Politics

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aeradalia [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

You miss the point though... sadly.

A liberal risks putting themselves in a bind... a conservative puts themselves first.

When times are good, a liberal mindset can be supported.

When times are bad, a more conservative mind frame is favorable.

---

Not when it comes to the economy.. well im sure people will argue with me on this point, however history has shown (several times), that while you are in a recession theres is a need to up spending to boost the economy (liberal).

A conservative approach would be to cut back spending thus not run a deficit, however you would most likely end up in a situation of rapid inflation and unemployment.

By the way, this is why balanced budgets are a horrible idea, because you don't spend as much money when it is most needed. Obviously you don't want to spend insane amounts of cash, however the aim should be to run a balanced spending budget over the course of a 'business cycle', (a period which encompasses a fall in the economy as well as a rise and then returning to its original starting position).

Geez, now I keep thinking back to my macroeconomics class.. making me ramble on. To get back on subject, yes I believe its important to have similar values which typically translates to political allegiance, however it doesn't need to be identical. Right or left leaning though, I am a firm believer that it is important to vote, even if you just spoil it.

Wow politics. Me like.

I'm socially liberal and fiscally conservative and it would definitely be a dealbreaker for me if she had extremist views which strayed too far from mine.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by all alone [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

A conservative approach would be to cut back spending thus not run a deficit, however you would most likely end up in a situation of rapid inflation and unemployment.

---

Your other points notwithstanding.. ^that statement is exceptionally outrageous, I think you should take a look at the Philips Curve.

But basic economic policy like fiscal stimulus isn't even debated anyway. Both liberals and conservatives (unless they're downright stupid) agree that you should boost govt spending in a recession.

As a consequence of the level of focktardery exhibited by the natives who share the country of my residence, I have completely stopped dating every and any prospect here as I can't abide by some of the drivel which comes out of their mouths regarding politics much less principles and philosophy, or lack of in their case.

So the short answer is no. I would and have become physically ill sharing a bed with someone who doesn't have my basic no frills political idealogy.

I've come to consider it akin to dating 5 year olds with ballot papers. Ironically, I've been called cruel, heartless, barbaric, unevolved, an inhumane by these very same philosphical runts.

That's my biggest fear. Getting involved with one of them, even for just casual sex, and having a reproductive accident where the offspring would have it's head filled with bollocks and I couldn't save him/her.

I totally agree- it is really a turn off if they aren't into politics- I would rather date someone with an opposing viewpoint than date a guy that just doesn't care!

Like the sort of education which can make the distinction between a conversation regarding mixed political relationships and whether one is capable of existing in one, or a conversation which devolves into subtle taunting of one's opposing political distraction despite a no religion/politics rule in longstanding at LF, Lulu? :)

Oops- I'll edit that!:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mishanya [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

But that's not true. Either liberal or conservative may put themselves in a bind or put themselves first depending on circumstances and personality of the individual. There is no clear demarcation line between the two.

---

There is when you're requesting the fundamentals... I sincerely doubt anyone can live up to being a fundamental liberal or a fundamental conservative.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lipp [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

So keep things as they are when they don't work (times are bad) and change them when they do work (times are good)?

How does that make any sense?

---

No, apply tactics that do work in both good and bad times. Sometimes the tactics might be liberal... sometimes the tactics might be conservative. It's dependent on the situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by all alone [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

Not when it comes to the economy.. well im sure people will argue with me on this point, however history has shown (several times), that while you are in a recession theres is a need to up spending to boost the economy (liberal).

A conservative approach would be to cut back spending thus not run a deficit, however you would most likely end up in a situation of rapid inflation and unemployment.

By the way, this is why balanced budgets are a horrible idea, because you don't spend as much money when it is most needed. Obviously you don't want to spend insane amounts of cash, however the aim should be to run a balanced spending budget over the course of a 'business cycle', (a period which encompasses a fall in the economy as well as a rise and then returning to its original starting position).

Geez, now I keep thinking back to my macroeconomics class.. making me ramble on. To get back on subject, yes I believe its important to have similar values which typically translates to political allegiance, however it doesn't need to be identical. Right or left leaning though, I am a firm believer that it is important to vote, even if you just spoil it.

---

I said I alternate between liberal and conservative methods... often favoring to stay in the middle... how has all you've written disproved my stance?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vashti [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

As the mother of a male child, I can tell you how your partner might become the enemy. Let's say you are a hard-core conservative, fully supportive of the war efforts overseas, and I am a liberal, not supportive of the war efforts, and together we have an 17 1/2 year old male child. Let's say the conservative party is pushing for a draft because people aren't lining up to support the war effort in the way that was anticipated.

I would consider you the enemy if you were to favor anything that would jeopardize the safety of my child. And I would consider you the enemy if you were to vote for any politician who favored the draft, because that might affect my child.

You see?

---

I see entirely.

I also feel compelled to correct your "facts":

Conservatives support the All-Volunteer Force (no draft).

Liberals, like your buddy Charles Rangel, support the draft.

Remember, the last draft was created by the Democrats, not by the Republicans!

Its sort of like hydrogen...you still "Hindenburg" even though the facts don't match up. Same thing with defense policy..."Oh, it must be the Republicans..."

Anyway, I read all the points. BTW...I'm neither a D or an R. Totally Independent.

It was a hypothetical scenario, CAM... meant to demonstrate HOW you might end up sleeping with the enemy. Don't over-think it.

does it really matter what opinion your bedmate has? it's not like it would ever affect the country. let them label themselves whatever they want.

I'd want to know that she could stand up under an extremely disturbed society and not cross the line or turnstile with any of our children nor become an informant on my relatives.

I'd need someone with strong convictions and a refusal to quit.

Just out of curiosity, how come the U.S. only has two parties that completely dominate the elections? I haven't even heard the slightest mention of other parties.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lipp [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

Just out of curiosity, how come the U.S. only has two parties that completely dominate the elections? I haven't even heard the slightest mention of other parties.

---

The media and both the Democrats and Republicans marginalize them.

They exist though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lipp [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

Just out of curiosity, how come the U.S. only has two parties that completely dominate the elections? I haven't even heard the slightest mention of other parties.

---

They have others like Nader and other independents, but they are insignificant because they get very little percent of the vote since US is practicably a two party system. I think it's a two party system with such little choice because they are constantly at war with each other, each election is a battlefield where you are either one or the other and any other deviation is tantamount to treason. It's unhealthy, but that's what you get in perpetual warfare politics.

To a lesser extent it is similar to this in most other western countries. Unfortunately for all of us we haven't yet evolved to a full democracy and beyond the need to bludgeon each other to death with slogans and punchlines of the opposition. We are not yet at that point in time where we can seat peacefully with each other and derive logical solutions to our problems.

Look up the definition of democracy, Mish. As a suggestion, merely.