAT is the problem no one sees.
 

Cecilie1200

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
49,444
Reaction score
11,435
Points
2,030
democrats are moving too far left
republicans have gone too far right
i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days
we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates
I've largely given up on this idea, considering the stranglehold the two "major" parties have on our election system. Plus, if such a party can't appear NOW, as ridiculous and polarized as things are, one NEVER will.

What I'm hoping now is that one of the parties will wake up and realize that a majority of the country wants moderation and cooperation, and be the first to take advantage of that. The problem is that the wings have most of the energy, and therefore the influence.

I don't know what fixes this.
It is actually more simple than you realize.
The Constitution is not a living document. It is a guideline.
It has resulted in the development of a union
It has allowed the freeing of people in bondage
It has allowed for fair elections
It has allowed for a SCOTUS that makes monumental decisions
It has allowed for the right to vote for women
It has allowed for the right to vote for all Americans
It has allowed for equal rights for all Americans
It has allowed for 3 equal branches of government offering checks and balances.

Sure, we were imperfect as a country back in the 1700's....we were new, we had habits of our heritages.....but it is our constitution that FORCED us to right our wrongs.

So what fixes it? Let the constitution do its job.

It really isnt that difficult. Only to the politicians who are trying to get votes.

And THAT is the problem.
Let the Constitution do what? Mind explaining further?
Not to start an argument. What is considered moderate these days? Like for these topics:
abortion
healthcare
taxes
national defense
foreign policy at large
What is the moderate position on each?
Abortion is the closest to being a binary argument. The rest all exist along a continuum and are not binary.

And I think we've fallen into a trap, thinking that one side has to "win" on any given issue, and one side has to "lose".

How about both sides collaborating, innovating, and creating something NEW, like our Constitution? That way we all have skin in the game.

America used to be able to innovate, back when we were great.
I agree, progress is only made through compromise and collaboration. But, that's not really a stance it's just asking the current parties to talk to each other. I was more curious as to what are the political beliefs of a moderate. Usually when they are asked it's quite clear that they would more than fit into one party or the other.
I think there are a couple of characteristics, depending on the individual moderate. So:
  • Some moderates have strong feelings on any given issue, but their opinions as a whole don't fit with one of the tribes. So, a moderate may be passionately pro choice and passionately pro lowering income taxes. Neither tribe, then, is a fit for them.
  • Some moderates really do want to find some kind of middle ground on most issues. They believe that there are decent or fair arguments on both ends, and want to at least begin the conversation by finding shared views and going from there.
  • Some moderates think that both tribes are narcissistic gasbags and would rather just approach each issue on its own merits, taking some ideas from column A, some from column B, and the rest from new ideas.
My two cents, anyway.
I don't think you have to be a 'moderate' to want to compromise. As a liberal, I'd rather get something rather than nothing.

But since this thread is about a moderate party, what is that exactly? How are a group of people who claim to be in the middle however their various opinions on a range of topics will individually slide from liberal to conservative leaning is supposed to make up a cohesive political party?
That I couldn't tell you, since we've never really had one. I think a glimpse of it came a few years ago when there was talk of a Kasich/Hickenlooper ticket.

But to your point, I think a party that was clearly committed to collaboration and new ideas would draw many people who didn't necessarily agree with its candidates on every issue. So the appeal would be more about general approach than specific positions.
Please do not build John Kasich into what he is not. He is far from moderate.
Lets see.
the constitution allowed for women to vote. It was only because of the constitution that were given the right to vote. I agree with the decision and I respect it.
The consitution allowed for the decision of Roe V Wade. I disagree with the decision, but I respect it.

You see, our constitution was written in a way where it allowed for debate and it allowed for majority decision and implementation of laws and rights.

Seems to be working well.

Albeit, there are those that say it is a living document and we must adjust to it.

To me? That is wrong. It is a document and we must apply it....not Obey it....that would be wrong....apply it. And that is what we do.

And it is working.
Good points but it only works when people stand up for rights. I think that is why many call it a living document.
We have three branches of government. 2 of them are elected and one is appointed by the executive branch...however...with the confirmation of the senate. Those elections are how people can stand up for their rights. But when people are voted in they still must adhere to the constitution as it is a guidance for legislative decisions made by those elected.
Sure, protests are good....and they allow the legislators to hesitate and reconsider....but it is the constitution that keeps them in check and not simply do what they want to do for votes, but instead so what the constitution has deemed best for the overall good.
I know...the left would love to toss the constitution. But without it? We would not have women voting, African Americans voting. abortion legalized. The ACLU pushing rights of Americans.
The constitution ensures we do the right thing and not do something that can be damaging.
A good example is the ACA. Justice Roberts was well aware that the constitution does not allow for forcing anyone to purchase something from the day they are born to the day they die. So he called it a tax.
For right or wrong and regardless of how you feel...it was the constitution that guided that decision. And without the creativity of Justice Roberts, the act was unconstitutional.

Just thin about this....what if a law was passed that said you MUST buy only American made cars....and you MUST buy it at no age older than 18? It is the constitution that prevents such ridiculous laws being imposed on the American People.
what if a law was passed that you must be a christian or you lose your rights?
What if you asked a question based on something real and meaningful and sensible, rather than on your drunken, religiophobic delusions?
 
OP
A

anynameyouwish

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2018
Messages
5,921
Reaction score
1,462
Points
170
democrats are moving too far left

republicans have gone too far right

i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days

we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates
conservatives are mainstream, the Dems are far left wing extremist who are attempting create a one Party banana republic
right wingers are not mainstream

REAL conservatives might be but right wingers are not
I am a conservative as it applies to how I live my life. I follow an ideology that helps me make decisions for myself, my family , my community and my business.
Does that make me a right winger?
Lets do the check box.

Personal responsibility....check
Learn from my mistakes....check
do not blame others for my decisions.....check
Do not count on others to help me.....check
Do not ask others to help me.....check
Never count on government to help me other than national security which I am not allowed to be a prat of....check
Abortion....dont believe in it as I was supposed to be an aborted baby....and instead I am 35 years married, well educated, a couple of married kids and a business that survivied COVID....BUT....I will always support a SCOTUS decision....check
I am not a fan of welfare but my human emotion allows me to respect it and support it....albeit. no fan at all. I never took it and trust me...at the age of 22 and homeless, I needed it.

SO am I a right winger?

You tell me.
no


i respect all of your positions

and i want pot legal and equal rights for gays, atheists, nonchristians

and i dont want the bible used as law of the land

am i a leftwinger?
what rights do gays, atheists and nonchristians not have?

they have them currently but some on your side would deny them

gay marriage would be denied

many on your team would pass laws denying muslims and atheists equal rights.

do you accept gay marriage?
 

SC Patriot

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2020
Messages
955
Reaction score
594
Points
873
i didnt say “policies”

i said the party itself has moved too far right

anti gay rights

the war on pot

advocating violence against their enemies

indulging a dictatorial traitor

agreeing that the only good democrat is a dead one
Yea, we agree that the only good Democrat is a dead one.

One out of five ain't bad.
Nah...Democrats keep us conservatives in check.

Im OK with that.

It is how it works.
Democrats have been the sole reason for compromise. The sole reason.
Thats doesnt make sense. It take a minimum of two to compromise.
I see you have never negotiated before.
I know it takes two to compromise.

The right is the side that always caves.

Democrats have been the sole reason for compromise.
well...saying the right is the one that always caves and the left is the sole reason for compromise pretty much answers your question

But you will use spin to redefine your post.

Go at it.
 

norwegen

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
8,986
Reaction score
3,747
Points
390
Location
Ormond Beach, FL
democrats are moving too far left

republicans have gone too far right

i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days

we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates
conservatives are mainstream, the Dems are far left wing extremist who are attempting create a one Party banana republic
right wingers are not mainstream

REAL conservatives might be but right wingers are not
I am a conservative as it applies to how I live my life. I follow an ideology that helps me make decisions for myself, my family , my community and my business.
Does that make me a right winger?
Lets do the check box.

Personal responsibility....check
Learn from my mistakes....check
do not blame others for my decisions.....check
Do not count on others to help me.....check
Do not ask others to help me.....check
Never count on government to help me other than national security which I am not allowed to be a prat of....check
Abortion....dont believe in it as I was supposed to be an aborted baby....and instead I am 35 years married, well educated, a couple of married kids and a business that survivied COVID....BUT....I will always support a SCOTUS decision....check
I am not a fan of welfare but my human emotion allows me to respect it and support it....albeit. no fan at all. I never took it and trust me...at the age of 22 and homeless, I needed it.

SO am I a right winger?

You tell me.
no


i respect all of your positions

and i want pot legal and equal rights for gays, atheists, nonchristians

and i dont want the bible used as law of the land

am i a leftwinger?
what rights do gays, atheists and nonchristians not have?
When moonbats say that we're anti-gay rights, they think we actually deny rights, as if somehow we have that power.

They don't understand that we simply don't recognize "rights" that breach meaning and reason. A marriage between two gays is no more meaningful than a marriage between two salamanders.

The leftwing is full of straw men.
 

norwegen

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
8,986
Reaction score
3,747
Points
390
Location
Ormond Beach, FL
i didnt say “policies”

i said the party itself has moved too far right

anti gay rights

the war on pot

advocating violence against their enemies

indulging a dictatorial traitor

agreeing that the only good democrat is a dead one
Yea, we agree that the only good Democrat is a dead one.

One out of five ain't bad.
Nah...Democrats keep us conservatives in check.

Im OK with that.

It is how it works.
Democrats have been the sole reason for compromise. The sole reason.
Thats doesnt make sense. It take a minimum of two to compromise.
I see you have never negotiated before.
I know it takes two to compromise.

The right is the side that always caves.

Democrats have been the sole reason for compromise.
well...saying the right is the one that always caves and the left is the sole reason for compromise pretty much answers your question

But you will use spin to redefine your post.

Go at it.
There's a difference between compromise and a reason for compromise.

Learn to read, eh.
 

Billiejeens

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2019
Messages
13,608
Reaction score
7,464
Points
995
i didnt say “policies”

i said the party itself has moved too far right

anti gay rights

the war on pot

advocating violence against their enemies

indulging a dictatorial traitor

agreeing that the only good democrat is a dead one
Yea, we agree that the only good Democrat is a dead one.

One out of five ain't bad.
Nah...Democrats keep us conservatives in check.

Im OK with that.

It is how it works.
Democrats have been the sole reason for compromise. The sole reason.
Thats doesnt make sense. It take a minimum of two to compromise.
I see you have never negotiated before.
I know it takes two to compromise.

The right is the side that always caves.

Democrats have been the sole reason for compromise.
so the one who caves is not the one who compromises?

Am I missing something here?

Yes, I am.

I am no idiot. One who compromises ensures the opposite doesnt cave. Instead those that compromise makes sure no one caves and both sides get some of what they want.

That is compromise.

I have absolutely no idea what you are saying.

Just to clarify...one side makes the other side cave and that is compromise?

Wow.
What is being said is that only the right ever compromises
The left never gives in.
When compromise happens it because the right is forced to compromise their values.
 

Billiejeens

Platinum Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2019
Messages
13,608
Reaction score
7,464
Points
995
democrats are moving too far left

republicans have gone too far right

i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days

we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates
conservatives are mainstream, the Dems are far left wing extremist who are attempting create a one Party banana republic
right wingers are not mainstream

REAL conservatives might be but right wingers are not
I am a conservative as it applies to how I live my life. I follow an ideology that helps me make decisions for myself, my family , my community and my business.
Does that make me a right winger?
Lets do the check box.

Personal responsibility....check
Learn from my mistakes....check
do not blame others for my decisions.....check
Do not count on others to help me.....check
Do not ask others to help me.....check
Never count on government to help me other than national security which I am not allowed to be a prat of....check
Abortion....dont believe in it as I was supposed to be an aborted baby....and instead I am 35 years married, well educated, a couple of married kids and a business that survivied COVID....BUT....I will always support a SCOTUS decision....check
I am not a fan of welfare but my human emotion allows me to respect it and support it....albeit. no fan at all. I never took it and trust me...at the age of 22 and homeless, I needed it.

SO am I a right winger?

You tell me.
no


i respect all of your positions

and i want pot legal and equal rights for gays, atheists, nonchristians

and i dont want the bible used as law of the land

am i a leftwinger?
what rights do gays, atheists and nonchristians not have?
They have them all as they should as the constitution guided our legislators and justices to agree to it.

But as I listen to the narrative...it seems Gays, athiests and minorities should have MORE rights than the rest of us.
And THAT is the problem no one sees.
It is a problem that reasonable people see.
 

norwegen

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
8,986
Reaction score
3,747
Points
390
Location
Ormond Beach, FL
i didnt say “policies”

i said the party itself has moved too far right

anti gay rights

the war on pot

advocating violence against their enemies

indulging a dictatorial traitor

agreeing that the only good democrat is a dead one
Yea, we agree that the only good Democrat is a dead one.

One out of five ain't bad.
Nah...Democrats keep us conservatives in check.

Im OK with that.

It is how it works.
Democrats have been the sole reason for compromise. The sole reason.
Thats doesnt make sense. It take a minimum of two to compromise.
I see you have never negotiated before.
I know it takes two to compromise.

The right is the side that always caves.

Democrats have been the sole reason for compromise.
so the one who caves is not the one who compromises?

Am I missing something here?

Yes, I am.

I am no idiot. One who compromises ensures the opposite doesnt cave. Instead those that compromise makes sure no one caves and both sides get some of what they want.

That is compromise.

I have absolutely no idea what you are saying.

Just to clarify...one side makes the other side cave and that is compromise?

Wow.
What is being said is that only the right ever compromises
The left never gives in.
When compromise happens it because the right is forced to compromise their values.
I should have said only the left has ever been the reason for compromise. Not just Democrats.

The Anti-Federalists were powerless to stop the Federalists from centralizing the government at the Constitutional Convention. Fortunately, though, the Federalists were still right of center.
 

Papageorgio

The Ultimate Winner
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
48,284
Reaction score
9,345
Points
2,070
Location
PNW
You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days.

moderate

dont want civil war
dont want religious laws
laws based on logic, reason and necessity
government out of private life
police do their jobs without killing people in the streets
fair tax system
affordable education
affordable healthcare

limit immigration to people who;
speak enough english to get by
have employment ready for them
will not get goverment handouts

stop the war on pot
all citizens have equal rights and protections

be more small business friendly
Fair tax system, affordable education, affordable healthcare? What does any of that mean? Limit immigration because they can or can’t speak English?

Laws based on logic, reason and necessity?

Sounds like politics by feelings. That is where we already are.
 

progressive hunter

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
24,608
Reaction score
10,309
Points
950
i didnt say “policies”

i said the party itself has moved too far right

anti gay rights

the war on pot

advocating violence against their enemies

indulging a dictatorial traitor

agreeing that the only good democrat is a dead one
Yea, we agree that the only good Democrat is a dead one.

One out of five ain't bad.
Nah...Democrats keep us conservatives in check.

Im OK with that.

It is how it works.
Democrats have been the sole reason for compromise. The sole reason.
Thats doesnt make sense. It take a minimum of two to compromise.
I see you have never negotiated before.
I know it takes two to compromise.

The right is the side that always caves.

Democrats have been the sole reason for compromise.
so the one who caves is not the one who compromises?

Am I missing something here?

Yes, I am.

I am no idiot. One who compromises ensures the opposite doesnt cave. Instead those that compromise makes sure no one caves and both sides get some of what they want.

That is compromise.

I have absolutely no idea what you are saying.

Just to clarify...one side makes the other side cave and that is compromise?

Wow.
What is being said is that only the right ever compromises
The left never gives in.
When compromise happens it because the right is forced to compromise their values.
what you keep calling right is still leftwing,,, the repubes are right of dems but not rightwing,,
 

SC Patriot

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2020
Messages
955
Reaction score
594
Points
873
democrats are moving too far left

republicans have gone too far right

i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days

we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates
conservatives are mainstream, the Dems are far left wing extremist who are attempting create a one Party banana republic
right wingers are not mainstream

REAL conservatives might be but right wingers are not
I am a conservative as it applies to how I live my life. I follow an ideology that helps me make decisions for myself, my family , my community and my business.
Does that make me a right winger?
Lets do the check box.

Personal responsibility....check
Learn from my mistakes....check
do not blame others for my decisions.....check
Do not count on others to help me.....check
Do not ask others to help me.....check
Never count on government to help me other than national security which I am not allowed to be a prat of....check
Abortion....dont believe in it as I was supposed to be an aborted baby....and instead I am 35 years married, well educated, a couple of married kids and a business that survivied COVID....BUT....I will always support a SCOTUS decision....check
I am not a fan of welfare but my human emotion allows me to respect it and support it....albeit. no fan at all. I never took it and trust me...at the age of 22 and homeless, I needed it.

SO am I a right winger?

You tell me.
no


i respect all of your positions

and i want pot legal and equal rights for gays, atheists, nonchristians

and i dont want the bible used as law of the land

am i a leftwinger?
what rights do gays, atheists and nonchristians not have?

they have them currently but some on your side would deny them

gay marriage would be denied

many on your team would pass laws denying muslims and atheists equal rights.

do you accept gay marriage?
My team?

I respect the constitution and I respect decisions by the Supreme Court.

Why would I ever deny atheists equal rights? My God (as a Jew) is Adanoi. Christians savior is Jesus. Muslims God is Allah. Atheists have no belief in a God. Who is right and who is wrong? I really don't care. Never did. I there a God? Not one of us knows....but some believe in God for guidance and others don't for individuality. I get it. Im ok with it.

Gay marriage? Me? Not into men. May have to do with the thought of stubble on my cheek. More likely that I think a mans body is ugly and not attractive including my own. Not attracted to that extra appendage if you know what I mean.

But......

I am a conservative. Your choices, be them inherent, biological, or simply ideological are yours. I will never deny someone their choice and I have always supported everyone's choice.

Heck...when I met my wife, she was told I was gay. Why? Because most of my friends were. Why? Because I lived in Chelsea NY and I am a friendly guy and like meeting people.

My brides grooms? 5 of 12 were gay. 2 years ago? I cried for two days when a friend of mine died. On whos shoulder? His husbands.

You are debating someone who is no where like the way the media have painted conservatives to be.

You need to open your mind in my opinion.
 

progressive hunter

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
24,608
Reaction score
10,309
Points
950
You're gong to have to define what it is to be moderate these days.

moderate

dont want civil war
dont want religious laws
laws based on logic, reason and necessity
government out of private life
police do their jobs without killing people in the streets
fair tax system
affordable education
affordable healthcare

limit immigration to people who;
speak enough english to get by
have employment ready for them
will not get goverment handouts

stop the war on pot
all citizens have equal rights and protections

be more small business friendly
Fair tax system, affordable education, affordable healthcare? What does any of that mean? Limit immigration because they can or can’t speak English?

Laws based on logic, reason and necessity?

Sounds like politics by feelings. That is where we already are.
those are leftwing policies,,
 

Cecilie1200

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2008
Messages
49,444
Reaction score
11,435
Points
2,030
democrats are moving too far left
republicans have gone too far right
i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days
we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates
I've largely given up on this idea, considering the stranglehold the two "major" parties have on our election system. Plus, if such a party can't appear NOW, as ridiculous and polarized as things are, one NEVER will.

What I'm hoping now is that one of the parties will wake up and realize that a majority of the country wants moderation and cooperation, and be the first to take advantage of that. The problem is that the wings have most of the energy, and therefore the influence.

I don't know what fixes this.
It is actually more simple than you realize.
The Constitution is not a living document. It is a guideline.
It has resulted in the development of a union
It has allowed the freeing of people in bondage
It has allowed for fair elections
It has allowed for a SCOTUS that makes monumental decisions
It has allowed for the right to vote for women
It has allowed for the right to vote for all Americans
It has allowed for equal rights for all Americans
It has allowed for 3 equal branches of government offering checks and balances.

Sure, we were imperfect as a country back in the 1700's....we were new, we had habits of our heritages.....but it is our constitution that FORCED us to right our wrongs.

So what fixes it? Let the constitution do its job.

It really isnt that difficult. Only to the politicians who are trying to get votes.

And THAT is the problem.
Let the Constitution do what? Mind explaining further?
Not to start an argument. What is considered moderate these days? Like for these topics:
abortion
healthcare
taxes
national defense
foreign policy at large
What is the moderate position on each?
Abortion is the closest to being a binary argument. The rest all exist along a continuum and are not binary.

And I think we've fallen into a trap, thinking that one side has to "win" on any given issue, and one side has to "lose".

How about both sides collaborating, innovating, and creating something NEW, like our Constitution? That way we all have skin in the game.

America used to be able to innovate, back when we were great.
I agree, progress is only made through compromise and collaboration. But, that's not really a stance it's just asking the current parties to talk to each other. I was more curious as to what are the political beliefs of a moderate. Usually when they are asked it's quite clear that they would more than fit into one party or the other.
I think there are a couple of characteristics, depending on the individual moderate. So:
  • Some moderates have strong feelings on any given issue, but their opinions as a whole don't fit with one of the tribes. So, a moderate may be passionately pro choice and passionately pro lowering income taxes. Neither tribe, then, is a fit for them.
  • Some moderates really do want to find some kind of middle ground on most issues. They believe that there are decent or fair arguments on both ends, and want to at least begin the conversation by finding shared views and going from there.
  • Some moderates think that both tribes are narcissistic gasbags and would rather just approach each issue on its own merits, taking some ideas from column A, some from column B, and the rest from new ideas.
My two cents, anyway.
I don't think you have to be a 'moderate' to want to compromise. As a liberal, I'd rather get something rather than nothing.

But since this thread is about a moderate party, what is that exactly? How are a group of people who claim to be in the middle however their various opinions on a range of topics will individually slide from liberal to conservative leaning is supposed to make up a cohesive political party?
That I couldn't tell you, since we've never really had one. I think a glimpse of it came a few years ago when there was talk of a Kasich/Hickenlooper ticket.

But to your point, I think a party that was clearly committed to collaboration and new ideas would draw many people who didn't necessarily agree with its candidates on every issue. So the appeal would be more about general approach than specific positions.
Please do not build John Kasich into what he is not. He is far from moderate.
Lets see.
the constitution allowed for women to vote. It was only because of the constitution that were given the right to vote. I agree with the decision and I respect it.
The consitution allowed for the decision of Roe V Wade. I disagree with the decision, but I respect it.

You see, our constitution was written in a way where it allowed for debate and it allowed for majority decision and implementation of laws and rights.

Seems to be working well.

Albeit, there are those that say it is a living document and we must adjust to it.

To me? That is wrong. It is a document and we must apply it....not Obey it....that would be wrong....apply it. And that is what we do.

And it is working.
Good points but it only works when people stand up for rights. I think that is why many call it a living document.
We have three branches of government. 2 of them are elected and one is appointed by the executive branch...however...with the confirmation of the senate. Those elections are how people can stand up for their rights. But when people are voted in they still must adhere to the constitution as it is a guidance for legislative decisions made by those elected.
Sure, protests are good....and they allow the legislators to hesitate and reconsider....but it is the constitution that keeps them in check and not simply do what they want to do for votes, but instead so what the constitution has deemed best for the overall good.
I know...the left would love to toss the constitution. But without it? We would not have women voting, African Americans voting. abortion legalized. The ACLU pushing rights of Americans.
The constitution ensures we do the right thing and not do something that can be damaging.
A good example is the ACA. Justice Roberts was well aware that the constitution does not allow for forcing anyone to purchase something from the day they are born to the day they die. So he called it a tax.
For right or wrong and regardless of how you feel...it was the constitution that guided that decision. And without the creativity of Justice Roberts, the act was unconstitutional.

Just thin about this....what if a law was passed that said you MUST buy only American made cars....and you MUST buy it at no age older than 18? It is the constitution that prevents such ridiculous laws being imposed on the American People.

the left would love to toss the constitution?

not sure there is much evidence of that.

and who do you consider “left”?
dolly parton?

meanwhile there is tons of evidence that the RIGHT would rewrite the constitution, insist it is a christian document, and use it to create a theocracy that denies rights and protections to gays, atheists, nonchristian religions...

and the dominionists would BAN evolution.....by their own admission...
Wow. I thought I was debating someone open minded.
But once you went in the direction of Christian document I realized I was not.
Take care

i dont want christian sharia law

do you?

i want fair laws based on logic and reason, dont you?

i dont want american declared a christian nation

do you?
"I don't want this thing that no one but me thinks is going to happen, because my whole life is paranoia based on my bigotry!!!"
 

MaryAnne11

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2016
Messages
1,872
Reaction score
661
Points
200
democrats are moving too far left
republicans have gone too far right
i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days
we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates
I've largely given up on this idea, considering the stranglehold the two "major" parties have on our election system. Plus, if such a party can't appear NOW, as ridiculous and polarized as things are, one NEVER will.

What I'm hoping now is that one of the parties will wake up and realize that a majority of the country wants moderation and cooperation, and be the first to take advantage of that. The problem is that the wings have most of the energy, and therefore the influence.

I don't know what fixes this.
It is actually more simple than you realize.
The Constitution is not a living document. It is a guideline.
It has resulted in the development of a union
It has allowed the freeing of people in bondage
It has allowed for fair elections
It has allowed for a SCOTUS that makes monumental decisions
It has allowed for the right to vote for women
It has allowed for the right to vote for all Americans
It has allowed for equal rights for all Americans
It has allowed for 3 equal branches of government offering checks and balances.

Sure, we were imperfect as a country back in the 1700's....we were new, we had habits of our heritages.....but it is our constitution that FORCED us to right our wrongs.

So what fixes it? Let the constitution do its job.

It really isnt that difficult. Only to the politicians who are trying to get votes.

And THAT is the problem.
Let the Constitution do what? Mind explaining further?
Not to start an argument. What is considered moderate these days? Like for these topics:
abortion
healthcare
taxes
national defense
foreign policy at large
What is the moderate position on each?
Abortion is the closest to being a binary argument. The rest all exist along a continuum and are not binary.

And I think we've fallen into a trap, thinking that one side has to "win" on any given issue, and one side has to "lose".

How about both sides collaborating, innovating, and creating something NEW, like our Constitution? That way we all have skin in the game.

America used to be able to innovate, back when we were great.
I agree, progress is only made through compromise and collaboration. But, that's not really a stance it's just asking the current parties to talk to each other. I was more curious as to what are the political beliefs of a moderate. Usually when they are asked it's quite clear that they would more than fit into one party or the other.
I think there are a couple of characteristics, depending on the individual moderate. So:
  • Some moderates have strong feelings on any given issue, but their opinions as a whole don't fit with one of the tribes. So, a moderate may be passionately pro choice and passionately pro lowering income taxes. Neither tribe, then, is a fit for them.
  • Some moderates really do want to find some kind of middle ground on most issues. They believe that there are decent or fair arguments on both ends, and want to at least begin the conversation by finding shared views and going from there.
  • Some moderates think that both tribes are narcissistic gasbags and would rather just approach each issue on its own merits, taking some ideas from column A, some from column B, and the rest from new ideas.
My two cents, anyway.
I don't think you have to be a 'moderate' to want to compromise. As a liberal, I'd rather get something rather than nothing.

But since this thread is about a moderate party, what is that exactly? How are a group of people who claim to be in the middle however their various opinions on a range of topics will individually slide from liberal to conservative leaning is supposed to make up a cohesive political party?
That I couldn't tell you, since we've never really had one. I think a glimpse of it came a few years ago when there was talk of a Kasich/Hickenlooper ticket.

But to your point, I think a party that was clearly committed to collaboration and new ideas would draw many people who didn't necessarily agree with its candidates on every issue. So the appeal would be more about general approach than specific positions.
Please do not build John Kasich into what he is not. He is far from moderate.
Lets see.
the constitution allowed for women to vote. It was only because of the constitution that were given the right to vote. I agree with the decision and I respect it.
The consitution allowed for the decision of Roe V Wade. I disagree with the decision, but I respect it.

You see, our constitution was written in a way where it allowed for debate and it allowed for majority decision and implementation of laws and rights.

Seems to be working well.

Albeit, there are those that say it is a living document and we must adjust to it.

To me? That is wrong. It is a document and we must apply it....not Obey it....that would be wrong....apply it. And that is what we do.

And it is working.
Good points but it only works when people stand up for rights. I think that is why many call it a living document.
We have three branches of government. 2 of them are elected and one is appointed by the executive branch...however...with the confirmation of the senate. Those elections are how people can stand up for their rights. But when people are voted in they still must adhere to the constitution as it is a guidance for legislative decisions made by those elected.
Sure, protests are good....and they allow the legislators to hesitate and reconsider....but it is the constitution that keeps them in check and not simply do what they want to do for votes, but instead so what the constitution has deemed best for the overall good.
I know...the left would love to toss the constitution. But without it? We would not have women voting, African Americans voting. abortion legalized. The ACLU pushing rights of Americans.
The constitution ensures we do the right thing and not do something that can be damaging.
A good example is the ACA. Justice Roberts was well aware that the constitution does not allow for forcing anyone to purchase something from the day they are born to the day they die. So he called it a tax.
For right or wrong and regardless of how you feel...it was the constitution that guided that decision. And without the creativity of Justice Roberts, the act was unconstitutional.

Just thin about this....what if a law was passed that said you MUST buy only American made cars....and you MUST buy it at no age older than 18? It is the constitution that prevents such ridiculous laws being imposed on the American People.
You abject to health care as a right? I do not. Millions of others feel as I do.
 

progressive hunter

Platinum Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2018
Messages
24,608
Reaction score
10,309
Points
950
democrats are moving too far left
republicans have gone too far right
i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days
we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates
I've largely given up on this idea, considering the stranglehold the two "major" parties have on our election system. Plus, if such a party can't appear NOW, as ridiculous and polarized as things are, one NEVER will.

What I'm hoping now is that one of the parties will wake up and realize that a majority of the country wants moderation and cooperation, and be the first to take advantage of that. The problem is that the wings have most of the energy, and therefore the influence.

I don't know what fixes this.
It is actually more simple than you realize.
The Constitution is not a living document. It is a guideline.
It has resulted in the development of a union
It has allowed the freeing of people in bondage
It has allowed for fair elections
It has allowed for a SCOTUS that makes monumental decisions
It has allowed for the right to vote for women
It has allowed for the right to vote for all Americans
It has allowed for equal rights for all Americans
It has allowed for 3 equal branches of government offering checks and balances.

Sure, we were imperfect as a country back in the 1700's....we were new, we had habits of our heritages.....but it is our constitution that FORCED us to right our wrongs.

So what fixes it? Let the constitution do its job.

It really isnt that difficult. Only to the politicians who are trying to get votes.

And THAT is the problem.
Let the Constitution do what? Mind explaining further?
Not to start an argument. What is considered moderate these days? Like for these topics:
abortion
healthcare
taxes
national defense
foreign policy at large
What is the moderate position on each?
Abortion is the closest to being a binary argument. The rest all exist along a continuum and are not binary.

And I think we've fallen into a trap, thinking that one side has to "win" on any given issue, and one side has to "lose".

How about both sides collaborating, innovating, and creating something NEW, like our Constitution? That way we all have skin in the game.

America used to be able to innovate, back when we were great.
I agree, progress is only made through compromise and collaboration. But, that's not really a stance it's just asking the current parties to talk to each other. I was more curious as to what are the political beliefs of a moderate. Usually when they are asked it's quite clear that they would more than fit into one party or the other.
I think there are a couple of characteristics, depending on the individual moderate. So:
  • Some moderates have strong feelings on any given issue, but their opinions as a whole don't fit with one of the tribes. So, a moderate may be passionately pro choice and passionately pro lowering income taxes. Neither tribe, then, is a fit for them.
  • Some moderates really do want to find some kind of middle ground on most issues. They believe that there are decent or fair arguments on both ends, and want to at least begin the conversation by finding shared views and going from there.
  • Some moderates think that both tribes are narcissistic gasbags and would rather just approach each issue on its own merits, taking some ideas from column A, some from column B, and the rest from new ideas.
My two cents, anyway.
I don't think you have to be a 'moderate' to want to compromise. As a liberal, I'd rather get something rather than nothing.

But since this thread is about a moderate party, what is that exactly? How are a group of people who claim to be in the middle however their various opinions on a range of topics will individually slide from liberal to conservative leaning is supposed to make up a cohesive political party?
That I couldn't tell you, since we've never really had one. I think a glimpse of it came a few years ago when there was talk of a Kasich/Hickenlooper ticket.

But to your point, I think a party that was clearly committed to collaboration and new ideas would draw many people who didn't necessarily agree with its candidates on every issue. So the appeal would be more about general approach than specific positions.
Please do not build John Kasich into what he is not. He is far from moderate.
Lets see.
the constitution allowed for women to vote. It was only because of the constitution that were given the right to vote. I agree with the decision and I respect it.
The consitution allowed for the decision of Roe V Wade. I disagree with the decision, but I respect it.

You see, our constitution was written in a way where it allowed for debate and it allowed for majority decision and implementation of laws and rights.

Seems to be working well.

Albeit, there are those that say it is a living document and we must adjust to it.

To me? That is wrong. It is a document and we must apply it....not Obey it....that would be wrong....apply it. And that is what we do.

And it is working.
Good points but it only works when people stand up for rights. I think that is why many call it a living document.
We have three branches of government. 2 of them are elected and one is appointed by the executive branch...however...with the confirmation of the senate. Those elections are how people can stand up for their rights. But when people are voted in they still must adhere to the constitution as it is a guidance for legislative decisions made by those elected.
Sure, protests are good....and they allow the legislators to hesitate and reconsider....but it is the constitution that keeps them in check and not simply do what they want to do for votes, but instead so what the constitution has deemed best for the overall good.
I know...the left would love to toss the constitution. But without it? We would not have women voting, African Americans voting. abortion legalized. The ACLU pushing rights of Americans.
The constitution ensures we do the right thing and not do something that can be damaging.
A good example is the ACA. Justice Roberts was well aware that the constitution does not allow for forcing anyone to purchase something from the day they are born to the day they die. So he called it a tax.
For right or wrong and regardless of how you feel...it was the constitution that guided that decision. And without the creativity of Justice Roberts, the act was unconstitutional.

Just thin about this....what if a law was passed that said you MUST buy only American made cars....and you MUST buy it at no age older than 18? It is the constitution that prevents such ridiculous laws being imposed on the American People.
You abject to health care as a right? I do not. Millions of others feel as I do.
healthcare is a product/service supplied by other people not a right,, unless of course you support slavery,,
 

MaryAnne11

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2016
Messages
1,872
Reaction score
661
Points
200
democrats are moving too far left
republicans have gone too far right
i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days
we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates
I've largely given up on this idea, considering the stranglehold the two "major" parties have on our election system. Plus, if such a party can't appear NOW, as ridiculous and polarized as things are, one NEVER will.

What I'm hoping now is that one of the parties will wake up and realize that a majority of the country wants moderation and cooperation, and be the first to take advantage of that. The problem is that the wings have most of the energy, and therefore the influence.

I don't know what fixes this.
It is actually more simple than you realize.
The Constitution is not a living document. It is a guideline.
It has resulted in the development of a union
It has allowed the freeing of people in bondage
It has allowed for fair elections
It has allowed for a SCOTUS that makes monumental decisions
It has allowed for the right to vote for women
It has allowed for the right to vote for all Americans
It has allowed for equal rights for all Americans
It has allowed for 3 equal branches of government offering checks and balances.

Sure, we were imperfect as a country back in the 1700's....we were new, we had habits of our heritages.....but it is our constitution that FORCED us to right our wrongs.

So what fixes it? Let the constitution do its job.

It really isnt that difficult. Only to the politicians who are trying to get votes.

And THAT is the problem.
Let the Constitution do what? Mind explaining further?
Not to start an argument. What is considered moderate these days? Like for these topics:
abortion
healthcare
taxes
national defense
foreign policy at large
What is the moderate position on each?
Abortion is the closest to being a binary argument. The rest all exist along a continuum and are not binary.

And I think we've fallen into a trap, thinking that one side has to "win" on any given issue, and one side has to "lose".

How about both sides collaborating, innovating, and creating something NEW, like our Constitution? That way we all have skin in the game.

America used to be able to innovate, back when we were great.
I agree, progress is only made through compromise and collaboration. But, that's not really a stance it's just asking the current parties to talk to each other. I was more curious as to what are the political beliefs of a moderate. Usually when they are asked it's quite clear that they would more than fit into one party or the other.
I think there are a couple of characteristics, depending on the individual moderate. So:
  • Some moderates have strong feelings on any given issue, but their opinions as a whole don't fit with one of the tribes. So, a moderate may be passionately pro choice and passionately pro lowering income taxes. Neither tribe, then, is a fit for them.
  • Some moderates really do want to find some kind of middle ground on most issues. They believe that there are decent or fair arguments on both ends, and want to at least begin the conversation by finding shared views and going from there.
  • Some moderates think that both tribes are narcissistic gasbags and would rather just approach each issue on its own merits, taking some ideas from column A, some from column B, and the rest from new ideas.
My two cents, anyway.
I don't think you have to be a 'moderate' to want to compromise. As a liberal, I'd rather get something rather than nothing.

But since this thread is about a moderate party, what is that exactly? How are a group of people who claim to be in the middle however their various opinions on a range of topics will individually slide from liberal to conservative leaning is supposed to make up a cohesive political party?
That I couldn't tell you, since we've never really had one. I think a glimpse of it came a few years ago when there was talk of a Kasich/Hickenlooper ticket.

But to your point, I think a party that was clearly committed to collaboration and new ideas would draw many people who didn't necessarily agree with its candidates on every issue. So the appeal would be more about general approach than specific positions.
Please do not build John Kasich into what he is not. He is far from moderate.
Lets see.
the constitution allowed for women to vote. It was only because of the constitution that were given the right to vote. I agree with the decision and I respect it.
The consitution allowed for the decision of Roe V Wade. I disagree with the decision, but I respect it.

You see, our constitution was written in a way where it allowed for debate and it allowed for majority decision and implementation of laws and rights.

Seems to be working well.

Albeit, there are those that say it is a living document and we must adjust to it.

To me? That is wrong. It is a document and we must apply it....not Obey it....that would be wrong....apply it. And that is what we do.

And it is working.
Good points but it only works when people stand up for rights. I think that is why many call it a living document.
We have three branches of government. 2 of them are elected and one is appointed by the executive branch...however...with the confirmation of the senate. Those elections are how people can stand up for their rights. But when people are voted in they still must adhere to the constitution as it is a guidance for legislative decisions made by those elected.
Sure, protests are good....and they allow the legislators to hesitate and reconsider....but it is the constitution that keeps them in check and not simply do what they want to do for votes, but instead so what the constitution has deemed best for the overall good.
I know...the left would love to toss the constitution. But without it? We would not have women voting, African Americans voting. abortion legalized. The ACLU pushing rights of Americans.
The constitution ensures we do the right thing and not do something that can be damaging.
A good example is the ACA. Justice Roberts was well aware that the constitution does not allow for forcing anyone to purchase something from the day they are born to the day they die. So he called it a tax.
For right or wrong and regardless of how you feel...it was the constitution that guided that decision. And without the creativity of Justice Roberts, the act was unconstitutional.

Just thin about this....what if a law was passed that said you MUST buy only American made cars....and you MUST buy it at no age older than 18? It is the constitution that prevents such ridiculous laws being imposed on the American People.
what if a law was passed that you must be a christian or you lose your rights?
Faith and politics are 2 different things.
 

MaryAnne11

Gold Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2016
Messages
1,872
Reaction score
661
Points
200
democrats are moving too far left
republicans have gone too far right
i find myself appreciating rinos and dinos more these days
we need a third party for the majority of us who are moderates
I've largely given up on this idea, considering the stranglehold the two "major" parties have on our election system. Plus, if such a party can't appear NOW, as ridiculous and polarized as things are, one NEVER will.

What I'm hoping now is that one of the parties will wake up and realize that a majority of the country wants moderation and cooperation, and be the first to take advantage of that. The problem is that the wings have most of the energy, and therefore the influence.

I don't know what fixes this.
It is actually more simple than you realize.
The Constitution is not a living document. It is a guideline.
It has resulted in the development of a union
It has allowed the freeing of people in bondage
It has allowed for fair elections
It has allowed for a SCOTUS that makes monumental decisions
It has allowed for the right to vote for women
It has allowed for the right to vote for all Americans
It has allowed for equal rights for all Americans
It has allowed for 3 equal branches of government offering checks and balances.

Sure, we were imperfect as a country back in the 1700's....we were new, we had habits of our heritages.....but it is our constitution that FORCED us to right our wrongs.

So what fixes it? Let the constitution do its job.

It really isnt that difficult. Only to the politicians who are trying to get votes.

And THAT is the problem.
Let the Constitution do what? Mind explaining further?
Not to start an argument. What is considered moderate these days? Like for these topics:
abortion
healthcare
taxes
national defense
foreign policy at large
What is the moderate position on each?
Abortion is the closest to being a binary argument. The rest all exist along a continuum and are not binary.

And I think we've fallen into a trap, thinking that one side has to "win" on any given issue, and one side has to "lose".

How about both sides collaborating, innovating, and creating something NEW, like our Constitution? That way we all have skin in the game.

America used to be able to innovate, back when we were great.
I agree, progress is only made through compromise and collaboration. But, that's not really a stance it's just asking the current parties to talk to each other. I was more curious as to what are the political beliefs of a moderate. Usually when they are asked it's quite clear that they would more than fit into one party or the other.
I think there are a couple of characteristics, depending on the individual moderate. So:
  • Some moderates have strong feelings on any given issue, but their opinions as a whole don't fit with one of the tribes. So, a moderate may be passionately pro choice and passionately pro lowering income taxes. Neither tribe, then, is a fit for them.
  • Some moderates really do want to find some kind of middle ground on most issues. They believe that there are decent or fair arguments on both ends, and want to at least begin the conversation by finding shared views and going from there.
  • Some moderates think that both tribes are narcissistic gasbags and would rather just approach each issue on its own merits, taking some ideas from column A, some from column B, and the rest from new ideas.
My two cents, anyway.
I don't think you have to be a 'moderate' to want to compromise. As a liberal, I'd rather get something rather than nothing.

But since this thread is about a moderate party, what is that exactly? How are a group of people who claim to be in the middle however their various opinions on a range of topics will individually slide from liberal to conservative leaning is supposed to make up a cohesive political party?
That I couldn't tell you, since we've never really had one. I think a glimpse of it came a few years ago when there was talk of a Kasich/Hickenlooper ticket.

But to your point, I think a party that was clearly committed to collaboration and new ideas would draw many people who didn't necessarily agree with its candidates on every issue. So the appeal would be more about general approach than specific positions.
Please do not build John Kasich into what he is not. He is far from moderate.
Lets see.
the constitution allowed for women to vote. It was only because of the constitution that were given the right to vote. I agree with the decision and I respect it.
The consitution allowed for the decision of Roe V Wade. I disagree with the decision, but I respect it.

You see, our constitution was written in a way where it allowed for debate and it allowed for majority decision and implementation of laws and rights.

Seems to be working well.

Albeit, there are those that say it is a living document and we must adjust to it.

To me? That is wrong. It is a document and we must apply it....not Obey it....that would be wrong....apply it. And that is what we do.

And it is working.
Good points but it only works when people stand up for rights. I think that is why many call it a living document.
We have three branches of government. 2 of them are elected and one is appointed by the executive branch...however...with the confirmation of the senate. Those elections are how people can stand up for their rights. But when people are voted in they still must adhere to the constitution as it is a guidance for legislative decisions made by those elected.
Sure, protests are good....and they allow the legislators to hesitate and reconsider....but it is the constitution that keeps them in check and not simply do what they want to do for votes, but instead so what the constitution has deemed best for the overall good.
I know...the left would love to toss the constitution. But without it? We would not have women voting, African Americans voting. abortion legalized. The ACLU pushing rights of Americans.
The constitution ensures we do the right thing and not do something that can be damaging.
A good example is the ACA. Justice Roberts was well aware that the constitution does not allow for forcing anyone to purchase something from the day they are born to the day they die. So he called it a tax.
For right or wrong and regardless of how you feel...it was the constitution that guided that decision. And without the creativity of Justice Roberts, the act was unconstitutional.

Just thin about this....what if a law was passed that said you MUST buy only American made cars....and you MUST buy it at no age older than 18? It is the constitution that prevents such ridiculous laws being imposed on the American People.
You abject to health care as a right? I do not. Millions of others feel as I do.
healthcare is a product/service supplied by other people not a right,, unless of course you support slavery,,
Health care for all is slavery? I disagree.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top