Gallup: Conservatives Finish 2009 as No. 1 Ideological Group-so you know it is higher

[rightwinger]

It's not a simplistic meaning. What you're saying could be true in the abstract, but would require a series of direct commands that don't exist in our nation.

Sure they do- what industry is not touch by gov't?

That some regulations exist isn't the same as government control of the industry.

Shhhhhhh...

To conservatives any regulation= SOCIALISM

 

[JakeStarkey]

Progressive regulation is not socialism in any historical or contextual or philosophical or economic sense.

And Neo just makes these statements without any support.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Yeah, here's how great the Conservatives are doing.

a new Harris Poll finds that Senator John McCain, the losing Republican presidential candidate in 2008, is most widely perceived as an influential Republican leader and as a leading voice of the GOP

From Forbes, yesterday.

John McCain Seen as Most Influential Republican and as Leading Voice of the Party - Forbes.com

 

[LibocalypseNow]

The Socialists have destroyed themselves. It really shouldn't be too difficult for the Republicans to gain some ground in coming elections. The Socialists/Democrats cannot win based on their beliefs. The only way they can win now is to resort to personal attacks like they did with Sarah Palin's family. When it comes to their beliefs,they will lose big time in coming elections. So look for the Moveon.org degenerates and their ilk to begin their personal smear campaigns against Republicans. It's the only chance they have of winning any coming elections and they know it. Based on beliefs alone,they lose.

 

[amrchaos]

Wow!

Lets check those numbers out...

Republicans get the 40% Conservative vote
Democrats get the 36% Moderate and 21% Liberal for 57%

Same percentage as in the House and Senate

Excuse me--Conservatives only want to talk to conservatives... They need 50%+ in order to get a secure majority.

And it does not help when they have Andy Martin explaining why certain groups of people need to be exclude!!

 

[Neotrotsky]

Progressive regulation is not socialism in any historical or contextual or philosophical or economic sense.

And Neo just makes these statements without any support.

Progressive regulation- thats a good one
Is that like compassionate conservatism


You ignore the slow incremental steps that have accrued over the years from both parties to drive the economy more and more towards socialism. Sure, one insignificant regulation does make too much a difference by itself, but, thousands on top of thousands do.

It never ends. Did you ever notice with the left we are always one regulation away from fixing something, but nothing ever gets fixed?
Funny how that works

Again:
I believe Norman Thomas (Socialist Party presidential candidate in the 1940's) said it the best: “The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But under the name of Liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without knowing how it happened.”

Speaking of statements with no support, you never did answer my question

Since the GOP is not in power and any movement in the polls towards them and conservatives is a reaction to the policies of the Democrats and Papa Obama, what do you see or expect the GOP to change?

Really, from a "Machiavellian" approach, at this rate the Dems and Papa Obama are going, the GOP does not have to do much

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your definitions and few facts are fatally flawed, Neo. I will commend you because you have not stooped to the lows of a Lieability in this thread.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Sure they do- what industry is not touch by gov't?

That some regulations exist isn't the same as government control of the industry.

Shhhhhhh...

To conservatives any regulation= SOCIALISM

While your answer is simple and we would expect no less; it is not quite right

The free market calls for regulations of such things as natural monopolies; public goods etc.

However, this is a far cry from some of the lefts' agenda

So it would be best to say

To conservatives some of the left's regulations = A PUSH TOWARDS SOCIALISM

I hope that helps

 

[midcan5]

Conservative media and the corporate think tanks managed through millions of dollars and many years of propaganda to make the word 'liberal' a negative. Asking Americans what camp they place themselves in has little value, as most Americans do not think of ideology as the nerds and whatnots who post on political boards do.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Your definitions and few facts are fatally flawed, Neo. I will commend you because you have not stooped to the lows of a Lieability in this thread.

Well, I am sorry you feel that way and of course I do not agree.
As for "lieability", I am not sure what you mean.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I am sure that you are sure what I mean by "lieabillity".

 

[Neotrotsky]

I am sure that you are sure what I mean by "lieabillity".

Honestly, I was not sure if it was a typo or something at first
I assume now that it was not
Thanks

 

[Polk]

Sure they do- what industry is not touch by gov't?

That some regulations exist isn't the same as government control of the industry.

Shhhhhhh...

To conservatives any regulation= SOCIALISM

Anyone who believes that is fries short of a Happy Meal. And if they want to prove they mean it and aren't just a bunch of loudmouths, I'm buy them a ticket on the first boat to Somalia, aka utopia in the minds of libertarians (after all, no government is the smallest possible government).

 

[Neotrotsky]

That some regulations exist isn't the same as government control of the industry.

Shhhhhhh...

To conservatives any regulation= SOCIALISM

Anyone who believes that is fries short of a Happy Meal. And if they want to prove they mean it and aren't just a bunch of loudmouths, I'm buy them a ticket on the first boat to Somalia, aka utopia in the minds of libertarians (after all, no government is the smallest possible government).

anarchists tend to believe in no government
Libertarians tend to believe in limited government

While I agree, no gov't is an impossibility, limited gov't was supported by most of the Founding Fathers of the US

 

[JakeStarkey]

Not one of the Founding Fathers' writings, including Ethan Allen, that madman, would support any type of libertarianism. You more than welcome to search, but nothing is there.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Not one of the Founding Fathers' writings, including Ethan Allen, that madman, would support any type of libertarianism. You more than welcome to search, but nothing is there.

I said they believed in limited government not libertarianism

 

[JakeStarkey]

Neo, don't play games, please. You are a libertarian fair and square, are you not? If I am wrong, please tell me what political system you do embrace.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Neo, don't play games, please. You are a libertarian fair and square, are you not? If I am wrong, please tell me what political system you do embrace.

First, I am not playing games

If you somehow you interpreted or if I somehow I mislead you to think otherwise, no game was intended

I did say they believed in limited government (not libertarianism)

As for the question of what political name I identify myself by- I really don't
I find it to be limiting. I belong to no political party- because I don't want to be bothered for donations nor do I agree with everything that the parties do

However if one is to say "I am closer to libertarians than say socialists" that statement would be correct

 

[JakeStarkey]

OK, would you say you are closer to Republican or to Libertarian?

 

[Neotrotsky]

OK, would you say you are closer to Republican or to Libertarian?

What is this 20 questions

It would really depend on the Republican now - would it not