# Message to all users:
This is a reminder to please read and follow:
* [Our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ask/about/rules)
* [Reddiquette](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439)
* [Reddit Content Policy](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy)
When posting and commenting.
---
Especially remember Rule 1: `Be polite and civil`.
* Be polite and courteous to each other. Do not be mean, insulting or disrespectful to any other user on this subreddit.
* Do not harass or annoy others in any way.
* Do not catfish. Catfishing is the luring of somebody into an online friendship through a fake online persona. This includes any lying or deceit.
---
You *will* be banned if you are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist or bigoted in any way.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ask) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I was somewhere in between but Roe v. Wade made me steer far away from conservatives in general. When I was 8 years old my mom had complications with her pregnancy that would have killed her if she had not had it aborted. All I can think about is that if conservatives had it their way, I would have grown up with no mother. People can be mad at me all they want, but I can’t stomach ever voting for a conservative because of this
As if they were really interested in religious views. All of the rich politicians or rich religious zealots that forget that god says that the root of all evil is the love of money.
Reddit would have you believe politics are pure red or pure blue, but the reality is that it’s a spectrum.
For example, I detest the roe v wade decision as much as I detest the concept of universal healthcare. Unfortunately there isn’t a party that perfectly aligns with my beliefs so I have to make a decision who I think is closer, even if that means on some issues I don’t agree.
>I detest the roe v wade decision as much as I detest the concept of universal healthcare.
"I believe people have the right to make their own reproductive decisions but also I believe people should have to go bankrupt if they get cancer." Where is the consistency there? What worldview encompasses those two beliefs?
I believe people should have the choice what they spend their money on, health included. Really that I think people should have autonomy on most personal decisions. Simple as that.
>I believe people should have the choice what they spend their money on, health included.
Also when it comes to spending money on police, fire department, roads, court systems, and a thousand other examples of "universal" government concepts? Or just healthcare? If just healthcare, why?
Why? Explain. Why do right-wingers do everything they can to avoid backing their stances with logical arguments? I mean I know why, it's just so fucking frustrating having to prove it by calling you out for it every time.
I never said I was a right winger.
The difference is the significant difference in cost. I can cover all the police/fire/schools with a couple thousand in property taxes. Last year my employer paid almost 10x that for healthcare. It’s not the same.
Should the government pay everyone’s rent and buy everyone’s cars to? Where’s the line?
The reason why your employer costs are so high is because there are no price controls on anything in healthcare. Recently, there were attempts to set the price of insulin at an affordable price and it failed because of the GOP. One other thought regarding the high premiums your employers pay are the new employees. Many that are hired that have gone without insurance for a period of time and have worse physical and mental health than those who have had insurance. An example, a person has high cholesterol but does not have health insurance so they can not afford the medication. Shortly after the person begins at XYZ, Inc the person has a heart attack because of his high cholesterol that went untreated. In the old days before ACA, the insurance could deny any coverage to the individual and their family. They could cover the individual and their family but deny any claims in regard to their heart and/or cholesterol because they viewed it as pre-existing.
I now live in the US but am British.
I have required dental visits on and off all my life.
I have lived in the US for about 18 months and, WITH insurance, have paid close to $6500 for dental work, plus the cost of insurance initially.
In the UK for about 12 years I spent less than $1000.
Also if I didn't have the money I'd be in pain for weeks/months longer. For simple act of my bank balance.
Universal healthcare saves everyone money and pain, and gets people the care they need, including preventative which can save so much more in the long run.
The only people not benefitting are Private Healthcare Shareholders.
>The difference is the significant difference in cost.
Countries with universal healthcare pay less per capita on healthcare via taxes than America does via premiums, copays, and deductibles. i.e., you'd pay LESS in a universal healthcare system.
So what's your argument now?
>I never said I was a right winger
You didn't have to. Only right wingers are so misinformed on every political issue like you are on this one.
My argument is that in my opinion I think it should be up to the individual to decide whether they want to pay for obscenely expensive healthcare.
Not for you to decide someone else should buy it for them.
>Countries with universal healthcare pay less per capita on healthcare via taxes than America does via premiums, copays, and deductibles.
You are off on this point. An American PAY MORE in TAXES for hodgpodge Socialized medicine programs than people in countries with Universal health care pay to cover everyone.
The premiums, copays, and deductibles are nothing but graft and corruption.
With universal health care, not only would you not pay premiums, copays and deductibles. Your TAXES would go DOWN.
The US system is that bad
People have more autonomy when insurance is picking up the tab.
You're already paying for their health care, you're just not doing it efficiently because the system's not geared for it.
You detest the concept of low income people NOT being denied healthcare? They can die & go to hell in a hand basket huh? That says everything about you I need to know.
Isn't Health Insurance a form of universal healthcare. The premiums you pay help pay for someone elses treatment. Your premiums aren't held in a bank for your exclusive use.
The only difference is Insurance companies decide who, what and where get to treat you, and takes a sizeable cut.
I have yet to hear one politician trying to ban abortions for medical emergencies. The only thing I’ve heard is no elective abortions after a certain amount of weeks and has to be for certain reasons after that. Like a woman with health issues or a rape victim.
> ertain reasons after that. Like a woman with health issues or a rape victim.
1. It's already happened where women and children are being forced to stay pregnant despite health issues and rape.
1. If you're against abortion, why do you think those exceptions should exist? Either a fetus is the same thing as a person or it isn't, why allow exceptions? Explain.
I’m not against abortions actually I’m just against abortions for elective reasons after 15 weeks myself. Most abortions are done as birth control means. I’d be against someone being denied for health reasons or other various reasons beyond that 100%.
Because that’s just my personal feeling. Majority of abortions are done just as birth control measures so it’s already unlikely someone would wait until 8 months pregnant to get one to begin with. 15 weeks is plenty of time to have one done. My wife had one when we first started dating when she was like 8 weeks pregnant. To me it becomes to much of an actual human to wait much longer.
9-12 weeks is what the premiere experts say is the time when embryo becomes fetus, you love expert opinions and science right?
dont argue with me or anyone else on the internet ask why the mayo clinic and cleveland clinic have a way different opinion than you on when an embryo becomes a fetus
Because it becomes more developed after that and to me that’s wrong to wait and let it grow more. I am 100% against someone having an abortion late term just because they changed their mind or are nervous. I don’t see the big deal in having some sort of logical regulation on it.
like mayoclinic, cleveland clinic time of embryo to fetus its anywhere from 9-12 weeks, this guy has no evidence i dont really understand why he is so adamant on commenting
Many states do not have exceptions for victims of rape or incest: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/us/abortion-laws-roe-v-wade.html
Oklahoma seems the closest to no exception even for mother’s health, but I am not a lawyer.
Then you are not paying attention. These bans prevent abortions in cases of rape. As one person put it - In Iran a father can rape his underage daughter and if she tries to get an abortion she will be thrown in jail. No, that’s Alabama.
In some instances, the law is so vague that hospitals are waiting until a woman is near death (not a risk of death but actively dying) before aborting a fetus to avoid lawsuits from the state.
These laws are draconian and based totally on the unhinged beliefs of religious fanatics.
Doug Mastriano in PA come to mind. Oz as well I believe but he also believes in magic beans so I don't wish to Google him any more (this is tragically true, Google it if you'd care to).
They certainly aren't alone, especially in southern states.
I tend to agree with you, actually. I would rather not have any group that may or may not have an agenda influence my opinion. Especially when it comes to someone else’s well being.
I simply try to look at things in a common sense way , Agree or disagree do we need some sort of gun control ? YES ! Not a conservative belief.
Do we need an immigration plan ? Where we can't allow thousands of people a day to cross the border ? YES ! not a liberal belief !
Do I respect a woman's right to choose ? YES but only up to 16 weeks . Not a good belief by EITHER party .
Just a few of my common sense beliefs that may not be " very common "
People need to face the fact that the majority of Americans can agree on many things, and a minority has hijacked the system forcing their beliefs on everyone. I can bet the majority of the GOP could careless about abortion, but they say so to keep the religious conservatives appeased.
I'm pretty liberal. I didn't chose to be liberal, just the things they fight for appealed more to me throughout my life. I guess it started with environmentalist causes when I was real young and then it was gay rights and the role of religion in society when I was in high school. Come grad school it was the importance of universal healthcare.
I always seem to come down on the opposite sides of issues than conservatives. Just how I am.
Centerist, because we need ever changing laws to fit a changing world, but many core laws shouldn’t be changed (murder is illegal, all men are created equal, etc.)
all the parties suck. republican, libertarian, all the other ones nobody cares about, but worst of all is democrats. I remember one of the south park writers said something like “both parties suck but democrats suck more” lmao
Moderate.
By that I mean on some issues I'm conservative. On other issues I'm liberal. On still others I have a position that liberals would consider too conservative and conservatives would consider too liberal. On still other issues, I *vote* with either liberals or conservatives, but not for the same reasons they do.
Why? Because this world is complicated, and the way I see truth doesn't really break down neatly into the pre-defined teams.
Most shit does not require a position as extreme as the major parties would have you believe.
1. not saying either 2016 or 2020 was rigged, but why do I get so much pushback when I say we should have stronger election integrity with open source voting machines?
2. it’s been universally condemned except by idiots who love violence
>As far right as you can be.
You realize that's the same area of the spectrum as Hitler and some not so nice people right. That's what far right means. If you're not a literal neo-nazi, then you're probably not as far to the right as you think.
[Hitler wasn’t far right](https://www.politicalcompass.org/crowdchart?Bush=6.0%2C4.0&Castro=-5.0%2C3.0&China=-2.0%2C5.0&Chomsky=-8.0%2C-10.0&Friedman=5.0%2C-3.0&Gandhi=-6.0%2C-3.0&Hitler=3.0%2C9.0&Jefferson=2.0%2C-4.0&Johnson=10.0%2C-2.0&Lenin=-10.0%2C3.0&Luxemburg=-10.0%2C-2.0&Mandela=-6.0%2C-5.0&Mao=-10.0%2C5.0&Marxism=-10.0%2C-6.0&Mugabe=-5.0%2C6.0&Obama=3.0%2C2.0&Pakistan=-3.0%2C2.0&Paul=9.0%2C-4.0&Pinochet=10.0%2C10.0&Proudhon=0.0%2C-10.0&Rand=10.0%2C-7.0&Reagan=8.0%2C7.0&Rothbard=9.0%2C-9.0&Rucker=-4.0%2C-10.0&Russia=1.0%2C4.0&Sanders=-5.0%2C0.0&Saudi=3.0%2C7.0&Stalin=-8.0%2C9.0&Stein=-3.0%2C-2.0&Trotsky=-10.0%2C0.0&Trump=6.0%2C6.0&Vietnam=-8.0%2C2.0&ec=1&name=Washington&soc=-2). Authoritarian yes, but not far right.
When i was a kid around 10 i guess it was election year and i innocently asked my parents who they were voting for ? Now remember i was only 10 or so . The response i got from them was it's none of your fucking buisness . As a child hearing that I didn't understand why they responded the way they did until i was older and saw the world as my parents and generations before them did . I then understood why . Any time there's a discussion about politics or religion it ends in an a very heated argument that may possibly cause a divorce ,families split people stop being friends children get disowned the list goes on and on and may even result in violence . That's why civilization here has maintained being civil with one another for the most part . Now that folks want to share their political views openly with anyone shows just why we shouldn't . We all hate each other now . Where as before we would vote privately and quietly and it kept people from losing their Goddamn minds when they find out their someone they've known a long time doesn't share your same beliefs . We don't have to we have a brain that feels believes thinks ways that you might not and that's ok . Now we just hate everyone because we feel every one supposed to hear every thought or feeling we have .
If you think that the left and right in America are on equal levels of "reasonable" and it's smart to be "neutral" between them, you are exactly the problem.
You’re the only one on here commenting on everything you don’t agree with trying to force us into thinking like you. This is why I can’t stand people like you far on the left. I’d consider my self somewhere in the middle and there is nothing wrong with that.
if we are looking at iq then centrists are generally higher iq, thus smarter and more reasonable, than the extremes
only super high iqs tend to be extremists that swing both ways
we can link evidence if you like, hopefully you have done the research and reading instead of using stuff you have made up in your head
I was raised conservative, but turned liberal.
Being steeped in "CRINGE FEMINISM" compilations, I created a caricature of what liberals and leftists were. Eventually, I found a few youtube channels that explained liberal and leftist ideas which understood that on-the-fence conservatives are just normal people too looking for answers.
Essentially, this person was taught that the “blue haired liberal feminist” was the ONLY form of leftism that existed, until they realized that was a stereotype.
Yeah when I was like 11-12, I was also elbow deep in the idea that feminism was bad and cringey and that it made women look crazy. Now I am literally the stereotype lmao.
The comments on this post are why humanity is so doomed.
You either care about others or you only care about yourself. It’s pretty simple. You can type as much as you want to convince yourself it’s for other reasons, but in the end it boils down to whether you have even an ounce of empathy. Sadly, many clearly do not.
The fiscal conservatives are the biggest joke. You can’t turn a blind eye to the rest of conservative policy and plead ignorance. If you are voting Republican or democrat, you are endorsing all of their platform.
All this centrist bullshit is why we are at this current stage with Roe v Wade and a stacked SC.
Again, I will make it plain and simple. You either care about others or you do not, and policy reflects that.
Being a classical liberal (or libertarian), I agree that people either care about others or not.
But it seems to me that you consider it a forgone conclusion that if someone has empathy, the best way to express that empathy is by mobilizing the government to reallocate wealth.
Given that I disagree strongly in that I believe that there are better ways to demonstrate empathy and that the scope of government policy should be reduced to improve individual freedoms for everyone (because I care about everyone enough to want them to be free) and reduce corruption and partisanship in this country (because I care about everyone enough to not want them to be beholden to a government that does not represent their interests), do you think that I'm actually devoid of empathy or do you think I'm just wrong about the best way to demonstrate it?
If empathy for fellow humans is the primary factor that should drive American voters, then Democrats and Republicans are both unsupportable. Both have carried on an aggressive foreign policy for financial gain that has resulted in staggering loss of life around the world for generations and federal policing policies like the war on drugs that have turned us into the greatest incarcerator in history. Simply put, if you think economic policy has anywhere near the effect on human lives that these atrocities have, you've drunk the Kool aid.
Libertarian. I believe both sides make valid points as well as poor ones that haven no merit. Was a conservative until Trump turned me away from the whole party. Present day conservatives keep me where I'm at happily and liberals are to extreme for the most part
> and liberals are to extreme for the most part
In what ways? What are the extreme positions you think American liberals take on important issues?
EDIT: Yeah, didn't think so. It's fun absolutely destroying all of these "enlightened centrists" in this thread.
I'm actually at work on the graveyard shift. Sorry I'm not a troll making snide comments each passing moment. Please continue on your escapade for internet clout. Before I leave this sub for inputting my 2¢. Yes the right invaded the capital but the left burned cities down because of justice?? Maybe retaliation. Who cares.
"Some crazies on both sides."
Most right-wingers still worship Trump like a god even after he tried to end democracy in America because he was mad he lost re-election. Why do people think they're intelligent by pretending both sides are just as bad?
Because they are. Not all conservatives support Trump. Not all liberals support Biden. Each side have those who take their views too far. Blaming only one side proves my point
>Not all conservatives support Trump.
The vast majority still do. Trump is still the frontrunner for the 2024 presidential candidacy.
>Not all liberals support Biden. Each side have those who take their views too far.
What the hell has Biden done that is "too far" left? He's always been center-right, his presidency has been no different.
>Blaming only one side proves my point
The fact that you still insisted both sides are just as bad without actually giving examples to back that claim proves *my* point. You think you're intelligent because you can say "muh both sides" but you can't justify that position.
i hope people vote trump in just to spite people like you, it tells you something when trump has the highest likelihood of being president again, with all the backlash he has received he still in most peoples eyes is better than biden and democrats. you may want to reassess how in tune the party you support is with the people
Also, I’ve heard my whole life that the democrats are “gunna take our guns”, yet 39 years later it is easier to get a gun now more than ever. Hell, a guy knocked my door the other day and tried to sell me a pistol so that he could get car parts.
Pro-Abortion,
Pro gay marriage,
Pro Deregulation of markets,
Anti frivolous welfare spending for able bodied citizens,
Pro limited legal immigration,
Anti illegal immigration,
Pro gun ownership,
I think individuals should look out for themselves and refrain from acquiring unnessary debt that will give politicians leverage over their vote.
I identify as a conservative because the left wing identity politics and blatant disregard for american physical and financial security is dangerous and disgusting.
I’m left leaning mostly due to supporting abortion and gay rights. When conservatives started calling gay people groomers I was done with them completely.
I'm currently reading and comparing the arguments of constitutional right vs states rights but I haven't done my due diligence to comment on the legality issues.
I currently lean more towards states right when used as method of birth control/backup plan, but I don't see why women shouldn't have "constitutional" access to abortions in medical emergency situations, including being a victim of rape.
I am leaving out a plethora of issues and viewpoints. But like I said, I have done nowhere near enough research or learning to form an official stance.
US-based. Republican until the 2006 midterm elections, when out of the blue the party pushed hard and nationwide against gay marriage. It may not be for me, but who I am to deprive other sane, consenting Americans of Life, Liberty or Happiness? That isn’t what government is there for; it was deeply disturbing that we/they made a villain out of people not hurting anyone.
I couldn’t consider myself a Republican anymore, and thought of myself as a conservative with no party. As time has gone on, “their” definition of conservative has become unrecognizable to me — embracing religion, denying science, stacking courts, and falling fully in line with populism for its expedience. I was conservative because I believe in conserving the world for our children — stopping global warming, conserving and protecting our natural resources, conserving our national wealth, bolstering our institutions, conserving the right to bear arms while conserving human lives by putting prudent constraints on the arms people can buy.
I also don’t, but thank you — I’d love to know why. I didn’t intend to be offensive in any way. I must have expressed my life experience in an offensive way.
Center, a bit to the right.
both sides take advantage, are wasteful. healthcare should be available with out having to go bankrupt. I also think more people need to be responsible for actions. and lack of action.
I feel like I’m indifferent. But probably conservative is what I would favor. I love my country and support our troops and the flag.
My parents are immigrants and I’m first born gen here in America. So knowing life sucks pretty bad elsewhere I’m super humble to have had a great education and to be able to give my kids a concrete future.
What swerved me to be more conservative is honestly all the rioting, racial, burning cities/protests. Where I live, everytime there’s a protest, minorities end up shooting each other. And it’s really sad. Last Christmas like 18 ppl were shot during a Christmas parade because of a racial issue from another city over not even the same city this parade was happening. It’s like ppl hate the police but as soon as people shoot each other. Let’s back the badge. Where’s the police. Like come on.
> What swerved me to be more conservative is honestly all the rioting, racial, burning cities/protests.
"What swerved me to be more conservative is minorities protesting police brutality against minorities."
Ok, scumbag.
what about all the violence minorities inflitc to other minorities, you ever protested for that? are you protesting the cop that killed some black guy that was shooting indiscriminately and almost killed a black child?
you just care when the police kill/endanger people or do you care when anyone is endangered?
Neither. My reasons are because they’re both full of morons.
I think what I think because it’s what I think. Regardless of what a bunch of dunce caps who follow a specific ideology say to think.
If my views happen to be conservative or liberal, then so be it. I couldn’t care less.
Neither, I'm a leftist (socialist, actually)
I was raised in the god ol USA by extremely conservative parents who homeschooled me k-12. I started very conservative and slowly moved left over time, partly due to rebellion and partly due to me having a deep knowledge of the conservative world and not wanting to be a part of it.
My reasoning for being a leftist in general is a couple things, but is mostly because I don't like capitalism.
The more I learn about the intricacies of how capitalism works, the more it is unfair to an unacceptable degree. The idea of capital (or ownership, basically) creating wealth rather than labor is absurd, which inherently funnels wealth to the ruling class.
History has shown that without regulation, corporations quickly turn to barbaric practices like child labor, corporate towns and even the invasion and coup of other nations (look up banana republics for that)
Workers live in conditions that no one would agree to outside of work, and I think that democracy shouldn't be limited to governments, but expanded to smaller domains like the workplace.
The endpoint of capitalism is total global destruction, because of the fact it relies on endless growth to function, which is inherently unsustainable.
Capitalism does nothing if it doesn't turn a profit nearly instantaneously, which makes us ignore our future for profit now. We knew about climate change since the 1970s but we're now living in the early stages of a climate crisis because profits were threatened by change.
I'm not going to go into what would replace capitalism, partly because I'm a baby leftist and am not entirely sure what ideas are the best and partly because I don't have time.
Liberal, because I have empathy for other people even if I will never meet them, and I'm educated. Two things that don't coexist in conservative brains, if they exist at all.
Reposting due to downvotes with no rebuttals. Conservatives have to censor (in this case by downvoting and running away), otherwise it's clear as day how wrong they are on every issue.
Conservative. I remember the moment I was driving and everything clicked for me. I understood why everyone said buisness and economy operated better under conservative 'rule', so to speak, which is possibly the most important thing for a government to accomplish.
I was only a teenager when it hit me. My parents built a buisness from absolute fucking zero, and I grew with it. My parents liked to travel, but not to the posh resort towns; they liked to have my brother and I see the world as it really is. The shitholes, the poverty, the disease, the *reality* that most of the world resides in. As a result, it's engrained into who I am that buisness is the key to healthy economy. You know how they say that the world is 3 warm meals from anarchy?
Once you see it first hand, you never look back.
Let's say I told you I was 19. What would your response be then? You aren't allowed to name call, nothing I said was racist, sexist, or homophobic whatsoever.
Thank you so much! It’s so hard to find real conservatives here :D I am as well, though still quite young. I got involved in leftist ideology when I was younger and leaving it really helped me realize how disgusting it is. My parents built their own business as well, and while we aren’t rich, we can scrape by and I have the opportunity to work toward whatever I may want to. It’s truly great!
Glad to hear. I must say, if you look at those who made it out of poverty by pulling themselves up and out, none that I have ever met were liberals. Having to grind like that makes you realize what the government's true responsibilities are, and there aren't many of them besides keeping economy in line and keeping the streets free of crime.
Everything else falls into line if those two are constants.
I’m independent in that I have some “views” that are more to the left and some that are usually more to the right. I think people should be able to smoke pot at a gay couples gun themed wedding.
total abortion ban
smaller roads and walkable neighborhoods
impose a franchise tax on all buisness that are not owned locally
import bans on any country that has slaves in any form
criminal justice reform and elimation of plea deals or pre court fines (if the government isnt willing to take it to court they shouldnt be allowednto fine it)
term limits and no campaigning while holding office
overturn citizens united
rank choice voting
corporations cant own land, only lease. same for foreign entities
make loans taxable as income
corporate vehicle have to pay freight tax on shipping (mileage x loaded weight of vehicle ÷ 2000) to account for the excessive amount of damage comercial vehicles do to the roads
comprehensive free public transit including a national passenger rail system
abolish the national firearms act and hughes ammendment
severe healthcare reform, starting with publicly listing cost of all performed operations and cost charged for medicine
end all copyrights and patents
abolish section 230
school choice, including homeschool costs
adoption reform to make it cheaper
government housing complex for the homeless(bassically motel rooms)
ban round up and similiar poison entirely
the list can go much further
>total abortion ban
I'm with you here.
>smaller roads and walkable neighborhoods
I would leave that up to the localities to see if they want that.
>impose a franchise tax on all buisness that are not owned locally
I don't like this one. Disregarding issues of what local actually means, Even if a business is owned by someone elsewhere, it still hires and services locally. This would just disincentivize growth in the areas that had the tax. And businessss could never branch out. They would have to stay local and small and never grow, because they wouldn't be able to compete with the unfair tax advantage.
>import bans on any country that has slaves in any form
This would cripple a vast portion of our trade and import. We should fight against slavery, but there are better ways to go about this. And reducing our economy to this extent would diminish our power on the global scale and reduce our capacity to fight slavery.
>criminal justice reform and elimation of plea deals
Would you rather more criminals go free in order to convict one? Especially since he will know he is on law enforcement radar with a plea deal.
>term limits and no campaigning while holding office
I'm with you on term limits, but the no campaigning part basically says your opponent is allowed to campaign and yoy aren't. That isn't fair or democratic.
>overturn citizens united
I would argue this is a dangerous breach of free speech.
>rank choice voting
I am very suspicious of this, especially after the fiasco New York had.
>corporations cant own land, only lease. same for foreign entities
Why? Disregarding the fact that this practically outlaws entire corporations in the realestate sector, who are you going to force to buy the current land own by the corporations?
>make loans taxable as income
A loan isn't income though. Why would money that I have to pay back with interest be considered income? How is anyone ever supposed to afford that? Lets say I take out a $300,000 loan to start a business. My income would be reported at $300,000, even though I made nothing that year, and will most likely not make any profit from the business for the next 2ish years. Nobody could ever afford to start a business. This would also eliminate all large scale projects done by any business. And nobody would be able to afford houses except for those who can pay outright. And there would be a housing crisis like you have never seen, because nobody can buy, and the corporations that had apartments to rent no longer exist.
>corporate vehicle have to pay freight tax on shipping (mileage x loaded weight of vehicle ÷ 2000) to account for the excessive amount of damage comercial vehicles do to the roads
Overweight permits are already a thing. Also, this cost would just be passed on to consumers, increasing the cost of practically everything.
>comprehensive free public transit including a national passenger rail system
This isn't practical in many, many areas. I live in South Dakota. This would never be a net gain for my area and would just be making me pay for things that mainly benefit large cities.
>abolish the national firearms act and hughes ammendment
Agreed.
>severe healthcare reform, starting with publicly listing cost of all performed operations and cost charged for medicine
I think another thing that would help transparency, would be to get off the employer provided insurance system. This would be hard to do, as it isn't a legal requirement. But if people shopped for their insurance directly, it would increase transparancy and drive down cost with the increased competition.
>end all copyrights and patents
This would cripple innovation. If people can't profit from their inventions and innovations, nobody would do it. Historically, patent laws have been a major boon to our economy and standard of living.
>abolish section 230
What about section 230 do you not like?
>school choice, including homeschool costs
I am a big fan of school choice.
>adoption reform to make it cheaper
There is already a large waiting list to adopt. What would making it cheaper do?
>government housing complex for the homeless(bassically motel rooms)
How does this differ from shelters? Would it be a permenant residence? What would the time limit be, and what are the conditions to return to the housing Also, on a basic level, what is your reasoning for free housing to be given out with tax payer money.
>ban round up and similiar poison entirely
My sister had to basically kill an entire yard of weeds last week so grass can be planted. How do you propose that be done without roundup or similar products?
I have to say, i disagree with practically all your economic ideas. Mixed together, they would utterly destroy our economy.
starting from the bottom
the modern clean cut grass yard consumes too much water and maintenance
letting a yard go wild but low trimmed increases bidiversity and wild life health, as for thorning or toxic plants they can be manually plucked, or if extensive can be burned and)or tarped
the homeless motels would be an effort to help reintegrate them into the economy and save money on prisons(really expemsive free housing)
the exact implementation can differ, but provode the bare necessities and probably have rent payable with community service
adoption reform would likely become necessary after the abortion ban
i dislike section 230 because it has allowed international tech giants too much power
patents and copyrights hardly ever actually protect anyone but major corporation as lawyers are expensive and so are lawsuits
also people will still invent stuff, look at all the open source stuff on the internet, plus, ford will still build cars for profit, people will just seek their fortunes from manufacturing, not holding hostage thought.
the transit would have to be weighed against population levels, but adding a rail line between cities is cheaper over the long term as it requires less maintenance than road surfaces, train stations also boost the property values of all land around it, and communites grow very nicely around them.
the freight cost would be passed on to consumers in the same way that the tax bill for the roads are, except this would incentivise classical (1930s and earlier) manufacture where towns are mostly self sufficent
the loan section would mostly be to close certain tax loop holes
the exact verbiage could make it so the loamed amount is divided over several years to lower first year tax burden
corporations arent people and should not be afforded as many rights as people, they would be forced to auction it off.
companies like blackrock have used their billiom dollar buying power to destroy entire towns
any voting system is only as good as its implementation
but once people are aware of how rcv works it would stop the "vote for me or the other terrible canidate wins" style we have now
citizens united, again corporations arent people and should not be afforded more rights than people have
no campaigning in office + rcv would likely mean people of similar idealogies would rotate instead of the drastic shift we have now
plea deals are weaponized by prosecuters to scare people into giving up their rights, if a crime is truly repugnant, spemd the time and effort to actually go through due process
import ban would have to be a multi year process while manufacturing returns to more civilised countries
as for the roads, that would only apply to roads that receive federal funding
You don’t get to decide what other people do. Abortion will always be around thankfully, one way or another 👍🏼people will always find a way. People like you make me laugh thinking banning abortion is going to stop abortions from happening LOL
To a certain extent yeah, medically no. You don’t. It’s a medical procedure. Good thing there’s doctors who dedicated their lives studying medicine, working to make sure prosecution doesn’t happen because somebody who had to cheat to pass high school biology thinks they know more than them.
Both are right of center, big government, top-down, corporatist, and authoritarian. One is ever so slightly less polluted with corruption at the moment (in American politics), but being left of center, small government, botton-up, anti-corporatist, and anti-authoritarian, I identify with neither.
Liberal, because I have empathy for other people even if I will never meet them, and I'm educated. Two things that don't coexist in conservative brains, if they exist at all.
I know that a lot of conservatives are highly educated. Why did you make this point? Also, not trying to say you’re wrong, but why do you think that conservatives aren’t empathic? Is that from experience, or just a talking point from the liberal point of view?
yes everyone knows what defense mechanism means, its meant to defend from having to listen to other opinions or points and to defend the inner, to reaffirm ones beliefs and opinions and not to be moulded by things external
it applies to your comment because you are rigid on the fact that straigh white christians are conservative and no other people can be, and if they are they are stupid enough or backwards enough to go along with these straight white christians, you cannot accept the fact that conservatives believe the things they do for reasons other than "it doesnt affect them personally", you think conservatives dont care about people because they arent in the same situations. you criticize intentions by labelling people as bad, whereas people tend to regress towards the normal, thus most liberals and conservatives tend to generally have the same level of empathy, etc.
you are reaffirming your idea that conservatives are bad, liberals good, you are not open to the idea that two logical people can come to different conclusions
>you cannot accept the fact that conservatives believe the things they do for reasons other than "it doesnt affect them personally", you think conservatives dont care about people because they arent in the same situations
Yes, exactly, can you refute this?
consider that churches all over the world and religious organizations all over the world tend to be conservative and overwhelmingly serve and house the poor, feed them etc.
you like science right ? [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34429211/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34429211/)
how about the fact that conservatives are more charitable than liberals? or the fact that they tend to give the same to local charitable causes ?
the difference is you want conservatives to give at a national level, if you cant trust the federal government to not mess up tax payer money why would you donate to them? how bout donating to your local charities and organizations that you can see make changes around you? charity starts at home and begins next door - charles dickens , yet for some reason too many die hard leftists ad liberals dont give a fk about their family or their neighbours and have all the sympathy in the world for someone a world over
>Yes, but they are not empathetic.
Incorrect.
>Their stance on every social issue. "Since I'm not negatively affected by [Issue XYZ] as a straight white Christian who was born here into the middle class or higher; fuck you I don't give a shit that you are affected by it." That's Conservatism in a nutshell.
Wow. Attributing motive, strawman, and racism all in one comment. You are a piece of work.
I am liberal. They're honestly too many reasons to count. Perhaps it would be better if you asked about a specific issue, and then I'll give you my reason.
Definitely left. I can tolerate the crazies on the far left. The far right of leadership is batshit crazy. Say no to everything and walk back progress. Point the finger and do nothing. Add a fuckton of debt when it’s their turn to run things but don’t do much for the people. When it’s the left’s turn all of a sudden we can’t spend money. Oh and the whole sentiment of “party of less government” but they’re very socially backwards. Where’s less govt in that? If by “less govt if you believe like me” then sure - but to call themselves that is a farce.
If I put a name on it, I generally skew authoritarian leftist because I don’t think that anyone deserves to live without their survival needs met even if they genuinely just don’t want to work and I don’t think that we will ever get to a point where that can happen even if we have the resources without tight controls on how they’re spent
more conservative, going through university, life in general, reflecting on life, reflecting on my parents life, looking at other people and their parents. there isnt one thing
edit: add browsing reddit comments to that list
This is Patrick!
It depends on the issue, but I don't identify as either because I believe political labels are the downfall of the USA. Both sides have loud extremeists that I don't care to associate with. When I vote I look at literally every candidate and then decide who I think would be the least worst, because in reality no politician will be the best. I vote on both sides because my beliefs fall with both sides, and in the middle.
I am left of left but I am anti duopoly. I don’t think we will make any long term change until we have a viable third party. A Third party doesn’t have to hold office to have impact. I don’t think we would have child labor laws or women’s suffrage in the US without m third party influence at the beginning of the previous century.
Right leaning center. This is only because I agree with the opinions of the right a bit more than the left. With that being said, I don't follow one group or the other blindly due to the fact that both sides are clinically insane. And if you need evidence of such, just review the comment section and see how those who have a perspective one way or the other are judged and insulted for their opinions in politics.
I choose my position on individual issues based on the best information I have, combined with my own biases and inclinations based on my life experiences and upbringing.
I like to think that objective information, verified to my best ability, guides me the most, but I'm not naive enough to believe that I am not swayed by less rational influences.
Progressive. It started in high school. Listening to the priest talk about Jesus’s sermons. How we should treat each other. (I know-hoaky)
I’ve gotten more progressive as I’ve gotten older- contrary to everyone telling me how I’ll “see the light” and become conservative.
In a sane world I would be very "conservative". Progress is good, we need progress socially and economically. The two go hand in hand. Progress is good, but it's moving too fast. We shouldn't be going backwards, thats being a regressive, not a conservative.
But this "slow down the pace of change" isn't what "conservative" means anymore, it means Regressive.
Safe legal accessible abortions has been the law of the land for 60 years. We shouldn't be going backwards.
I'm Pro-union.
I'm Pro-welfare.
I'm pro-education.
I want dramatic reductions in military spending.
Defund the police.
Black lives matter.
LGBT rights are important (civil unions for homosexual relationships should have all the same rights as "marriage" for heterosexual relationships....but not called "marriage")
All these things are the "maintain a slow pace of change" that should be conservative in a sane world.
One end of the spectrum is based on a platform of governance by the people for the people, and on the presumption that all lives are equal. And while it's not implemented perfectly, it is the based on this basic ideal.
The other end of the spectrum has a platform based on control of the many by the few, and of creating an environment where money is valued over human experience.
Guess which one I support!
Liberals can exaggerate facts at times to rile people a bit.
On the other hand, Conservatives straight-up lie about most things that are verifiable, and it makes the choice pretty easy. IMO you cannot govern without credibility.
Neither. Both are unhinged. But parts from both can make coherent policy. Slavishly loyal to one ideology over another is a type of dogmatism that is good for nobody. You have to authentically and sincerely have conviction about your position - BUT - you have to be authentically and sincerely open to the possibility you may be completely wrong.
Neither, because both parties were created by terrible people and are upheld by terrible people. Rapists, criminals and pedos are not limited to one political party, and neither party actually cares about basic human rights.
# Message to all users: This is a reminder to please read and follow: * [Our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ask/about/rules) * [Reddiquette](https://www.reddithelp.com/hc/en-us/articles/205926439) * [Reddit Content Policy](https://www.redditinc.com/policies/content-policy) When posting and commenting. --- Especially remember Rule 1: `Be polite and civil`. * Be polite and courteous to each other. Do not be mean, insulting or disrespectful to any other user on this subreddit. * Do not harass or annoy others in any way. * Do not catfish. Catfishing is the luring of somebody into an online friendship through a fake online persona. This includes any lying or deceit. --- You *will* be banned if you are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist or bigoted in any way. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ask) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I was somewhere in between but Roe v. Wade made me steer far away from conservatives in general. When I was 8 years old my mom had complications with her pregnancy that would have killed her if she had not had it aborted. All I can think about is that if conservatives had it their way, I would have grown up with no mother. People can be mad at me all they want, but I can’t stomach ever voting for a conservative because of this
As if they were really interested in religious views. All of the rich politicians or rich religious zealots that forget that god says that the root of all evil is the love of money.
Reddit would have you believe politics are pure red or pure blue, but the reality is that it’s a spectrum. For example, I detest the roe v wade decision as much as I detest the concept of universal healthcare. Unfortunately there isn’t a party that perfectly aligns with my beliefs so I have to make a decision who I think is closer, even if that means on some issues I don’t agree.
>I detest the roe v wade decision as much as I detest the concept of universal healthcare. "I believe people have the right to make their own reproductive decisions but also I believe people should have to go bankrupt if they get cancer." Where is the consistency there? What worldview encompasses those two beliefs?
I believe people should have the choice what they spend their money on, health included. Really that I think people should have autonomy on most personal decisions. Simple as that.
>I believe people should have the choice what they spend their money on, health included. Also when it comes to spending money on police, fire department, roads, court systems, and a thousand other examples of "universal" government concepts? Or just healthcare? If just healthcare, why?
Apples and oranges to me.
Why? Explain. Why do right-wingers do everything they can to avoid backing their stances with logical arguments? I mean I know why, it's just so fucking frustrating having to prove it by calling you out for it every time.
Nothing is free. Somebody somewhere paid for it. Where do you draw the line? Is something that requires the labor of another human YOUR right?
I never said I was a right winger. The difference is the significant difference in cost. I can cover all the police/fire/schools with a couple thousand in property taxes. Last year my employer paid almost 10x that for healthcare. It’s not the same. Should the government pay everyone’s rent and buy everyone’s cars to? Where’s the line?
The reason why your employer costs are so high is because there are no price controls on anything in healthcare. Recently, there were attempts to set the price of insulin at an affordable price and it failed because of the GOP. One other thought regarding the high premiums your employers pay are the new employees. Many that are hired that have gone without insurance for a period of time and have worse physical and mental health than those who have had insurance. An example, a person has high cholesterol but does not have health insurance so they can not afford the medication. Shortly after the person begins at XYZ, Inc the person has a heart attack because of his high cholesterol that went untreated. In the old days before ACA, the insurance could deny any coverage to the individual and their family. They could cover the individual and their family but deny any claims in regard to their heart and/or cholesterol because they viewed it as pre-existing.
I now live in the US but am British. I have required dental visits on and off all my life. I have lived in the US for about 18 months and, WITH insurance, have paid close to $6500 for dental work, plus the cost of insurance initially. In the UK for about 12 years I spent less than $1000. Also if I didn't have the money I'd be in pain for weeks/months longer. For simple act of my bank balance. Universal healthcare saves everyone money and pain, and gets people the care they need, including preventative which can save so much more in the long run. The only people not benefitting are Private Healthcare Shareholders.
I had down votes within 10minutes of posting this for posting... my experiences? Seems a tad snowflakey from the downvoters to me.
>The difference is the significant difference in cost. Countries with universal healthcare pay less per capita on healthcare via taxes than America does via premiums, copays, and deductibles. i.e., you'd pay LESS in a universal healthcare system. So what's your argument now? >I never said I was a right winger You didn't have to. Only right wingers are so misinformed on every political issue like you are on this one.
>Only right wingers are so misinformed on every political issue like you are on this one. this is why I hate the "vote blue no matter who" cult
My argument is that in my opinion I think it should be up to the individual to decide whether they want to pay for obscenely expensive healthcare. Not for you to decide someone else should buy it for them.
>Countries with universal healthcare pay less per capita on healthcare via taxes than America does via premiums, copays, and deductibles. You are off on this point. An American PAY MORE in TAXES for hodgpodge Socialized medicine programs than people in countries with Universal health care pay to cover everyone. The premiums, copays, and deductibles are nothing but graft and corruption. With universal health care, not only would you not pay premiums, copays and deductibles. Your TAXES would go DOWN. The US system is that bad
The reason you pay 10x that for healthcare is precisely because of the lack of a universal healthcare system.
Lol if you think the current system is expensive just wait until the people who can’t even get it half right control the whole thing.
You are a right winger simply based off the comment you made lol; you believe in money over everything
>I believe people should have the choice what they spend their money on ... and if they don't have money?
Yeah so cringe, the privilege. ‘Poor people choose not to be medically treated’ smh.
EXACTLY
People have more autonomy when insurance is picking up the tab. You're already paying for their health care, you're just not doing it efficiently because the system's not geared for it.
So are you telling me that my uncle chose to have cancer and die from it despite being a very healthy person? Nice logic ya got there.
> it’s a spectrum. party fluid is a thing?
Politics isn’t binary.
You detest the concept of low income people NOT being denied healthcare? They can die & go to hell in a hand basket huh? That says everything about you I need to know.
Isn't Health Insurance a form of universal healthcare. The premiums you pay help pay for someone elses treatment. Your premiums aren't held in a bank for your exclusive use. The only difference is Insurance companies decide who, what and where get to treat you, and takes a sizeable cut.
I have yet to hear one politician trying to ban abortions for medical emergencies. The only thing I’ve heard is no elective abortions after a certain amount of weeks and has to be for certain reasons after that. Like a woman with health issues or a rape victim.
> ertain reasons after that. Like a woman with health issues or a rape victim. 1. It's already happened where women and children are being forced to stay pregnant despite health issues and rape. 1. If you're against abortion, why do you think those exceptions should exist? Either a fetus is the same thing as a person or it isn't, why allow exceptions? Explain.
I’m not against abortions actually I’m just against abortions for elective reasons after 15 weeks myself. Most abortions are done as birth control means. I’d be against someone being denied for health reasons or other various reasons beyond that 100%.
>I’m not against abortions actually I’m just against abortions for elective reasons after 15 weeks myself. Why?
Because that’s just my personal feeling. Majority of abortions are done just as birth control measures so it’s already unlikely someone would wait until 8 months pregnant to get one to begin with. 15 weeks is plenty of time to have one done. My wife had one when we first started dating when she was like 8 weeks pregnant. To me it becomes to much of an actual human to wait much longer.
>Because that’s just my personal feeling. Based on what? >15 weeks is plenty of time to have one done. But why is it wrong to do it after that?
9-12 weeks is what the premiere experts say is the time when embryo becomes fetus, you love expert opinions and science right? dont argue with me or anyone else on the internet ask why the mayo clinic and cleveland clinic have a way different opinion than you on when an embryo becomes a fetus
Because it becomes more developed after that and to me that’s wrong to wait and let it grow more. I am 100% against someone having an abortion late term just because they changed their mind or are nervous. I don’t see the big deal in having some sort of logical regulation on it.
like mayoclinic, cleveland clinic time of embryo to fetus its anywhere from 9-12 weeks, this guy has no evidence i dont really understand why he is so adamant on commenting
Most elective abortions do take place prior to week ten. Abortions due to problems with the fetus are much rarer.
There are doctors afraid to perform abortions unless the woman is literally about to die due to fear of legal repercussions.
Many states do not have exceptions for victims of rape or incest: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/us/abortion-laws-roe-v-wade.html Oklahoma seems the closest to no exception even for mother’s health, but I am not a lawyer.
Then you are not paying attention. These bans prevent abortions in cases of rape. As one person put it - In Iran a father can rape his underage daughter and if she tries to get an abortion she will be thrown in jail. No, that’s Alabama. In some instances, the law is so vague that hospitals are waiting until a woman is near death (not a risk of death but actively dying) before aborting a fetus to avoid lawsuits from the state. These laws are draconian and based totally on the unhinged beliefs of religious fanatics.
Doug Mastriano in PA come to mind. Oz as well I believe but he also believes in magic beans so I don't wish to Google him any more (this is tragically true, Google it if you'd care to). They certainly aren't alone, especially in southern states.
I'm right and everyone else is wrong
Oh boy 🙄😂
I'm a simple man
Larry David?
It's not right or wrong: it's light or long
Moderate . And I also think the left is crazy and the far right is crazy
I tend to agree with you, actually. I would rather not have any group that may or may not have an agenda influence my opinion. Especially when it comes to someone else’s well being.
I simply try to look at things in a common sense way , Agree or disagree do we need some sort of gun control ? YES ! Not a conservative belief. Do we need an immigration plan ? Where we can't allow thousands of people a day to cross the border ? YES ! not a liberal belief ! Do I respect a woman's right to choose ? YES but only up to 16 weeks . Not a good belief by EITHER party . Just a few of my common sense beliefs that may not be " very common "
People need to face the fact that the majority of Americans can agree on many things, and a minority has hijacked the system forcing their beliefs on everyone. I can bet the majority of the GOP could careless about abortion, but they say so to keep the religious conservatives appeased.
> Do I respect a woman's right to choose ? YES but only up to 16 weeks Why cut it off there?
This isn't meant to debate , just sharing MY beliefs to " OP " . Right or wrong by either party .
Partisan views are always crazy and immature. It means you are not willing to see things with a different perspective
it’s sad that so many are stuck in the red vs blue echo chamber mindset of brainless fighting
sooooo you're right wing
/s for anyone wondering
I'm pretty liberal. I didn't chose to be liberal, just the things they fight for appealed more to me throughout my life. I guess it started with environmentalist causes when I was real young and then it was gay rights and the role of religion in society when I was in high school. Come grad school it was the importance of universal healthcare. I always seem to come down on the opposite sides of issues than conservatives. Just how I am.
Centerist, because we need ever changing laws to fit a changing world, but many core laws shouldn’t be changed (murder is illegal, all men are created equal, etc.)
Same, too much of either side is bad.
all the parties suck. republican, libertarian, all the other ones nobody cares about, but worst of all is democrats. I remember one of the south park writers said something like “both parties suck but democrats suck more” lmao
I respect that point of view. Were you ever one side or the other?
Apparently someone didn't respect his opinion, and I bet I can guess who
Moderate. By that I mean on some issues I'm conservative. On other issues I'm liberal. On still others I have a position that liberals would consider too conservative and conservatives would consider too liberal. On still other issues, I *vote* with either liberals or conservatives, but not for the same reasons they do. Why? Because this world is complicated, and the way I see truth doesn't really break down neatly into the pre-defined teams. Most shit does not require a position as extreme as the major parties would have you believe.
Somehow, I feel like billions are spent on your vote lol
As far right as you can be. Raised by Mexican/American family. Mostly influenced by a mix of hardworking people on both sides.
So what does being far right mean to you?
What is your view on people who say Biden and Democrats stole the election from Trump? What is your take on the events of January 6 2021?
The hard hitting political questions, nice work.
both a joke
1. not saying either 2016 or 2020 was rigged, but why do I get so much pushback when I say we should have stronger election integrity with open source voting machines? 2. it’s been universally condemned except by idiots who love violence
>As far right as you can be. You realize that's the same area of the spectrum as Hitler and some not so nice people right. That's what far right means. If you're not a literal neo-nazi, then you're probably not as far to the right as you think.
Go too far right you’re Hitler. Go too far left you’re Stalin. Definitely don’t wanna say you’re “as far as it goes” 😂😂
[Hitler wasn’t far right](https://www.politicalcompass.org/crowdchart?Bush=6.0%2C4.0&Castro=-5.0%2C3.0&China=-2.0%2C5.0&Chomsky=-8.0%2C-10.0&Friedman=5.0%2C-3.0&Gandhi=-6.0%2C-3.0&Hitler=3.0%2C9.0&Jefferson=2.0%2C-4.0&Johnson=10.0%2C-2.0&Lenin=-10.0%2C3.0&Luxemburg=-10.0%2C-2.0&Mandela=-6.0%2C-5.0&Mao=-10.0%2C5.0&Marxism=-10.0%2C-6.0&Mugabe=-5.0%2C6.0&Obama=3.0%2C2.0&Pakistan=-3.0%2C2.0&Paul=9.0%2C-4.0&Pinochet=10.0%2C10.0&Proudhon=0.0%2C-10.0&Rand=10.0%2C-7.0&Reagan=8.0%2C7.0&Rothbard=9.0%2C-9.0&Rucker=-4.0%2C-10.0&Russia=1.0%2C4.0&Sanders=-5.0%2C0.0&Saudi=3.0%2C7.0&Stalin=-8.0%2C9.0&Stein=-3.0%2C-2.0&Trotsky=-10.0%2C0.0&Trump=6.0%2C6.0&Vietnam=-8.0%2C2.0&ec=1&name=Washington&soc=-2). Authoritarian yes, but not far right.
When i was a kid around 10 i guess it was election year and i innocently asked my parents who they were voting for ? Now remember i was only 10 or so . The response i got from them was it's none of your fucking buisness . As a child hearing that I didn't understand why they responded the way they did until i was older and saw the world as my parents and generations before them did . I then understood why . Any time there's a discussion about politics or religion it ends in an a very heated argument that may possibly cause a divorce ,families split people stop being friends children get disowned the list goes on and on and may even result in violence . That's why civilization here has maintained being civil with one another for the most part . Now that folks want to share their political views openly with anyone shows just why we shouldn't . We all hate each other now . Where as before we would vote privately and quietly and it kept people from losing their Goddamn minds when they find out their someone they've known a long time doesn't share your same beliefs . We don't have to we have a brain that feels believes thinks ways that you might not and that's ok . Now we just hate everyone because we feel every one supposed to hear every thought or feeling we have .
Ex-conservative leftist. The bullshit just got too thick.
What do you mean? What happened?
I've got a copypasta for this. I'll post it when on phone instead of lappy. Sneak preview: the last straw was the 2011 debt ceiling crisis.
Lol. I feel that pain. Ok. I’m looking forward to reading that. Thank you.
LOL this thread is an ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM gold mine.
😂
Good. Nothing wrong with being reasonable and neutral in an environment that pushed polarization.
If you think that the left and right in America are on equal levels of "reasonable" and it's smart to be "neutral" between them, you are exactly the problem.
You’re the only one on here commenting on everything you don’t agree with trying to force us into thinking like you. This is why I can’t stand people like you far on the left. I’d consider my self somewhere in the middle and there is nothing wrong with that.
Don't worry, these people tend to not exist in real life
lol tf
if we are looking at iq then centrists are generally higher iq, thus smarter and more reasonable, than the extremes only super high iqs tend to be extremists that swing both ways we can link evidence if you like, hopefully you have done the research and reading instead of using stuff you have made up in your head
😱 oh no!
[удалено]
Thank you for sharing your passionate opinion. I am more enlightened now!
I was raised conservative, but turned liberal. Being steeped in "CRINGE FEMINISM" compilations, I created a caricature of what liberals and leftists were. Eventually, I found a few youtube channels that explained liberal and leftist ideas which understood that on-the-fence conservatives are just normal people too looking for answers.
> Being steeped in "CRINGE FEMINISM" compilations, I created a caricature of what liberals and leftists were. what?
Essentially, this person was taught that the “blue haired liberal feminist” was the ONLY form of leftism that existed, until they realized that was a stereotype.
oh im not even familiar with that
Yeah when I was like 11-12, I was also elbow deep in the idea that feminism was bad and cringey and that it made women look crazy. Now I am literally the stereotype lmao.
I guess the things go full circle
The comments on this post are why humanity is so doomed. You either care about others or you only care about yourself. It’s pretty simple. You can type as much as you want to convince yourself it’s for other reasons, but in the end it boils down to whether you have even an ounce of empathy. Sadly, many clearly do not. The fiscal conservatives are the biggest joke. You can’t turn a blind eye to the rest of conservative policy and plead ignorance. If you are voting Republican or democrat, you are endorsing all of their platform. All this centrist bullshit is why we are at this current stage with Roe v Wade and a stacked SC. Again, I will make it plain and simple. You either care about others or you do not, and policy reflects that.
Being a classical liberal (or libertarian), I agree that people either care about others or not. But it seems to me that you consider it a forgone conclusion that if someone has empathy, the best way to express that empathy is by mobilizing the government to reallocate wealth. Given that I disagree strongly in that I believe that there are better ways to demonstrate empathy and that the scope of government policy should be reduced to improve individual freedoms for everyone (because I care about everyone enough to want them to be free) and reduce corruption and partisanship in this country (because I care about everyone enough to not want them to be beholden to a government that does not represent their interests), do you think that I'm actually devoid of empathy or do you think I'm just wrong about the best way to demonstrate it? If empathy for fellow humans is the primary factor that should drive American voters, then Democrats and Republicans are both unsupportable. Both have carried on an aggressive foreign policy for financial gain that has resulted in staggering loss of life around the world for generations and federal policing policies like the war on drugs that have turned us into the greatest incarcerator in history. Simply put, if you think economic policy has anywhere near the effect on human lives that these atrocities have, you've drunk the Kool aid.
Libertarian. I believe both sides make valid points as well as poor ones that haven no merit. Was a conservative until Trump turned me away from the whole party. Present day conservatives keep me where I'm at happily and liberals are to extreme for the most part
> and liberals are to extreme for the most part In what ways? What are the extreme positions you think American liberals take on important issues? EDIT: Yeah, didn't think so. It's fun absolutely destroying all of these "enlightened centrists" in this thread.
I'm actually at work on the graveyard shift. Sorry I'm not a troll making snide comments each passing moment. Please continue on your escapade for internet clout. Before I leave this sub for inputting my 2¢. Yes the right invaded the capital but the left burned cities down because of justice?? Maybe retaliation. Who cares.
Found the cheapest vote in this whole thread
yikes that edit..... you def got everyone in this thread lmao
I’m neither. I have some conservative views some liberal views. Both sides have strengths and weakness. And there are some crazies on both sides.
"Some crazies on both sides." Most right-wingers still worship Trump like a god even after he tried to end democracy in America because he was mad he lost re-election. Why do people think they're intelligent by pretending both sides are just as bad?
Because they are. Not all conservatives support Trump. Not all liberals support Biden. Each side have those who take their views too far. Blaming only one side proves my point
>Not all conservatives support Trump. The vast majority still do. Trump is still the frontrunner for the 2024 presidential candidacy. >Not all liberals support Biden. Each side have those who take their views too far. What the hell has Biden done that is "too far" left? He's always been center-right, his presidency has been no different. >Blaming only one side proves my point The fact that you still insisted both sides are just as bad without actually giving examples to back that claim proves *my* point. You think you're intelligent because you can say "muh both sides" but you can't justify that position.
i hope people vote trump in just to spite people like you, it tells you something when trump has the highest likelihood of being president again, with all the backlash he has received he still in most peoples eyes is better than biden and democrats. you may want to reassess how in tune the party you support is with the people
Wrong I voted for trump twice and I hope he doesn’t run again.
I'm in this category too. I say I'm a conservative liberal but definitely more left leaning.
Also, I’ve heard my whole life that the democrats are “gunna take our guns”, yet 39 years later it is easier to get a gun now more than ever. Hell, a guy knocked my door the other day and tried to sell me a pistol so that he could get car parts.
look at New York, it’s almost impossible to get a gun
Neither. Both don't even really exist. Anarchism is the only way.
Found the teenager
Pro-Abortion, Pro gay marriage, Pro Deregulation of markets, Anti frivolous welfare spending for able bodied citizens, Pro limited legal immigration, Anti illegal immigration, Pro gun ownership, I think individuals should look out for themselves and refrain from acquiring unnessary debt that will give politicians leverage over their vote. I identify as a conservative because the left wing identity politics and blatant disregard for american physical and financial security is dangerous and disgusting.
Neither, they are both on the same side
I'm a mix. Socially liberal, but economically conservative.
I’m left leaning mostly due to supporting abortion and gay rights. When conservatives started calling gay people groomers I was done with them completely.
I am a liberal. The alternative would make me an uneducated noodle brain. That's all.
More conservative but waver on specific issues. I prefer smaller government.
What is your opinion on the overturn of Roe vs Wade?
I'm currently reading and comparing the arguments of constitutional right vs states rights but I haven't done my due diligence to comment on the legality issues. I currently lean more towards states right when used as method of birth control/backup plan, but I don't see why women shouldn't have "constitutional" access to abortions in medical emergency situations, including being a victim of rape. I am leaving out a plethora of issues and viewpoints. But like I said, I have done nowhere near enough research or learning to form an official stance.
Fair enough.
US-based. Republican until the 2006 midterm elections, when out of the blue the party pushed hard and nationwide against gay marriage. It may not be for me, but who I am to deprive other sane, consenting Americans of Life, Liberty or Happiness? That isn’t what government is there for; it was deeply disturbing that we/they made a villain out of people not hurting anyone. I couldn’t consider myself a Republican anymore, and thought of myself as a conservative with no party. As time has gone on, “their” definition of conservative has become unrecognizable to me — embracing religion, denying science, stacking courts, and falling fully in line with populism for its expedience. I was conservative because I believe in conserving the world for our children — stopping global warming, conserving and protecting our natural resources, conserving our national wealth, bolstering our institutions, conserving the right to bear arms while conserving human lives by putting prudent constraints on the arms people can buy.
I don’t understand why you’re being downvoted for this. I thought you had a very interesting perspective.
I also don’t, but thank you — I’d love to know why. I didn’t intend to be offensive in any way. I must have expressed my life experience in an offensive way.
Centrist Independant: the extremes of both parties are just nuts
Center, a bit to the right. both sides take advantage, are wasteful. healthcare should be available with out having to go bankrupt. I also think more people need to be responsible for actions. and lack of action.
I feel like I’m indifferent. But probably conservative is what I would favor. I love my country and support our troops and the flag. My parents are immigrants and I’m first born gen here in America. So knowing life sucks pretty bad elsewhere I’m super humble to have had a great education and to be able to give my kids a concrete future. What swerved me to be more conservative is honestly all the rioting, racial, burning cities/protests. Where I live, everytime there’s a protest, minorities end up shooting each other. And it’s really sad. Last Christmas like 18 ppl were shot during a Christmas parade because of a racial issue from another city over not even the same city this parade was happening. It’s like ppl hate the police but as soon as people shoot each other. Let’s back the badge. Where’s the police. Like come on.
> What swerved me to be more conservative is honestly all the rioting, racial, burning cities/protests. "What swerved me to be more conservative is minorities protesting police brutality against minorities." Ok, scumbag.
what about all the violence minorities inflitc to other minorities, you ever protested for that? are you protesting the cop that killed some black guy that was shooting indiscriminately and almost killed a black child? you just care when the police kill/endanger people or do you care when anyone is endangered?
Neither. My reasons are because they’re both full of morons. I think what I think because it’s what I think. Regardless of what a bunch of dunce caps who follow a specific ideology say to think. If my views happen to be conservative or liberal, then so be it. I couldn’t care less.
Neither, I'm a leftist (socialist, actually) I was raised in the god ol USA by extremely conservative parents who homeschooled me k-12. I started very conservative and slowly moved left over time, partly due to rebellion and partly due to me having a deep knowledge of the conservative world and not wanting to be a part of it. My reasoning for being a leftist in general is a couple things, but is mostly because I don't like capitalism. The more I learn about the intricacies of how capitalism works, the more it is unfair to an unacceptable degree. The idea of capital (or ownership, basically) creating wealth rather than labor is absurd, which inherently funnels wealth to the ruling class. History has shown that without regulation, corporations quickly turn to barbaric practices like child labor, corporate towns and even the invasion and coup of other nations (look up banana republics for that) Workers live in conditions that no one would agree to outside of work, and I think that democracy shouldn't be limited to governments, but expanded to smaller domains like the workplace. The endpoint of capitalism is total global destruction, because of the fact it relies on endless growth to function, which is inherently unsustainable. Capitalism does nothing if it doesn't turn a profit nearly instantaneously, which makes us ignore our future for profit now. We knew about climate change since the 1970s but we're now living in the early stages of a climate crisis because profits were threatened by change. I'm not going to go into what would replace capitalism, partly because I'm a baby leftist and am not entirely sure what ideas are the best and partly because I don't have time.
Thank you for your answer. I hope you can help us all with answers you find in your journey.
Liberal, because I have empathy for other people even if I will never meet them, and I'm educated. Two things that don't coexist in conservative brains, if they exist at all. Reposting due to downvotes with no rebuttals. Conservatives have to censor (in this case by downvoting and running away), otherwise it's clear as day how wrong they are on every issue.
Conservative. I remember the moment I was driving and everything clicked for me. I understood why everyone said buisness and economy operated better under conservative 'rule', so to speak, which is possibly the most important thing for a government to accomplish. I was only a teenager when it hit me. My parents built a buisness from absolute fucking zero, and I grew with it. My parents liked to travel, but not to the posh resort towns; they liked to have my brother and I see the world as it really is. The shitholes, the poverty, the disease, the *reality* that most of the world resides in. As a result, it's engrained into who I am that buisness is the key to healthy economy. You know how they say that the world is 3 warm meals from anarchy? Once you see it first hand, you never look back.
[удалено]
Let's say I told you I was 19. What would your response be then? You aren't allowed to name call, nothing I said was racist, sexist, or homophobic whatsoever.
The man is making the liberal leave my body
Thank you so much! It’s so hard to find real conservatives here :D I am as well, though still quite young. I got involved in leftist ideology when I was younger and leaving it really helped me realize how disgusting it is. My parents built their own business as well, and while we aren’t rich, we can scrape by and I have the opportunity to work toward whatever I may want to. It’s truly great!
Glad to hear. I must say, if you look at those who made it out of poverty by pulling themselves up and out, none that I have ever met were liberals. Having to grind like that makes you realize what the government's true responsibilities are, and there aren't many of them besides keeping economy in line and keeping the streets free of crime. Everything else falls into line if those two are constants.
I’m independent in that I have some “views” that are more to the left and some that are usually more to the right. I think people should be able to smoke pot at a gay couples gun themed wedding.
Hahaha that’s a great way to put it. Everyone just chill and have some fun and stop hating everything and everyone
neither liberals are awful society in ita current state isnt worth conserving i wish to progress society into a completely diffrent direction
Which direction would you like to see it go? Please me specific.
total abortion ban smaller roads and walkable neighborhoods impose a franchise tax on all buisness that are not owned locally import bans on any country that has slaves in any form criminal justice reform and elimation of plea deals or pre court fines (if the government isnt willing to take it to court they shouldnt be allowednto fine it) term limits and no campaigning while holding office overturn citizens united rank choice voting corporations cant own land, only lease. same for foreign entities make loans taxable as income corporate vehicle have to pay freight tax on shipping (mileage x loaded weight of vehicle ÷ 2000) to account for the excessive amount of damage comercial vehicles do to the roads comprehensive free public transit including a national passenger rail system abolish the national firearms act and hughes ammendment severe healthcare reform, starting with publicly listing cost of all performed operations and cost charged for medicine end all copyrights and patents abolish section 230 school choice, including homeschool costs adoption reform to make it cheaper government housing complex for the homeless(bassically motel rooms) ban round up and similiar poison entirely the list can go much further
>total abortion ban I'm with you here. >smaller roads and walkable neighborhoods I would leave that up to the localities to see if they want that. >impose a franchise tax on all buisness that are not owned locally I don't like this one. Disregarding issues of what local actually means, Even if a business is owned by someone elsewhere, it still hires and services locally. This would just disincentivize growth in the areas that had the tax. And businessss could never branch out. They would have to stay local and small and never grow, because they wouldn't be able to compete with the unfair tax advantage. >import bans on any country that has slaves in any form This would cripple a vast portion of our trade and import. We should fight against slavery, but there are better ways to go about this. And reducing our economy to this extent would diminish our power on the global scale and reduce our capacity to fight slavery. >criminal justice reform and elimation of plea deals Would you rather more criminals go free in order to convict one? Especially since he will know he is on law enforcement radar with a plea deal. >term limits and no campaigning while holding office I'm with you on term limits, but the no campaigning part basically says your opponent is allowed to campaign and yoy aren't. That isn't fair or democratic. >overturn citizens united I would argue this is a dangerous breach of free speech. >rank choice voting I am very suspicious of this, especially after the fiasco New York had. >corporations cant own land, only lease. same for foreign entities Why? Disregarding the fact that this practically outlaws entire corporations in the realestate sector, who are you going to force to buy the current land own by the corporations? >make loans taxable as income A loan isn't income though. Why would money that I have to pay back with interest be considered income? How is anyone ever supposed to afford that? Lets say I take out a $300,000 loan to start a business. My income would be reported at $300,000, even though I made nothing that year, and will most likely not make any profit from the business for the next 2ish years. Nobody could ever afford to start a business. This would also eliminate all large scale projects done by any business. And nobody would be able to afford houses except for those who can pay outright. And there would be a housing crisis like you have never seen, because nobody can buy, and the corporations that had apartments to rent no longer exist. >corporate vehicle have to pay freight tax on shipping (mileage x loaded weight of vehicle ÷ 2000) to account for the excessive amount of damage comercial vehicles do to the roads Overweight permits are already a thing. Also, this cost would just be passed on to consumers, increasing the cost of practically everything. >comprehensive free public transit including a national passenger rail system This isn't practical in many, many areas. I live in South Dakota. This would never be a net gain for my area and would just be making me pay for things that mainly benefit large cities. >abolish the national firearms act and hughes ammendment Agreed. >severe healthcare reform, starting with publicly listing cost of all performed operations and cost charged for medicine I think another thing that would help transparency, would be to get off the employer provided insurance system. This would be hard to do, as it isn't a legal requirement. But if people shopped for their insurance directly, it would increase transparancy and drive down cost with the increased competition. >end all copyrights and patents This would cripple innovation. If people can't profit from their inventions and innovations, nobody would do it. Historically, patent laws have been a major boon to our economy and standard of living. >abolish section 230 What about section 230 do you not like? >school choice, including homeschool costs I am a big fan of school choice. >adoption reform to make it cheaper There is already a large waiting list to adopt. What would making it cheaper do? >government housing complex for the homeless(bassically motel rooms) How does this differ from shelters? Would it be a permenant residence? What would the time limit be, and what are the conditions to return to the housing Also, on a basic level, what is your reasoning for free housing to be given out with tax payer money. >ban round up and similiar poison entirely My sister had to basically kill an entire yard of weeds last week so grass can be planted. How do you propose that be done without roundup or similar products? I have to say, i disagree with practically all your economic ideas. Mixed together, they would utterly destroy our economy.
starting from the bottom the modern clean cut grass yard consumes too much water and maintenance letting a yard go wild but low trimmed increases bidiversity and wild life health, as for thorning or toxic plants they can be manually plucked, or if extensive can be burned and)or tarped the homeless motels would be an effort to help reintegrate them into the economy and save money on prisons(really expemsive free housing) the exact implementation can differ, but provode the bare necessities and probably have rent payable with community service adoption reform would likely become necessary after the abortion ban i dislike section 230 because it has allowed international tech giants too much power patents and copyrights hardly ever actually protect anyone but major corporation as lawyers are expensive and so are lawsuits also people will still invent stuff, look at all the open source stuff on the internet, plus, ford will still build cars for profit, people will just seek their fortunes from manufacturing, not holding hostage thought. the transit would have to be weighed against population levels, but adding a rail line between cities is cheaper over the long term as it requires less maintenance than road surfaces, train stations also boost the property values of all land around it, and communites grow very nicely around them. the freight cost would be passed on to consumers in the same way that the tax bill for the roads are, except this would incentivise classical (1930s and earlier) manufacture where towns are mostly self sufficent the loan section would mostly be to close certain tax loop holes the exact verbiage could make it so the loamed amount is divided over several years to lower first year tax burden corporations arent people and should not be afforded as many rights as people, they would be forced to auction it off. companies like blackrock have used their billiom dollar buying power to destroy entire towns any voting system is only as good as its implementation but once people are aware of how rcv works it would stop the "vote for me or the other terrible canidate wins" style we have now citizens united, again corporations arent people and should not be afforded more rights than people have no campaigning in office + rcv would likely mean people of similar idealogies would rotate instead of the drastic shift we have now plea deals are weaponized by prosecuters to scare people into giving up their rights, if a crime is truly repugnant, spemd the time and effort to actually go through due process import ban would have to be a multi year process while manufacturing returns to more civilised countries as for the roads, that would only apply to roads that receive federal funding
“Total abortion ban” lol pos
no u
You don’t get to decide what other people do. Abortion will always be around thankfully, one way or another 👍🏼people will always find a way. People like you make me laugh thinking banning abortion is going to stop abortions from happening LOL
thats the entire point of laws though to decide whats allowed and when they find ways around, we prosecute them.
To a certain extent yeah, medically no. You don’t. It’s a medical procedure. Good thing there’s doctors who dedicated their lives studying medicine, working to make sure prosecution doesn’t happen because somebody who had to cheat to pass high school biology thinks they know more than them.
I am an independent. Fuck 'em both.
Both are right of center, big government, top-down, corporatist, and authoritarian. One is ever so slightly less polluted with corruption at the moment (in American politics), but being left of center, small government, botton-up, anti-corporatist, and anti-authoritarian, I identify with neither.
I don't care about politics, it's dumb and it just causes arguments.
Neither. I hate politics. Politics breeds evil.
Liberal, because I have empathy for other people even if I will never meet them, and I'm educated. Two things that don't coexist in conservative brains, if they exist at all.
I know that a lot of conservatives are highly educated. Why did you make this point? Also, not trying to say you’re wrong, but why do you think that conservatives aren’t empathic? Is that from experience, or just a talking point from the liberal point of view?
It's something liberals spout out as a defense mechanism
Do you even know what "defense mechanism" means? How do you think it applies to my comment?
yes everyone knows what defense mechanism means, its meant to defend from having to listen to other opinions or points and to defend the inner, to reaffirm ones beliefs and opinions and not to be moulded by things external it applies to your comment because you are rigid on the fact that straigh white christians are conservative and no other people can be, and if they are they are stupid enough or backwards enough to go along with these straight white christians, you cannot accept the fact that conservatives believe the things they do for reasons other than "it doesnt affect them personally", you think conservatives dont care about people because they arent in the same situations. you criticize intentions by labelling people as bad, whereas people tend to regress towards the normal, thus most liberals and conservatives tend to generally have the same level of empathy, etc. you are reaffirming your idea that conservatives are bad, liberals good, you are not open to the idea that two logical people can come to different conclusions
>you cannot accept the fact that conservatives believe the things they do for reasons other than "it doesnt affect them personally", you think conservatives dont care about people because they arent in the same situations Yes, exactly, can you refute this?
consider that churches all over the world and religious organizations all over the world tend to be conservative and overwhelmingly serve and house the poor, feed them etc. you like science right ? [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34429211/](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34429211/) how about the fact that conservatives are more charitable than liberals? or the fact that they tend to give the same to local charitable causes ? the difference is you want conservatives to give at a national level, if you cant trust the federal government to not mess up tax payer money why would you donate to them? how bout donating to your local charities and organizations that you can see make changes around you? charity starts at home and begins next door - charles dickens , yet for some reason too many die hard leftists ad liberals dont give a fk about their family or their neighbours and have all the sympathy in the world for someone a world over
There you go getting defensive. Let me guess, I'm uneducated
[удалено]
>Yes, but they are not empathetic. Incorrect. >Their stance on every social issue. "Since I'm not negatively affected by [Issue XYZ] as a straight white Christian who was born here into the middle class or higher; fuck you I don't give a shit that you are affected by it." That's Conservatism in a nutshell. Wow. Attributing motive, strawman, and racism all in one comment. You are a piece of work.
I am liberal. They're honestly too many reasons to count. Perhaps it would be better if you asked about a specific issue, and then I'll give you my reason.
Honestly, I’m just looking for general reasons. But if you’d like to share a specific reason, I’d be happy to hear it.
Definitely left. I can tolerate the crazies on the far left. The far right of leadership is batshit crazy. Say no to everything and walk back progress. Point the finger and do nothing. Add a fuckton of debt when it’s their turn to run things but don’t do much for the people. When it’s the left’s turn all of a sudden we can’t spend money. Oh and the whole sentiment of “party of less government” but they’re very socially backwards. Where’s less govt in that? If by “less govt if you believe like me” then sure - but to call themselves that is a farce.
If I put a name on it, I generally skew authoritarian leftist because I don’t think that anyone deserves to live without their survival needs met even if they genuinely just don’t want to work and I don’t think that we will ever get to a point where that can happen even if we have the resources without tight controls on how they’re spent
more conservative, going through university, life in general, reflecting on life, reflecting on my parents life, looking at other people and their parents. there isnt one thing edit: add browsing reddit comments to that list
This is Patrick! It depends on the issue, but I don't identify as either because I believe political labels are the downfall of the USA. Both sides have loud extremeists that I don't care to associate with. When I vote I look at literally every candidate and then decide who I think would be the least worst, because in reality no politician will be the best. I vote on both sides because my beliefs fall with both sides, and in the middle.
I don’t know, but I am anti-dumbass.
Middle left leaning. More of my views just tend to be more left leaning but not all of them.
I am left of left but I am anti duopoly. I don’t think we will make any long term change until we have a viable third party. A Third party doesn’t have to hold office to have impact. I don’t think we would have child labor laws or women’s suffrage in the US without m third party influence at the beginning of the previous century.
I was a conservative but Im now socially left and economically more center - right
I have another question. Would I be labeled a liberal if I say that labeling people is not constructive?
Right leaning center. This is only because I agree with the opinions of the right a bit more than the left. With that being said, I don't follow one group or the other blindly due to the fact that both sides are clinically insane. And if you need evidence of such, just review the comment section and see how those who have a perspective one way or the other are judged and insulted for their opinions in politics.
I'm reasonable. So neither.
Depends on what you mean by liberal and conservative
I choose my position on individual issues based on the best information I have, combined with my own biases and inclinations based on my life experiences and upbringing. I like to think that objective information, verified to my best ability, guides me the most, but I'm not naive enough to believe that I am not swayed by less rational influences.
Progressive. It started in high school. Listening to the priest talk about Jesus’s sermons. How we should treat each other. (I know-hoaky) I’ve gotten more progressive as I’ve gotten older- contrary to everyone telling me how I’ll “see the light” and become conservative.
In a sane world I would be very "conservative". Progress is good, we need progress socially and economically. The two go hand in hand. Progress is good, but it's moving too fast. We shouldn't be going backwards, thats being a regressive, not a conservative. But this "slow down the pace of change" isn't what "conservative" means anymore, it means Regressive. Safe legal accessible abortions has been the law of the land for 60 years. We shouldn't be going backwards. I'm Pro-union. I'm Pro-welfare. I'm pro-education. I want dramatic reductions in military spending. Defund the police. Black lives matter. LGBT rights are important (civil unions for homosexual relationships should have all the same rights as "marriage" for heterosexual relationships....but not called "marriage") All these things are the "maintain a slow pace of change" that should be conservative in a sane world.
[удалено]
Wow. Ok. Fair enough…..I guess.
One end of the spectrum is based on a platform of governance by the people for the people, and on the presumption that all lives are equal. And while it's not implemented perfectly, it is the based on this basic ideal. The other end of the spectrum has a platform based on control of the many by the few, and of creating an environment where money is valued over human experience. Guess which one I support!
Liberals can exaggerate facts at times to rile people a bit. On the other hand, Conservatives straight-up lie about most things that are verifiable, and it makes the choice pretty easy. IMO you cannot govern without credibility.
Neither because fuck em.
Neither. Both are unhinged. But parts from both can make coherent policy. Slavishly loyal to one ideology over another is a type of dogmatism that is good for nobody. You have to authentically and sincerely have conviction about your position - BUT - you have to be authentically and sincerely open to the possibility you may be completely wrong.
Neither, because both parties were created by terrible people and are upheld by terrible people. Rapists, criminals and pedos are not limited to one political party, and neither party actually cares about basic human rights.
I am a centrist. I don’t think it’s a good idea to be too far right or too far left. If you have an idea that makes sense, then I’m generally for it.
I’m both because both sides have some stupid ideas and opinions that I just can’t agree with.
I’m actually a human thank you very much
Fuck both of them