What is your party affiliation and why?

Pre-College Issues High School Life
61

<p>This is a prime example of a non sequitur logical fallacy. If we assume the definition of a buzz phrase is the same as that of a buzzword ("buzzword - stock phrases that have become nonsense through endless repetition"), the presence of a history behind the phrase does nothing to refute its status unless you somehow prove to me that the people I frequently hear throwing the phrases around know or understand the full extent of their meaning. You linking to these articles supports no argument of yours.</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>Another non sequitur.</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>Irrelevant how? They were all derived from the tidy explanation I received (which, for all its faults, was at least more than just a link to a Wikipedia article).</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>I just made an assertion regarding their respective adherents, which thus far you have done precious little to refute.</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>So far you've asserted that the terms have originated recently, that they have no set meaning within the current political sphere, and that their adherents are "adolescent." So far you have done absolutely nothing to support this.</p>

62

<p>Um, at no point did I assert or even imply that the phrases originated in 2008. That would be idiotic. I think just about anyone else who read the clause "2008's adolescent political buzz phrase" would derive "a political buzz phrase used by adolescent's in the year 2008," and not "no one said these until 2008."</p>

<p>If that's what you think my thesis has been this entire time, it's no wonder your arguments aren't making any sense.</p>

<p>Since it would be impossible to conduct a valid statistical survey on this topic, I'm forced to rely on personal experience, namely that adherents of the questioned ideology can't really say much about it. Since the only person who's really responded to that claim is you, whose reading comprehension skills must be called into question at this point, and everyone else has chosen to ignore the questions I posed, it is not unreasonable for me to suggest that a significant populations of the self-styled fiscal conservatives/social liberals in this thread don't really have much to say beyond "I am a fiscal conservative and social liberal."</p>

<p>And to repeat, because I don't trust you not to get it otherwise, I never claimed that the terms "fiscal conservative" and "social liberal" originated in 2008. That is something you fabricated, and I'd have corrected you sooner if I'd had any idea what you were going on about.</p>

63

<p>
[quote]
It was Vivi who called Ron Paul a social liberal. She seems to be fond of him.

[/quote]

Sorry guys, a misunderstanding; Ron Paul has libertarian ideals, but is not a member of the Libertarian party - he is registered and runs as a Republican. That said, he mixes his conservative ways of thinking with the libertarian ideals (what we call right-libertarian). I didn't say RP himself was identified as fiscal-conservative/social-liberal, I merely hoped to point out that many of the "independents" on this board could probably identify with many libertarian ideals judging from their stances. Sorry if I confused anyone.</p>

<p>
[quote]
it is not unreasonable for me to suggest that a significant populations of the self-styled fiscal conservatives/social liberals in this thread don't really have much to say beyond "I am a fiscal conservative and social liberal."

[/quote]

I'm fairly certain that the general populace carries more intelligence than you may care to assume, and that many of us have strong opinions about fiscal conservatism/social liberism (oh wait, that's pretty much libertarianism) which we are perfectly able to expand on should you wish.</p>

64

<p>The general populace has done precious little to convince me otherwise. You seem different, though. Want to have an actual discussion? It's bound to be a lot more interesting than arguing semantics over whether I claimed that libertarianism was invented in 2008.</p>

65

<p>My political compass has me as a tempered communist. Basically the government should have control, but business shouldn't. I don't have a real party affiliation; I support whichever major candidate seems more competent and less pro-wealth. Obviously one will compensate for the other, to a certain extent.</p>

66

<p>^ Communism simply doesn't work. The big reason why China's thriving is because it's becoming more and more capitalistic.</p>

67

<p>I know a republican and he is the must stuckup hunk of crap ever.</p>

68

<p>There are plenty of countries with socialist-inspired economic systems that are also doing extremely well for themselves. Much of Europe comes to mind.</p>

<p>I could just as easily turn around and say "(Pure) Capitalism simply doesn't work" and point to the Great Depression or sweat shops in the Third World. All things in moderation.</p>

69

<p>^^ You know only one republican? :p Man, I wish I lived where you do. My town is like 90% rich, white conservatives.</p>

70

<p>I'm Independent, but I have leaned towards the Democratic Candidates the past few years. Ideology wise, I'm liberal, if that makes sense all in all. </p>

<p>I know a couple Republicans too, and the only reason they think the way they do is one thing: Money. At least the Democrats have more sincere interests at heart.</p>

71

<p>socialist...nuff said :)</p>

72

<p>Democrat.</p>

<p>I believe that capitalistic access to the American market should come with a price (ahem, taxes). Plain and simple. And I'm not ashamed to admit it. </p>

<p>~pro choice
~undecided on aff. action
~anti-capitalism (by definition, anyway...)
~pro labor
~pro stem cell research
~moderate on free speech
~pro civil liberties
~pro universal health care
~pro public education
~pro government assistance
~pro woman's rights
~pro gay rights/marriage/adoption</p>

<p>but the most important issue to me is the war. While I agree with Barack's position, many say that it's not nearly as liberal as they would've expected it to be. It is the one issue that I most define myself with him on, though. Here's what I think:</p>

<p>We can't stay in Iraq and act like 9/11 never happened
We can't come on home and act like 9/11 never happened</p>

<p>We must get out of Iraq AND on the right battlefield. Justice for the victims of 9/11, security for the American people. Nothing more or less.</p>