This board's political alignment seems to have changed since the election. What is yours?

[jc456]

I'm not keen to say it because I have so many lefty friends that I respect, but the harsh truth is that lefties don't want to discuss things, they just want others to confirm and agree with their opinions. Why would they go to a discussion board with strangers who disagree with them, when they can "get famous" in their echo chambers and feel good about themselves?

no, they want us to conform to their beliefs. they push an ideology and if you don't agree you are nazi or white lover or white period, but now I'm learning they don't actually label us. funny shit today.

 

[jc456]

It seems there are way less Progs than there were before the election and even since the spring.

What is your political ideology that you lean, in general.

In general, of course many have crossover issues.

What the hell is a "Prog" anyway? Far as I know that was a century ago.

I keep asking for that definition on this board from those who use it, and I have yet to get one. Other than the roughly 1890-1920 one I already know.

Pretty hard to take a position here if said positions can't be defined.

(and btw it would be "fewer Progs" --- not "less".
"Less rain --- fewer raindrops")

______________________________________

This is just my humble opinion but, in this strange post-Obama world of today, I think the labels Democrat, Progressive, Liberal, Socialist, Marxist, and Bolshevik.....are all interchangeable.

Also, you ought to quit pestering the educated for definitions, and go read a dictionary.

______________________________________

They're in NO WAY interchangeable, and it's blatant abuse of basic political science to lump different terms into a single basket just because one can't be bothered with distinctions.

"Liberal" for instance, to take another established term popularly perverted, means one who believes power derives from We the People, and not from an aristocracy or clergy or priveleged class. Liberalism is what built this country and wrote its Constitution. Nothing to do with political parties or "right" and "left". Some like flacaltenn prefer to call this "libertarian" although "Liberal' is the older term.

That has nothing to do with, for example, "Democrat", which did not even exist then, and which is the name of a specific political party. As such it's a practical vehicle to get elected, not the repository of some ideology. Billy Graham and Zell Miller are Democrats. Frank Rizzo and Ray Nagin were Democrats for the purpose of getting elected because they knew what vehicle would work. The Sheriff in my town was a Democrat running for re-election, then a Republican running for re-election. He won both times. Same guy. Arlen Specter was a Democrat, then a Republican, then a Democrat again. Again, same guy. That's simply a grand game of Whatever Works. In the case of Rizzo and Nagin, they knew running for mayor of their city involved two choices, (a) run as a Democrat or (b) lose. Just as their counterparts in their suburbs face the opposite dynamic. In the case of my sheriff I suspect he assessed at some point that one local party ran a better get-out-the-vote campaign than the other. Just as you buy a Ford or a Dodge -- they take you to the same place.

Won't even bother with your other lump-basket terms. That should suffice.

It probably won't.

So how do we label ourselves and each other, then? USMB would DIE without its pigeon holes. Shoot down all our labels? How do we speak?

I don't find a need for labels at all. Labeling I find leads to Composition Fallacies. I hate that.

I would label you as "thinker". And that's a very good thing.

I might add you have a certain.... what is the word............. pulkercidy.

I've never been here to make points for this or that 'side'. I'm here in search of honest and intelligent argument. And it's rare.

should I do a search and see if this is accurate? I'm happy to waste my time for a nice guy like you.

 

[Borillar]

I'm not keen to say it because I have so many lefty friends that I respect, but the harsh truth is that lefties don't want to discuss things, they just want others to confirm and agree with their opinions. Why would they go to a discussion board with strangers who disagree with them, when they can "get famous" in their echo chambers and feel good about themselves?

This has to be one of the greatest cases of projection I have ever witnessed.

 

[jc456]

What the hell is a "Prog" anyway? Far as I know that was a century ago.

I keep asking for that definition on this board from those who use it, and I have yet to get one. Other than the roughly 1890-1920 one I already know.

Pretty hard to take a position here if said positions can't be defined.

(and btw it would be "fewer Progs" --- not "less".
"Less rain --- fewer raindrops")

______________________________________

This is just my humble opinion but, in this strange post-Obama world of today, I think the labels Democrat, Progressive, Liberal, Socialist, Marxist, and Bolshevik.....are all interchangeable.

Also, you ought to quit pestering the educated for definitions, and go read a dictionary.

______________________________________

They're in NO WAY interchangeable, and it's blatant abuse of basic political science to lump different terms into a single basket just because one can't be bothered with distinctions.

"Liberal" for instance, to take another established term popularly perverted, means one who believes power derives from We the People, and not from an aristocracy or clergy or priveleged class. Liberalism is what built this country and wrote its Constitution. Nothing to do with political parties or "right" and "left". Some like flacaltenn prefer to call this "libertarian" although "Liberal' is the older term.

That has nothing to do with, for example, "Democrat", which did not even exist then, and which is the name of a specific political party. As such it's a practical vehicle to get elected, not the repository of some ideology. Billy Graham and Zell Miller are Democrats. Frank Rizzo and Ray Nagin were Democrats for the purpose of getting elected because they knew what vehicle would work. The Sheriff in my town was a Democrat running for re-election, then a Republican running for re-election. He won both times. Same guy. Arlen Specter was a Democrat, then a Republican, then a Democrat again. Again, same guy. That's simply a grand game of Whatever Works. In the case of Rizzo and Nagin, they knew running for mayor of their city involved two choices, (a) run as a Democrat or (b) lose. Just as their counterparts in their suburbs face the opposite dynamic. In the case of my sheriff I suspect he assessed at some point that one local party ran a better get-out-the-vote campaign than the other. Just as you buy a Ford or a Dodge -- they take you to the same place.

Won't even bother with your other lump-basket terms. That should suffice.

It probably won't.

So how do we label ourselves and each other, then? USMB would DIE without its pigeon holes. Shoot down all our labels? How do we speak?

I don't find a need for labels at all. Labeling I find leads to Composition Fallacies. I hate that.

I would label you as "thinker". And that's a very good thing.

I might add you have a certain.... what is the word............. pulkercidy.

I've never been here to make points for this or that 'side'. I'm here in search of honest and intelligent argument. And it's rare.

should I do a search and see if this is accurate? I'm happy to waste my time for a nice guy like you.

wow, the very first post I look at and there is a label.

Wag. whatever the fk that is.

[/quote]

But, you think a person as filled with hate as yourself should live?

He's off the deep end at this point. Everybody but him is "Nazi". Obviously cannabis is not in his repertoire. That sounds much more like alcohol.

Again (as in 90% of your posts) you are wrong. The only (Nazis) are liberals. YOU are a typical Nazi. George Soros is a Nazi. "Progressive Liberals" are Nazis.

Get it now?

Oh I got it the first time.



George Soros??

In another thread I just told some other wag that there were people here equating "Nazi" with "Liberal". He didn't believe me.

 

[OldLady]

______________________________________

This is just my humble opinion but, in this strange post-Obama world of today, I think the labels Democrat, Progressive, Liberal, Socialist, Marxist, and Bolshevik.....are all interchangeable.

Also, you ought to quit pestering the educated for definitions, and go read a dictionary.

______________________________________

They're in NO WAY interchangeable, and it's blatant abuse of basic political science to lump different terms into a single basket just because one can't be bothered with distinctions.

"Liberal" for instance, to take another established term popularly perverted, means one who believes power derives from We the People, and not from an aristocracy or clergy or priveleged class. Liberalism is what built this country and wrote its Constitution. Nothing to do with political parties or "right" and "left". Some like flacaltenn prefer to call this "libertarian" although "Liberal' is the older term.

That has nothing to do with, for example, "Democrat", which did not even exist then, and which is the name of a specific political party. As such it's a practical vehicle to get elected, not the repository of some ideology. Billy Graham and Zell Miller are Democrats. Frank Rizzo and Ray Nagin were Democrats for the purpose of getting elected because they knew what vehicle would work. The Sheriff in my town was a Democrat running for re-election, then a Republican running for re-election. He won both times. Same guy. Arlen Specter was a Democrat, then a Republican, then a Democrat again. Again, same guy. That's simply a grand game of Whatever Works. In the case of Rizzo and Nagin, they knew running for mayor of their city involved two choices, (a) run as a Democrat or (b) lose. Just as their counterparts in their suburbs face the opposite dynamic. In the case of my sheriff I suspect he assessed at some point that one local party ran a better get-out-the-vote campaign than the other. Just as you buy a Ford or a Dodge -- they take you to the same place.

Won't even bother with your other lump-basket terms. That should suffice.

It probably won't.

So how do we label ourselves and each other, then? USMB would DIE without its pigeon holes. Shoot down all our labels? How do we speak?

I don't find a need for labels at all. Labeling I find leads to Composition Fallacies. I hate that.

I would label you as "thinker". And that's a very good thing.

I might add you have a certain.... what is the word............. pulkercidy.

I've never been here to make points for this or that 'side'. I'm here in search of honest and intelligent argument. And it's rare.

should I do a search and see if this is accurate? I'm happy to waste my time for a nice guy like you.

wow, the very first post I look at and there is a label.

Wag. whatever the fk that is.

But, you think a person as filled with hate as yourself should live?

He's off the deep end at this point. Everybody but him is "Nazi". Obviously cannabis is not in his repertoire. That sounds much more like alcohol.

Again (as in 90% of your posts) you are wrong. The only (Nazis) are liberals. YOU are a typical Nazi. George Soros is a Nazi. "Progressive Liberals" are Nazis.

Get it now?

Oh I got it the first time.



George Soros??

In another thread I just told some other wag that there were people here equating "Nazi" with "Liberal". He didn't believe me.

[/QUOTE]
wag2
waɡ/
noun
dated
noun: wag; plural noun: wags

1. a person who makes facetious jokes.

define wag - Google Search

 

[Bush92]

It seems there are way less Progs than there were before the election and even since the spring.

What is your political ideology that you lean, in general.

In general, of course many have crossover issues.

Eisenhower- Buchanan Republican.

 

[Bush92]

I think the Orange Puke is a fraud. LOL

He is YOUR President.

 

[jc456]

They're in NO WAY interchangeable, and it's blatant abuse of basic political science to lump different terms into a single basket just because one can't be bothered with distinctions.

"Liberal" for instance, to take another established term popularly perverted, means one who believes power derives from We the People, and not from an aristocracy or clergy or priveleged class. Liberalism is what built this country and wrote its Constitution. Nothing to do with political parties or "right" and "left". Some like flacaltenn prefer to call this "libertarian" although "Liberal' is the older term.

That has nothing to do with, for example, "Democrat", which did not even exist then, and which is the name of a specific political party. As such it's a practical vehicle to get elected, not the repository of some ideology. Billy Graham and Zell Miller are Democrats. Frank Rizzo and Ray Nagin were Democrats for the purpose of getting elected because they knew what vehicle would work. The Sheriff in my town was a Democrat running for re-election, then a Republican running for re-election. He won both times. Same guy. Arlen Specter was a Democrat, then a Republican, then a Democrat again. Again, same guy. That's simply a grand game of Whatever Works. In the case of Rizzo and Nagin, they knew running for mayor of their city involved two choices, (a) run as a Democrat or (b) lose. Just as their counterparts in their suburbs face the opposite dynamic. In the case of my sheriff I suspect he assessed at some point that one local party ran a better get-out-the-vote campaign than the other. Just as you buy a Ford or a Dodge -- they take you to the same place.

Won't even bother with your other lump-basket terms. That should suffice.

It probably won't.

So how do we label ourselves and each other, then? USMB would DIE without its pigeon holes. Shoot down all our labels? How do we speak?

I don't find a need for labels at all. Labeling I find leads to Composition Fallacies. I hate that.

I would label you as "thinker". And that's a very good thing.

I might add you have a certain.... what is the word............. pulkercidy.

I've never been here to make points for this or that 'side'. I'm here in search of honest and intelligent argument. And it's rare.

should I do a search and see if this is accurate? I'm happy to waste my time for a nice guy like you.

wow, the very first post I look at and there is a label.

Wag. whatever the fk that is.

But, you think a person as filled with hate as yourself should live?

He's off the deep end at this point. Everybody but him is "Nazi". Obviously cannabis is not in his repertoire. That sounds much more like alcohol.

Again (as in 90% of your posts) you are wrong. The only (Nazis) are liberals. YOU are a typical Nazi. George Soros is a Nazi. "Progressive Liberals" are Nazis.

Get it now?

Oh I got it the first time.



George Soros??

In another thread I just told some other wag that there were people here equating "Nazi" with "Liberal". He didn't believe me.

wag2
waɡ/
noun
dated
noun: wag; plural noun: wags

1. a person who makes facetious jokes.

define wag - Google Search[/QUOTE]
no labels right?

 

[EverCurious]

I'm not keen to say it because I have so many lefty friends that I respect, but the harsh truth is that lefties don't want to discuss things, they just want others to confirm and agree with their opinions. Why would they go to a discussion board with strangers who disagree with them, when they can "get famous" in their echo chambers and feel good about themselves?

This has to be one of the greatest cases of projection I have ever witnessed.

I'll give the benefit of the doubt and say maybe it's just my lefty friends and a group or three on political forums...

Though the implication that I give two shits if someone agrees with me or not is rather amusing.

 

[eddiew37]

I think the Orange Puke is a fraud. LOL

He is YOUR President.

He is a cancer to America

 

[eddiew37]

I'm not keen to say it because I have so many lefty friends that I respect, but the harsh truth is that lefties don't want to discuss things, they just want others to confirm and agree with their opinions. Why would they go to a discussion board with strangers who disagree with them, when they can "get famous" in their echo chambers and feel good about themselves?

This has to be one of the greatest cases of projection I have ever witnessed.

I'll give the benefit of the doubt and say maybe it's just my lefty friends and a group or three on political forums...

Though the implication that I give two shits if someone agrees with me or not is rather amusing.

IF I had a shit I wouldn't give it

 

[tycho1572]

I'd say I'm center right.

 

[OldLady]

So how do we label ourselves and each other, then? USMB would DIE without its pigeon holes. Shoot down all our labels? How do we speak?

I don't find a need for labels at all. Labeling I find leads to Composition Fallacies. I hate that.

I would label you as "thinker". And that's a very good thing.

I might add you have a certain.... what is the word............. pulkercidy.

I've never been here to make points for this or that 'side'. I'm here in search of honest and intelligent argument. And it's rare.

should I do a search and see if this is accurate? I'm happy to waste my time for a nice guy like you.

wow, the very first post I look at and there is a label.

Wag. whatever the fk that is.

But, you think a person as filled with hate as yourself should live?

He's off the deep end at this point. Everybody but him is "Nazi". Obviously cannabis is not in his repertoire. That sounds much more like alcohol.

Again (as in 90% of your posts) you are wrong. The only (Nazis) are liberals. YOU are a typical Nazi. George Soros is a Nazi. "Progressive Liberals" are Nazis.

Get it now?

Oh I got it the first time.



George Soros??

In another thread I just told some other wag that there were people here equating "Nazi" with "Liberal". He didn't believe me.

wag2
waɡ/
noun
dated
noun: wag; plural noun: wags

1. a person who makes facetious jokes.

define wag - Google Search

no labels right?[/QUOTE]
I don't think of that as a "label," per se. Not many people use the word anymore, so it isn't being used to slap a stereotypical image on anyone. It's just a word.

 

[SavannahMann]

I haven't changed. I'm still a Moderate. By Rural Georgia standards, I'm fairly liberal. By the standards of say San Francisco I'm a raging RW Conservative.

 

[ColonelAngus]

I am a Libertarian. That does not fit well in your poll. Far right fiscally and mostly left socially with the exception of being anti-abortion.

Libertarian is considered right, in general.

 

[Pogo]

I don't see that as a sufficient equation. As in quantifiable.

A "Progressive" as used a century ago meant part of a movement calling for accountable government, opposing entrenched corruption and dealing with the turbulence of the rapid industrialization/urbanization/immigration of that time, all of which were forefront issues.

I don't think anyone can argue that the political dynamics of 2017 are the same as those of 1917. One glaring contemporary contrast is the Lost Cause movement --- vibrant and erecting statues the same statues then that are under serious review now. So applying the same term to two different eras' sociopolitical environments is automatically problematic.

Then there's the distinction between "a Progressive" (capital P, the noun) and ""progressive" (small P, the adjective). The former was a proponent of the movement of a century ago, the latter is a generic adjective applied to anything at any time. Meaning a state of "progress". Not sure who doesn't value "progress" --- a Luddite?

I think that's why I've never gotten a definition. Doesn't mean anything.

People here are very sensitive about labels. I'm just tellin ya how I've heard it being used. Warren. Sanders. The Alt Right of the Left, so to speak. It is not flung around so much as Alt Right, but it's accumulating a new connotation.

Yes I understand that. And I've seen it used here, and I've seen some quote, for example Hillary Clinton using the label on themselves.

But none of that defines what it IS.

I think you would be the perfect person to pen that definition, Pogo, once enough examples of its new use have been collected so that you can summarize and put into a nutshell what "progressive" these days actually means.

That's just it --- I can't do that. Not just because it's recycled and therefore already has a definition from another era, but because no one can or will say what they mean. It's a meaningless pseudo-slur. I've been soliticing this definition for literally years here and all I ever get is either the emotional butthurt ad homs, or the empty "_________ called himself/herself a 'progressive" which expects to attach a Composition Fallacy, which never works.

You are probably right, though, that it is being misused as much as it is being used with a specific meaning in mind. So it can't have a clear definition since it is being used to define more than one thing.

Exactly. Apparently those that can only engage in slurs seem to think their perversion of "Liberal" worked, and think they can mine another one out of the past. It's bizzaro.

Well this quest has gone to the same Nowhere it always did before, so I guess that's my answer.

Progressive is not being used only as a slur. Here and on Fox are the only places I hear it used that way. But they call everyone on the "left" commies, too, which isn't true, so whatever.
P.S. From all the context in which I've heard the word used recently, Hillary Clinton is NOT a progressive.

Yep, she'd have to be about 125 years old. That's why I call it a bullshit term.

 

[Pogo]

I am a Libertarian. That does not fit well in your poll. Far right fiscally and mostly left socially with the exception of being anti-abortion.

Libertarian is considered right, in general.

Disagree. "Libertarian" and "Liberal" are not part of that two-dimesional left-right thingy. They're off in a third dimension separate from it.

 

[ColonelAngus]

It's an indicator, not perfect.

That's why I said to choose from those options.

Progs say there are 72 genders. I say there are 2.

The board leans heavy right is the conclusion.

It was definitely more centrist prior to Trump. That's interesting.

Have people's sensibilities changed, or do people just enjoy echo chambers?

 

[ColonelAngus]

Libs got mad at me and told me to call them Progs.

I don't know what the fuck you assholes want to be called.

I am fine with being called a conservative...although I am liberal on certain issues.

Mincing words is for Hillary voters.

 

[OldLady]

I am a Libertarian. That does not fit well in your poll. Far right fiscally and mostly left socially with the exception of being anti-abortion.

Libertarian is considered right, in general.

Disagree. "Libertarian" and "Liberal" are not part of that two-dimesional left-right thingy. They're off in a third dimension separate from it.

Libertarians seem to share a lot of space with the right on the Venn diagram. But if you ask me, "Libertarian" is almost as muddy a term as "Progressive" as far as what in hell it actually means. I tried to look into it a bit during the Presidential campaign, but for the life of me I couldn't get what a Libertarian government would look like, act like, sound like, be like to live under. Almost anarchy, with the strong scent of reefer.