Liberals and the left

DaGimp

Well-known member
seems about right to me, what are your issues with their stance?

I believe that most liberals are democrats, I dont believe that most democrats are liberals. I think this was a sad attempt to blur the lines between democrats, liberal and the far left.
 

WJeeper

Member
I believe that most liberals are democrats, I dont believe that most democrats are liberals. I think this was a sad attempt to blur the lines between democrats, liberal and the far left.

Pretty sure that was the point, is that they are not the same even though people confuse them with each other. Pretty sure the video was clarifying that there is a line between leftists and liberals, not blurring it. But maybe I missed something.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

DaGimp

Well-known member
A "crying" liberal in Wyoming leaves home @ 18 feeling out of place.
Ends up in Bolder of all places and suddenly he feels like a conservative.

My father would have called me a liberal. By today's standards I"m a libertarian.

Titles.. labels..
 

WILLD420

Well-known member
Premium Member
Liberal and Leftist are often confused. I think it has to do with Leftists trying to hide behind the camouflage of the liberal ideology and people not taking the time to sort out the differences. My working man's definition is that one wants to save the world by taxing those who they believe have too much. The other wants to enslave the world by turning everyone against each other, then ruling the survivors through the barrel of a gun that only they can possess; manned by an Army of like minded useful idiots led by the bloodthirsty and the power mad underlings they hand picked to take the fall if it all goes south.
 

DaGimp

Well-known member
"I belong to this party, so I must agree to this really stupid idea to get votes for the other not so stupid things". American voting.
The two party system of voting is a horrible failure.
We having a ruling class but they dont wear crowns, its who has enough money to buy our politicians. "Paid for by X" aka we couldnt just flat out pay for your re-election so we'lll fund it another way like give your daughter a ridiculously high wage right out of law school.


And if you have that much money laws dont apply to you.
 

DJRENO

Active member
Premium Member
"I belong to this party, so I must agree to this really stupid idea to get votes for the other not so stupid things". American voting.
The two party system of voting is a horrible failure.
We having a ruling class but they dont wear crowns, its who has enough money to buy our politicians. "Paid for by X" aka we couldnt just flat out pay for your re-election so we'lll fund it another way like give your daughter a ridiculously high wage right out of law school.


And if you have that much money laws dont apply to you.


Really? So what do you suggest that would work better? I'm all ears. For all it's "faults" this system of government has lasted longer than any other on the planet.

Make your case.
 

DaGimp

Well-known member
Really? So what do you suggest that would work better? I'm all ears. For all it's "faults" this system of government has lasted longer than any other on the planet.

Make your case.

Educated voters, IQ and political knowledge test before being allowed to vote. Sounds ridiculous, I'm all for it.
 

ScoobyMike

Well-known member
Really? So what do you suggest that would work better? I'm all ears. For all it's "faults" this system of government has lasted longer than any other on the planet.

Make your case.
Term limits and political funding reform. Did you see Booker in the Kavanaugh hearings recap? That man has crawled way up into the DNC ass and will lie, cheat and steal to further the party agenda. This is the on ramp to the career politician gravy train. Did you know that congressional commity seats (including the chair) are sold, with the proceeds going to the affiliated party war chest? Congress has delegated their power to the executive and judicial branches because making hard decisions is bad for a long political career. Congress now whines a lot and take emotionally correct defensible positions.

We are no longer operating a government envisioned by the founding fathers. A combination of crippling debt, sold out congress (R & D)and militaristically aggressive policies has doomed America and I do not believe that there is a viable recovery path. Best strategy is to establish a base camp in a remote location that Has an abundance of clean water to ride out the inevitable transition.
 

Dennis

Administrator
Staff member
I like proportional representation, that way if 3rd party is supported by 10% of the population, then they get 10% of seats in the congress/parliament.

Our 2 party system is set up to hoard 100% of the power, and unfortunately if a 3rd Party got to a major status, all the career politicians will jump on their bandwagon and dilute the party's principles.
 

DJRENO

Active member
Premium Member
Strict proportional representation would mean there would be no voice for Nevada and similar sparsely populated states - everything would be run by California and the east coast.

Funding reform would go a long ways to mitigating the corruption we currently experience.
 

jfrey123

Well-known member
The only issue with proportional representation is it can’t be accurately split amongst different state populations. “10% of American voters are libertarian, so 5 states are now required to send us a libertarian,” even if their population voted some other way.

Also ends up having to account for any party meeting a minimum. Eventually we end up like European countries who have parties that control the parliament with only 30% support of the people.

One of the overlooked perks of electoral college for presidency is the minimum. If we had 4 candidates and none of them capture the magical 270 number then no one wins.
 

Mudspit

New member
I agree with some of it, but it's too much A or B with some of the definitions of some complex beliefs, views & ideologies. Supporting one thing doesn't mean you can't support something different, or necessarily have to view it as an opposing view.
 

kairo

Moderator
Staff member
I'm about as left, liberal, soft, pussy, whatever you want to call it as you can get, and I generally don't say a thing about it because I also like guns, trucks, and people being able to get rich off their small businesses, hard work, and sometimes luck.

I tend to draw the line where billionaires control most of the capital, political influence, and business concerns in any country. The US (in my humble opinion) has reached that tipping point.

I agree with Denis on proportional representation.

I also think if you want to do drugs, marry 5 men or women, get a sex change or walk naked through a main street that that's ok. As long as you aren't hurting me or society, I have no complaint about what you do with your personal life.

I do, however, strongly believe that we've let the wealthiest among us control our political system to their benefit. All the fox news, cnn, nbc and online arguing does nothing but divide us amongst ourselves and let those folks at the top secure even more of the worlds resources for themselves.

Edit: I just realized I resurrected a dead thread. Carry on y'all :D
 
Last edited:

DJRENO

Active member
Premium Member
I do, however, strongly believe that we've let the wealthiest among us control our political system to their benefit.

Yep you are correct, "we" have let that happen by voting for the usual schmoes. They are all in the same club, cut from the same bolt of cloth with just a little different bias. The Bushes, the Clintons, the Obamas, Kennedy, Nixon, Johnson, even Eisenhower - all members of the professional political elite, many of which have garnered huge fortunes being humble servants of the people - classic example: Joe Biden. The only disruption in this unending rerun has been Trump. For all of his warts and foibles and flaws, he has managed to disrupt the dominant political paradigm, and that disruption has been sorely needed. If the political elite weren't scared of that disruption, they wouldn't have started fighting him the even before he got elected. And it is the traditional professional politicians that have allowed, perhaps encouraged, the concentration of wealth to occur.
 

DaGimp

Well-known member
I'm about as left, liberal, soft, pussy, whatever you want to call it as you can get, and I generally don't say a thing about it because I also like guns, trucks, and people being able to get rich off their small businesses, hard work, and sometimes luck.

I tend to draw the line where billionaires control most of the capital, political influence, and business concerns in any country. The US (in my humble opinion) has reached that tipping point.

I agree with Denis on proportional representation.

I also think if you want to do drugs, marry 5 men or women, get a sex change or walk naked through a main street that that's ok. As long as you aren't hurting me or society, I have no complaint about what you do with your personal life.

I do, however, strongly believe that we've let the wealthiest among us control our political system to their benefit. All the fox news, cnn, nbc and online arguing does nothing but divide us amongst ourselves and let those folks at the top secure even more of the worlds resources for themselves.

Edit: I just realized I resurrected a dead thread. Carry on y'all :D

1% of the population have 95% of the wealth in the USA. Why are they not paying 95% of the taxes?

If you really want to get started please do.
 
Top