Party Poll- Republican, Democrat or Independant?

[Zombie]

Im proud to say Im a registered Republican. I only disagree with my party on 2 issues...
1- Amnesty for Illegal Ailens (they are ILLEGAL after all..)
2- Drilling for oil in Alaska.

What party are you with and what do you disagree with them on?

-Zombie

[LycanSpectre]

Meh.. I'm registered Republican, but I really should be Independant. I do not see eye to eye with the republicans anymore. I'll probably change my party affiliation before November. Maybe.

[Darth Cluich]

I'm registered as a Republican, but that's only so I can vote in primaries. I'm actually a libertarian.

Down with the PATRIOT Act!

[blueeyes]

Independent, since Tweedledee and Tweedledum are bad enough; I don't want to have to care about Edwards and Kerry, although I would have gone for that Mosley-Braun :: smiles :: Mainly vote Republican, although I didn't vote for Bush. This year, however, I go NADER!
(so it looks more impressive if the Democrats loose. I'm in MA, so I have to throw my vote away.)

Mainly, I'm just don't agree with a lot of enviromental actions, and want something done about SUVs. Maybe some more anti-cigarette laws, too.

[phantomroller]

I'm very, very. very much a liberal. so I'm with the Democrats. no, I don't agree on everything they stand for. but out of all of them, it's the lesser of the two evils so to say. but I'll go with either canidate as long as they are liberals (and they're usually from the Dems)

[Wolffy13]

Republican here! I've always been rather conservative in nature, but I do agree with a few liberal ideas. I am by no means a tree hugger, but I do think it would be nice to keep the environment looking nice. It also seems most conservatives (most of which are Republican) are aginst gays, and I can't say I agree on their philosophy. Otherwise, I think it's the party for me

[Darth Cluich]

It also seems most conservatives (most of which are Republican) are aginst gays, and I can't say I agree on their philosophy.

That would be only the so-called "social conservatives," which is often synonymous with the religious right. There are different "species," if you will, of conservatives -- social, fiscal et al.

[LOBO REY]

I'm hispanic so I'm a Democrat. I don't agree with some of the partys positions. As for you Republicans, y'all ever hear of David Duke, former Grand Wizard of the California Klan, founder of the NAAWP, white supremist and registerd republican politician. He was in the 93' presidental primaries.

[Wolffy13]

Well, no. You political standings can be measured better on a grid than a straight line. Here got to this link http://politicalcompass.org/ and click on Take the Test in the left hand column and follow the directions. This will show you on a graph how your political views truly are. Not only does it show you where you stand economically, but also socially. It's quite interesting

[Darth Cluich]

I'm hispanic so I'm a Democrat. I don't agree with some of the partys positions. As for you Republicans, y'all ever hear of David Duke, former Grand Wizard of the California Klan, founder of the NAAWP, white supremist and registerd republican politician. He was in the 93' presidental primaries.

I have to say, this is just plain ignorant. Being Hispanic automatically makes you a Democrat? Excuse me? My ancestry is Irish. Uh...Ted Kennedy is Irish, and he's a Democrat. I must be a Democrat, too, then. That's just plain ridiculous. Your ethnic background does not determine your party affiliation, unless you blindly follow others and don't make up your own mind. I should point out, too, that the first Latino to serve in the House of Representatives, Romualdo Pacheco of California (served 1877-1883), was a Republican, as was the first to serve in the Senate, Octaviano Larrazolo of New Mexico (1928-1929). Sure, Latinos tend to register as Democrats, but that doesn't translate into a Latino automatically being a Democrat.

As for bringing up David Duke in an attempt to smear the GOP, that's ridiculous as well. Anyone can register for a party -- be it the Democrats, the Republicans, the Libertarians, or the Invite the Martians to Rescue Us From Earth Party. Likewise, anyone party member can, in most instances, run for that party's nomination, as Duke did in 1992, not 1993 (there wasn't a presidential primary that year). You neglect to mention, of course (since it would undermine your attempt at smearing), that the GOP distanced itself from Duke as far as possible. In fact, the GOP in Florida and Georgia went so far as to strike his name from the list of candidates in their state primaries, something that had never been done before (both moves were later determined to be legal by the 11th Circuit Court in 1993). In the end, Duke got no delegates -- none, zippo, goose egg -- so he's hardly someone that can be held up as a model of the Republican Party.

[LycanSpectre]

Well, no. You political standings can be measured better on a grid than a straight line. Here got to this link http://politicalcompass.org/ and click on Take the Test in the left hand column and follow the directions. This will show you on a graph how your political views truly are. Not only does it show you where you stand economically, but also socially. It's quite interesting


Very interesting indeed. It appears I'm more geared towards a collectivistic econonomy (I dont think that's right) and anarchy as a form of government (as an ideal, hell yeah)!

Cluich, my sentiments exactly. :D

[Darth Cluich]

Well, no. You political standings can be measured better on a grid than a straight line. Here got to this link http://politicalcompass.org/ and click on Take the Test in the left hand column and follow the directions. This will show you on a graph how your political views truly are. Not only does it show you where you stand economically, but also socially. It's quite interesting


Interesting, yes. Accurate, no. The questions -- which are answered with responses of strongly agree, agree, disagree, and strongly disagree -- are phrased in a slanted manner. Take this one, for example: "If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations." And that's just the first one! Nobody is going to say "I'm all for screwing humanity! Power to the trans-nationals!" It's the same as the idiotic statement: "I'm for clean water and air." Who the hell isn't? I've never heard anyone stand up and say, "Damn, I love smog!"

Here's another: "A significant advantage of a one-party state is that it avoids all the arguments that delay progress in a democratic political system." Duh...of course, that's a significant advantage. Really, it's probably the only advantage, and it's gained by sacrificing all the many, many advantages of democracy to obtain it. However, if you're going to answer this question honestly and factually, you would have to agree.

I will say, however, that I do like the two-dimensional approach taken here, as opposed to the traditional linear (right-to-left) approach.

[chriz]

I'm sorta Libertarian, mainly conservative, not at all Republican. I like small government. The smaller, the better.

Basically, I think like this. (http://home.mn.rr.com/meadowbrookhome/z/liberty_intro.swf)

[Darth Cluich]

I'm sorta Libertarian, mainly conservative, not at all Republican. I like small government. The smaller, the better.

Basically, I think like this. (http://home.mn.rr.com/meadowbrookhome/z/liberty_intro.swf)

I like the graphic "Libertarianism for Dummies," chriz. Very nice! :beerchug:

[Klark]

My party is NON. That's right, I don't party....er, I don't belong to any party whatsoever. I just sit back, relax, listen to hear stuff that appeals, weigh the pros and cons and then decide where to toss my vote, even if I toss it away. I don't totally agree with the Republicans, I don't totally agree with the Democrats, Independants go the same, so yeah, I have no party.

*runs through thread partyless* Don't look, I don't have my party on.

I'm more interested in how the universe works than I am in who the universe will revolve around for the next four years, so, I'm sorry that I'm politically ignorant, but I thought I would mention that I was NON, since I didn't see it in here.

[chriz]

I like the graphic "Libertarianism for Dummies," chriz. Very nice! :beerchug:

Well, it's not mine... :)

[LOBO REY]

First off I'm hispanic not latin, yes there is a diffrence. Latins are futher down and on islands. I'm a Tejano, most hispanics are poor. The democrats are the ones who help the hard lucked. The Republican party is for the rich, and if you aren't you can't join the party. I'm a very radical Democrat any ways. Second I like the irish, but the truth is that y'all are half white, you have more freedom. Unlike my family American sense Texas joined the uion in 1846 and look at like a wet back. And Duke did run for primaries after he lost in Louisiana.

[Fuzzy]

I hate Bush.
thats my party.

[Darth Cluich]

First off I'm hispanic not latin, yes there is a diffrence. Latins are futher down and on islands. I'm a Tejano, most hispanics are poor. The democrats are the ones who help the hard lucked. The Republican party is for the rich, and if you aren't you can't join the party. I'm a very radical Democrat any ways. Second I like the irish, but the truth is that y'all are half white, you have more freedom. Unlike my family American sense Texas joined the uion in 1846 and look at like a wet back. And Duke did run for primaries after he lost in Louisiana.

My gawd...where to begin?

Okay, howsabout the Latino/Hispanic difference? Hispanics are a subgroup, if you will, of Latinos. Latinos are those peoples from south of the US that speak Spanish, Portuguese, or French. Thus, Hispanics, as Spanish-speakers, are a subgroup of Latinos.

Next...hmmm...gee, I'm so glad you like the Irish. On behalf of my ancestors and all of their descendents, I'd like to thank you so much for your kindness. Last time I checked, though, the Irish were white, period. They're not half white. The Irish enjoy no more freedom in this country than anyone else. In fact, it could be argued that during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, the Irish actually faced more discrimination in this country than almost any other ethnic group (go ahead and argue that -- please!).

And now, finally, the political issue. Democrats are "help the hard lucked." The GOP, meanwhile, "is for the rich, and if you aren't you can't join the party." Your characterization of Democrats depends a lot on how you define helping. Are handouts actually helpful? If you believe that, sure, then Democrats are the champions of the lower classes (and I've got some beachfront property in Oklahoma to sell you). As for the GOP being for the rich. Eh, I don't even feel like arguing that frankly. The demonization of Republicans as evil moneygrubbing rich guys like Mr. Potter in It's A Wonderful Life is trite and is used by people who can't be bothered addressing substantive issues. What I particularly am at a loss to understand, though, is how you can say that, if you're not rich, you can't join the GOP. As I've already noted in this thread, I'm a registered Republican (though only so I can vote hassle-free in primaries), and I am not rich by any stretch of the imagination, even one as fanciful as yours.

[LOBO REY]

Okay, howsabout the Latino/Hispanic difference? Hispanics are a subgroup, if you will, of Latinos. Latinos are those peoples from south of the US that speak Spanish, Portuguese, or French. Thus, Hispanics, as Spanish-speakers, are a subgroup of Latinos.


No, I have counted that there are 13 races. The hispanic and latin races were created and devolped diffrently by the mixing of blood.
Hispanics are the crossbreeds of Spanish, Indios, and black blood.
You described the latins very well. I am a subspecies of hispanic called a Tejano. we are diffrent from Mexicans by apperance and habitat. Now I don't consider the Irish, Spanish, Italians, Egyptions, or Greeks white. Although there are some White Power groups that will let y'all in most won't. If for bieng Catholic.
Oh yes, you and Duke have a common enemy, he dislikes Ted Kennedy also.

[Darth Cluich]

I'm glad you've made that accurate count of races... :rolleyes:

And did you even read my post about David Duke? If you have read it, I really don't see why you're bringing him up again. :shrug:

[LOBO REY]

Two thirds of your party supported his anti-affermative action bills.

[Darth Cluich]

Two thirds of your party supported his anti-affermative action bills.

Remember, it's only "my party" so that I can vote in the primaries. I'm a libertarian. No sense in registering for the Libertarian party, though -- at least, not until they get a real platform, one that's not based solely on legalizing drugs and abolishing the IRS.

As for bills against affirmative action...um...what's wrong with that?

[Edwardo_son_of_haqim]

Hold on Lobo the Irish aren't white? I'm fullblood Irish and I'm
white along with every other fullblood Irish person whose lived in Ireland all their life.look at a map we're that small island next to England and the English are white

[LycanSpectre]

As for bills against affirmative action...um...what's wrong with that?

I was wondering the same thing myself. All evidence I have seen suggests to me that Affirmative Action outlived it usefulness a while back. Race is a terrible reason to hire someone, especially when other, more qualified people are being turned down, becuase if hired the company won't meet its race quota. Affirmative Action stinks of dicrimination and manipulation. The sooner it dies, the better.

[AlphaMale]

Registered Republican, but Libertarian in philosophy. I'm against the war on drugs and the war on poverty. I don't care if people of the same gender get married. I am against government censorship of any kind. Avid support of the Constitution and the Bill or Rights. Not a fan of mob rule (aka democracy).I support a minimal safety net for fellow citizens who come across hard times, but am against using social services as a living. If kids want to pray in school fine, but they shouldn't be forced to or forbidden to.