Jump to content
270soft Forum

4 Politicians that Represent your Political Views.


Recommended Posts

Just now, Actinguy said:

Economic: Jeb! Bush

Social: Barack Obama

Foreign Policy: Dick Cheney

Misc: Pete Buttigieg

Economic was difficult — I don’t have firmly held economic beliefs, it’s just always a balance of trying to do helpful things while being realistic about it.  I don’t know what Jeb! actually believes in economically, but he was my fourth favorite politician, and the one with no clear fit, so I put him in economic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
[[Template forums/front/topics/activity is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

Economic - Bernie Sanders


Social - Vice President of Philippines Leni Robredo.She's great. Kinda centrist by american standard but Leftist by our country's standard.

 

Foreign Policy - Tulsi Gabbard


Misc -  Pasig City Mayor Vico Sotto

embodies good leadership from the youth (he's 29) he's nonpartisan but is obviously left of center. 

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

Economic: Jeb! Bush

Social: Barack Obama

Foreign Policy: Dick Cheney

Misc: Pete Buttigieg

Dick Cheney has no soul and no conscience! The "Dark Lord of the Sith," and "Dracula," memes are about right.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Economic: Robert Kennedy

Social: Bernie Sanders

Foreign Policy: Dennis Kucinich or Ron Paul

Misc: John Kasich

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Patine said:

Only for foreign and military affairs. Certainly not social and economic. And, besides, how many "conservatives," today share his views in foreign and military affairs, I ask you? And I thought Goldwater was "Mr. Conservative." And he was also seriously considering nuking Hanoi, regardless of the bigger consequences. Hence, the "Daisy," attack ad by the Johnson campaign.

You are correct! Mr. Goldwater was Mr. Conservative. Our history professor @vcczar should know better! Taft was, of course, Mr. Republican whereas Goldwater was Mr. Conservative.

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

You are correct! Mr. Goldwater was Mr. Conservative. Our history professor @vcczar should know better! Taft was, of course, Mr. Republican whereas Goldwater was Mr. Conservative.

Of course, in the pre-Reagan days, when a large portion of Republicans were not necessarily conservative ideologically, or expected to be, and a lot of Democrats, especially in the Deep South, were ideologically VERY conservative, Goldwater's moniker was probably more profound.

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

You are correct! Mr. Goldwater was Mr. Conservative. Our history professor @vcczar should know better! Taft was, of course, Mr. Republican whereas Goldwater was Mr. Conservative.

Yeah you’re right. That’s actually what I meant to put. My mistake. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Economic - Tom Cotton

2. Social - George W. Bush

3. Foreign Policy/Military - Lindsey Graham

4. Misc. Values - Mike Huckabee

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

1. Economic - Tom Cotton

2. Social - George W. Bush

3. Foreign Policy/Military - Lindsey Graham

4. Misc. Values - Mike Huckabee

What meaningful and distinctive social policies did Bush have? His agendas as a President were almost entirely focused on his monstrous, criminal wars and violating the U.S. Constitution thoroughly, with a big economic bailout package that only served the rich, in the end, at the tail end of his Presidency. Or are you referring to his "smoke and mirrors," deflection strategy of declaring "same sex marriage is the biggest issue of our time," to try (in vane) to get critics' minds of him making himself the biggest war criminal of the 21st Century thus far, and showing his complete and utter contempt for U.S. Constitutional law, due process, and other Constitutional guarantees, and his oath of office?

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

What meaningful and distinctive social policies did Bush have? His agendas as a President were almost entirely focused on his monstrous, criminal wars and violating the U.S. Constitution thoroughly, with a big economic bailout package that only served the rich, in the end, at the tail end of his Presidency. Or are you referring to his "smoke and mirrors," deflection strategy of declaring "same sex marriage is the biggest issue of our time," to try (in vane) to get critics' minds of him making himself the biggest war criminal of the 21st Century thus far, and showing his complete and utter contempt for U.S. Constitutional law, due process, and other Constitutional guarantees, and his oath of office?

I mean before 9/11 Bush campaigned on education reform. So pre 9/11 Bush is who he could be referring to?

Edited by SilentLiberty
Grammar hard hah
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Patine said:

What meaningful and distinctive social policies did Bush have? His agendas as a President were almost entirely focused on his monstrous, criminal wars and violating the U.S. Constitution thoroughly, with a big economic bailout package that only served the rich, in the end, at the tail end of his Presidency. Or are you referring to his "smoke and mirrors," deflection strategy of declaring "same sex marriage is the biggest issue of our time," to try (in vane) to get critics' minds of him making himself the biggest war criminal of the 21st Century thus far, and showing his complete and utter contempt for U.S. Constitutional law, due process, and other Constitutional guarantees, and his oath of office?

 

2 hours ago, SilentLiberty said:

I mean before 9/11 Bush campaigned on education reform. So pre 9/11 Bush is who he could be referring to?

Yeah I chose Bush on social issues for the reason, no one could bring up criticism  on his handling of the Iraq war, which might have been not the best but also not the worst. Just for the record.

Bush seemed like the moral conscience of the nation. He had values at his heart and he fought for them, if they were unpopular among the electorate or other nations. Bush is like the nice guy from next door and he can be described as a compassionate conservative. I think this can account for my choosing of him for the social issues spot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

 

Yeah I chose Bush on social issues for the reason, no one could bring up criticism  on his handling of the Iraq war, which might have been not the best but also not the worst. Just for the record.

Bush seemed like the moral conscience of the nation. He had values at his heart and he fought for them, if they were unpopular among the electorate or other nations. Bush is like the nice guy from next door and he can be described as a compassionate conservative. I think this can account for my choosing of him for the social issues spot.

Another signature social policy of his was that he was probably the most effective President in history at meaningfully making sure that gay marriage did not become legalized. It was a big battering ram in 2004 for him and he presided over a time in his second term when voters across the nation were banning it in droves where that was one of the few issues on which he was still popular.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

1. Economic - Tom Cotton

2. Social - George W. Bush

3. Foreign Policy/Military - Lindsey Graham

4. Misc. Values - Mike Huckabee

I'm surprised you didn't include any European or even Austrian politicians. 

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

I'm surprised you didn't include any European or even Austrian politicians. 

I actually thought it was only about Americans before realizing now that this was a false assumption of mine. 

But honestly Austrian's current leadership does not really represent my views and they are not very likeable. I grew even depressed with Austrian politicians since about three years. My party was hijacked from Chancellor Kurz who is not close to what I consider a good politician. Most of the old leadership  was replaced with Kurz-loyal guys who are either incompetent or opportunistic (some have both attributes). Other qualifications are mostly not requested. The even more right-wing FPÖ was hit by a major scandal which exposed what I always believed. Former Vice Chancellor Strache is a fly-by-night politician who would make a good night club owner but no trusted politician. (Fun fact: he left the FPÖ and intends to run for a new party called DAÖ for the upcoming Viennese State elections).

And overall I don't like many aspects about Austria's political landscape. You can't be a right-winger without being accused of being antisemitic or anti-American (which is not even an accusation most of the time, because people here don't like American influence abroad - left-wingers as well). Most criticism I hear about Angela Merkel for example is that she's an American puppet. I think Merkel is a bad politician, but for utterly different reasons. I'd happily change the Euro for the Dollar for example. If you say this in Austria, you are lambasted from the left and the right. Same with the EU. I despise the current EU as a left-wing moralistic, open-border institution but I would support it for more cooperation in economical and security issues. 

Nearly all good Austrian politicians who have been popular when I became interested in domestic and (foreign) politics are now out of office. 

For other countries in Europe, I have the most respect for British politicians. Jacob Rees-Mogg is currently my favorite politician there. 

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

I actually thought it was only about Americans before realizing now that this was a false assumption of mine. 

But honestly Austrian's current leadership does not really represent my views and they are not very likeable. I grew even depressed with Austrian politicians since about three years. My party was hijacked from Chancellor Kurz who is not close to what I consider a good politician. Most of the old leadership  was replaced with Kurz-loyal guys who are either incompetent or opportunistic (some have both attributes). Other qualifications are mostly not requested. The even more right-wing FPÖ was hit by a major scandal which exposed what I always believed. Former Vice Chancellor Strache is a fly-by-night politician who would make a good night club owner but no trusted politician. (Fun fact: he left the FPÖ and intends to run for a new party called DAÖ for the upcoming Viennese State elections).

And overall I don't like many aspects about Austria's political landscape. You can't be a right-winger without being accused of being antisemitic or anti-American (which is not even an accusation most of the time, because people here don't like American influence abroad - left-wingers as well). Most criticism I hear about Angela Merkel for example is that she's an American puppet. I think Merkel is a bad politician, but for utterly different reasons. I'd happily change the Euro for the Dollar for example. If you say this in Austria, you are lambasted from the left and the right. Same with the EU. I despise the current EU as a left-wing moralistic, open-border institution but I would support it for more cooperation in economical and security issues. 

Nearly all good Austrian politicians who have been popular when I became interested in domestic and (foreign) politics are now out of office. 

For other countries in Europe, I have the most respect for British politicians. Jacob Rees-Mogg is currently my favorite politician there. 

Who is the last Austrian politician that you've liked as much, if not more, than your favorite US politicians? 

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

Another signature social policy of his was that he was probably the most effective President in history at meaningfully making sure that gay marriage did not become legalized. It was a big battering ram in 2004 for him and he presided over a time in his second term when voters across the nation were banning it in droves where that was one of the few issues on which he was still popular.

Yeah Bush fought for values. Although I do not support same-sex marriage, the thing I criticize the most about legalizing it, is the way how it was done. 5 judges ruled against what most people in many states truly believed in. I had accepted referendums in all 50 states as a compromise. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, vcczar said:

Who is the last Austrian politician that you've liked as much, if not more, than your favorite US politicians? 

I am glad you are asking. People I really like include:

The best chancellor Austria had: Wolfgang Schüssel (Chancellor between 2000 - 2007) Under his term there were even talks about joining the NATO and he had high integrity (ok he lobbied for nuclear energy after leaving office, but hey that's no real problem). At least one couldn't accuse him of antisemitism (as stated the greatest problem with right-wing politicians in Austria is, that most of them are anti-semitic and anti-American. I hate both aspects absolutely. I had to hold my nose during the run-offs in our presidential election in 2016). After he left office, he signed a book for me.

 

No particular order from here:

The best vice-chancellor was probably Michael Spindelegger. He is regarded as lame duck and uninspiring but he had integrity as well. After he left office I wrote a letter to the lobbying firm he joined and I got a very nice response. Seems like I was right, he is a very likeable but unsuccessful politician.

The best President was Kurt Waldheim. An old-guard politician, highly respected within the international community and a true leader. 

An honorary mention goes to the former ''ambassador'' of Austria to the EU. Franz Fischler. Also an old-guard politician who is one of the last great people. We differ on the EU issue greatly, but hey I have no problem with other opinions. 

One more I don't want to forget about:

Ewald Stadler is a great orator, but is a bit more at the right, than the others. This brings the same problems on the table I mentioned before.

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

Another signature social policy of his was that he was probably the most effective President in history at meaningfully making sure that gay marriage did not become legalized. It was a big battering ram in 2004 for him and he presided over a time in his second term when voters across the nation were banning it in droves where that was one of the few issues on which he was still popular.

 

29 minutes ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

Yeah Bush fought for values. Although I do not support same-sex marriage, the thing I criticize the most about legalizing it, is the way how it was done. 5 judges ruled against what most people in many states truly believed in. I had accepted referendums in all 50 states as a compromise. 

Of course, why should same-sex marriages be denied from a Constitutional perspective? What value is "moral legislation," that is always punitive and bigoted. If Christian values are quoted, that wasn't the tenor of Christ's Ministry and Teachings at all - only a repugnant perversion and mockery of them (like a lot of modern "Christians," try to use for ulterior motives). And there's no value in such a ban in pragmatic, societal order, non-theocratic/theonynmous law-making - in fact, it's only an unnecessary and unjust barrier and a problem in that regard.

3 hours ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

 

Yeah I chose Bush on social issues for the reason, no one could bring up criticism  on his handling of the Iraq war, which might have been not the best but also not the worst. Just for the record.

Bush seemed like the moral conscience of the nation. He had values at his heart and he fought for them, if they were unpopular among the electorate or other nations. Bush is like the nice guy from next door and he can be described as a compassionate conservative. I think this can account for my choosing of him for the social issues spot.

Please, don't even try this tract. It's laughable, in a gallows-humour way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Patine said:

Of course, why should same-sex marriages be denied from a Constitutional perspective?

I never said it should be. Marriage Equality is an absolute must under the 14th amendment. I was simply just answering your question about what Bush's signature social policies were. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Reagan04 said:

I never said it should be. Marriage Equality is an absolute must under the 14th amendment. I was simply just answering your question about what Bush's signature social policies were. 

Ah, my mistake. I wasn't clear it was just an academic rendition or a defense of them.

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

Of course, why should same-sex marriages be denied from a Constitutional perspective?

I can't say this from a constitutional perspective for sure although I strongly believe four judges had their reasons to not agree on Obergefell v. Hodges but for myself it could also be seen as a legal custom ?!

16 minutes ago, Reagan04 said:

I never said it should be. Marriage Equality is an absolute must under the 14th amendment.

Roberts, Scalia, Alito and Thomas must have thought differently ;) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

I am glad you are asking. People I really like include:

The best chancellor Austria had: Wolfgang Schüssel (Chancellor between 2000 - 2007) Under his term there were even talks about joining the NATO and he had high integrity (ok he lobbied for nuclear energy after leaving office, but hey that's no real problem). At least one couldn't accuse him of antisemitism (as stated the greatest problem with right-wing politicians in Austria is, that most of them are anti-semitic and anti-American. I hate both aspects absolutely. I had to hold my nose during the run-offs in our presidential election in 2016). After he left office, he signed a book for me.

 

No particular order from here:

The best vice-chancellor was probably Michael Spindelegger. He is regarded as lame duck and uninspiring but he had integrity as well. After he left office I wrote a letter to the lobbying firm he joined and I got a very nice response. Seems like I was right, he is a very likeable but unsuccessful politician.

The best President was Kurt Waldheim. An old-guard politician, highly respected within the international community and a true leader. 

An honorary mention goes to the former ''ambassador'' of Austria to the EU. Franz Fischler. Also an old-guard politician who is one of the last great people. We differ on the EU issue greatly, but hey I have no problem with other opinions. 

One more I don't want to forget about:

Ewald Stadler is a great orator, but is a bit more at the right, than the others. This brings the same problems on the table I mentioned before.

Of these, I've only heard of Waldheim and Schussel. I don't know anything about them except for their names. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

Roberts, Scalia, Alito and Thomas must have thought differently ;) 

They did, and while I respect their opinion, I disagree with it. As long as marriage is an institution recognize by government, government cannot sequester that on the basis of sexuality.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Conservative Elector 2 said:

I can't say this from a constitutional perspective for sure although I strongly believe four judges had their reasons to not agree on Obergefell v. Hodges but for myself it could also be seen as a legal custom ?!

Roberts, Scalia, Alito and Thomas must have thought differently ;) 

Well, Scalia, at least, was personally a known and obvious homophobe in his opinions - especially given in the much earlier Supreme Court case, when he wasn't a Justice, but an attorney representing one of the involved parties, I believe - the criminalization of consenting homosexual activity in private between consensual adults was ruled as Unconstitutional to keep enforcing. So a blatant bigot, who complained about both relevant rulings from a clearly bigoted and uninformed point of view, probably didn't have the most valuable dissent from the ruling. Besides, defending any "legal custom," that denies people equal rights or treatment based on inborn traits or nature is, frankly, barbaric and Medievalist, and deserves no respect and only excoriation in the modern world.

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...

×
×
  • Create New...