Jump to content
270soft Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Actinguy

What is your political affiliation?

What is your political affiliation?  

36 members have voted

  1. 1. What is your political affiliation? (USA)

    • I consider myself to be a Republican
      7
    • I consider myself to be a Democrat
      17
    • I consider myself to be too far to the left to be a member of either party.
      4
    • I consider myself to be too far to the right to be a member of either party.
      0
    • I consider myself to be too far in the center to be a member of either party.
      4
    • I consider myself to be a member of a political party, but it isn't named above (name it in the comments?)
      4


Recommended Posts

I’m registered with the Working Families Party but consider myself to be an independent (the Working Families Party doesn’t actually have party status in Massachusetts anyways). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Actinguy said:

Just a general interest in folks' political affiliations, if any.

I do not belong to a political party as a member or loyal supporter. First, I certainly don't claim membership in an American political party, as that would not serve me at all, and it would be nonsensical for me to declare such an allegiance for a party whose candidates I could not vote for, a party I could not run on behalf, and one I could not even legally give campaign donations to, and whose elected officials' platforms, policies, and decisions only directly affect me through foreign affairs, trade, and certain collateral affects of domestic policy. Of the political parties in my home nation of Canada on a Federal level, or Alberta on a Provincial level, I have never been a firm member or staunch supporter of any, and have voted strategically, voting for, I believe, five separate party labels across Federal and Provincial in the time I've been able to vote (if I had had a birthday several month earlier and could have voted in the pivotal and infamous 1993 Federal election - the last election I was UNABLE to vote in, it would have been yet another party, that looked promising and well-promoted at the time, but in truth, only ran in that one election and didn't get a single seat), and, in the upcoming 2019 Alberta Election, I'm definitely voting for yet another party I've never voted for before. I can only really see myself firmly and loyally belonging to a political party in a true sense if I was a founding member from the ground up and a principal party ideologue (though NOT necessarily leader or even candidate) of said party.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, lizphairphreak said:

I'm a Dem because you have to be registered in a party to vote in primaries.

I live in Ohio, where you actually can vote in any primary but have to choose just one in a  given election.

I usually vote in the Dem primaries, but in 2016 I voted in the Republican primary because I cared way more about which Republican got the nomination ("Not Trump") than on the Democrat side.

Most of Ohio dems seemingly agreed with me, as Kasich ended up winning the Ohio nomination, but Trump still won Ohio in the general election.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I vote in the SC Democratic Primaries, while being more ideologically aligned with Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders. However, I have made compromises with myself and vote for less extreme candidates within the primary if I feel they have a legitimate chance on winning(a local state house race, and my congressional race- SC 1).  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lizphairphreak said:

I'm a Dem because you have to be registered in a party to vote in primaries.

I believe official electoral agencies and committees managing and runs election events demanding you to state your party affiliation mandatorily, or penalizing you in any way, should be illegal. Then again, so too should party primaries, caucuses, and conventions of the two major parties (but only the major parties) being managed said public, government electoral and committees on the taxpayers' dime, and not by the parties themselves (which should be completely deintegrated from the actual government apparatus and made purely legally separate and private-public organizations, like political parties are in every other nation except one-party, dominant-party-systems, and party-of-party-systems, but in the latter two cases, only for the entrenched incumbent party - like with only the two entrenched incumbent parties in the U.S.).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't answer this. I"m a registered Democrat, because it just makes it easier to vote. However, I'm not a loyalist. I'll vote for any part so long as they have a real chance to win 270 EVs, and they are further to the left of the other party or parties that have a real chance to win 270 EVs.  I'll vote Republican if they ever go left of the Democrats. 

I think a better identification is pragmatic progressive. I'm vehemently opposed to Bernie or Bust mentalities, even though Bernie Sanders is the closest to my ideal politician (Kucinich was probably closer to me but even he had flaws). 

Economically: I'm fiscally flexible. I can understand some merits of fiscal conservatism. I am sometimes in agreement with it. That said, in 21st century there are things that need funding and with the size of our population, our aging population, our level of consumerism, our basic standard of living/quality of life, it is senseless to really cut much of the spending. For this reason, we haven't really had a fiscal conservative since before FDR. It's impossible. It's rendered to rhetoric. 

Socially: I would be considered "far-left" by a social conservative, but I don't see the views as being far-left since they seem obviously in accordance with natural law. Most of social conservatism seems to be Satanic or at the very least, inhumane. That said I am flexible with certain elements of cultural conservatism. That is traditional methods, celebrations, etc., so long as they tinged with racism, bigotry, and the like. I'd say I'm the least flexible in this area. 

Foreign Policy: War only in self defense and for humanitarian reasons (ex. holocaust and genocide). War is never an instrument of policy or profit-making. No unilateral wars. 

I think the fact that I'm economically flexible prevents me from being far-left. I think I would probably surprise many people by agreeing with Republicans on some issues that other Democrats might be less incline to agree with, at least for the sake of being the opposition party.

Overall, I'm very independent.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I consider myself to be a Republican but that's only because I'm a registered Republican. As of late I have been thinking of registered independent. In Nebraska as an independent I could vote in the Democratic primaries, and this election cycle they seem to be more in line with my views. According to ISideWith I'm currently closest aligned to Delaney, Kasich, Trump, Gabbard, Buttigieg, Beto, and Klobuchar.

 

That being said in 2016 I voted for Johnson, and if it's Trump or Warren in the general, I'll like vote for the Libertarian again as long as it isn't Adam Kokesh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Man we’re all in love with descriptive words and titles aren’t we.  

 

Heres a better question.  Raise your hand if you’ve voted for the Dem candidate for president in one election and a Republican candidate in another president election. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, HonestAbe said:

Man we’re all in love with descriptive words and titles aren’t we.  

 

Heres a better question.  Raise your hand if you’ve voted for the Dem candidate for president in one election and a Republican candidate in another president election. 

 

I've voted in eight presidential elections and never voted for a Democrat or a Republican

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not American, but if I was I would probably be a moderate Republican or more realistically not a member of either party, but if I needed to register to vote in the primaries I would be a Republican most likely

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LegolasRedbard said:

Not American, but if I was I would probably be a moderate Republican or more realistically not a member of either party, but if I needed to register to vote in the primaries I would be a Republican most likely

As also not being an American, I find myself thankful I'm not in regards to the political cultural and partisan landscape, to be honest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, HonestAbe said:

Man we’re all in love with descriptive words and titles aren’t we.  

 

Heres a better question.  Raise your hand if you’ve voted for the Dem candidate for president in one election and a Republican candidate in another president election. 

I voted for NEW Democratic candidates four times Federally and three times Provincially, but that's not the AMERICAN Democratic Party. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, HonestAbe said:

Man we’re all in love with descriptive words and titles aren’t we.  

 

Heres a better question.  Raise your hand if you’ve voted for the Dem candidate for president in one election and a Republican candidate in another president election. 

I have.  I supported W Bush twice in a row, and then Obama twice in a row.  In all four cases, I was backing who I thought was the right man for the job, given my options.    

But I would take literally anyone over Trump -- and even if he dropped out today, I also can't take anyone who was willing to pretend that he was anything but pure evil.  Which rules out almost any Republican candidate I can think of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Actinguy said:

I have.  I supported W Bush twice in a row, and then Obama twice in a row.  In all four cases, I was backing who I thought was the right man for the job.  

But I would take literally anyone over Trump -- and even if he dropped out today, I also can't take anyone who was willing to pretend that he was anything but pure evil.  Which rules out almost any Republican candidate I can think of.

I wouldn't call Trump EVIL, per se. He is thoughtless, egotistical, self-absorbed, nepotistic, incompetent in his current office, and probably, deep down inside, too apathetic of the needs and concerns of the American people and the U.S. as a nation to remotely belong in the White House. But, he is not a flagrant war criminal and trampler of the U.S. Constitution, playing the fears and zeitgeist of the people like a fiddle, like George W. Bush.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Actinguy said:

Then I can't back you for President.  ;c)

I'm not running for President. I'm too pragmatic, honest, frank, clear-sighted, and ethical, and willing to call ALL socio-political camps to task and wanting to tackle problems and issues at their root causes, not just playing "whack-the-mole" with their symptoms, to be electable. It's unfortunate that that's the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Patine said:

I'm not running for President. I'm too pragmatic, honest, frank, clear-sighted, and ethical, and willing to call ALL socio-political camps to task and wanting to tackle problems and issues at their root causes, not just playing "whack-the-mole" with their symptoms, to be electable. It's unfortunate that that's the case.

I too have decided not to run due to my absolute perfectness.  ;c)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Patine said:

I wouldn't call Trump EVIL, per se. He is thoughtless, egotistical, self-absorbed, nepotistic, incompetent in his current office, and probably, deep down inside, too apathetic of the needs and concerns of the American people and the U.S. as a nation to remotely belong in the White House. But, he is not a flagrant war criminal and trampler of the U.S. Constitution, playing the fears and zeitgeist of the people like a fiddle, like George W. Bush.

He has been far worse for the Constitution than Bush. Most recently see his unilateral usurpation of the power of the purse from the legislative branch to the executive branch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

He has been far worse for the Constitution than Bush. Most recently see his unilateral usurpation of the power of the purse from the legislative branch to the executive branch.

Have you even read the (un)Patriot Act?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Patine said:

Have you even read the (un)Patriot Act?

How patronizing, yes, of course I have. And yes I know it to be one of the worst affronts to the 4th amendment but you do know that the Constitution has other sections and parts too right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Harris/Ernst 2020 said:

@Reagan04 whats your thoughts on Pres. Trump declaring an emergency to build the wall?

That is to what I was alluding to above. This is most likely going to be the straw the breaks the back of the proverbial camel as this will go down as one of the most unconstitutional and anti-republican things done by an American President in history. This is up there with Lincoln and Habeas Corpus, FDR and Japanese Internment, and yes, Bush's Patriot Act. What this essentially does is usurp the power of the purse unto the executive, declawing Congress entirely in the process such that the power of the sword and purse lay entirely with the executive. What the precedent does is destroy separation of powers and ergo destroy checks and balances as an indirect effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Reagan04 said:

That is to what I was alluding to above. This is most likely going to be the straw the breaks the back of the proverbial camel as this will go down as one of the most unconstitutional and anti-republican things done by an American President in history. This is up there with Lincoln and Habeas Corpus, FDR and Japanese Internment, and yes, Bush's Patriot Act. What this essentially does is usurp the power of the purse unto the executive, declawing Congress entirely in the process such that the power of the sword and purse lay entirely with the executive. What the precedent does is destroy separation of powers and ergo destroy checks and balances as an indirect effect.

I agree. It's obvious I don't agree with what it's being used for, but he is literally going into unconstitutional territory that will likely be upheld by the Supreme Court should it reach it, which to me shows the sad state of our Constitutional Democracy. I long for the days of true compromise and bipartisanship. I wonder what it would take for us to get back to those days. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...