Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wow, I see GOBS of conservatives out helping and giving ($$$ included) to communities/people in need. I'm not sure why that has to be tied to some type of belief on the liberal/conservative spectrum.
Admittedly none of them is Dwight Eisenhower. But we have to work with the candidates who are willing to put themselves through the torture of the primary season and the general election campaign, which means they have to be a little weird to begin with.
Yes but I was talking about the Congress & the Senate and local and state elections.
Presidential politics to me is just a game or sport - I pick a few favorites and like to engage in spirited discussions, but other than being concerned about possible Supreme Court Justice vacancies, I really don't care who wins the election.
If that is a saying it makes no sense. While I do find a young person in college spouting conservative ideas disturbing, i don't know why one should turn conservative as one get older. conservative values only get more meaningless as you age and get some wisdom.
Here we go with the smart/wisdom = liberal again......so fun. I am feeling less smart all of the time.
My other favorite is I am liberal because I have compassion for my fellow human beings....implying....
Here we go with the smart/wisdom = liberal again......so fun. I am feeling less smart all of the time.
My other favorite is I am liberal because I have compassion for my fellow human beings....implying....
Most of us are so polarized that once we decide on one party (face it, even if we claim not be affiliated there are only 2 and one is on the right and one on the left) we can no longer accept the other as even being a reasonable choice. The odd thing is that while we are starting out with some major extremes (like Huckaby at one end and Sanders at the other) if we end up with something like Clinton versus Kasich (unlikely) or Rubio (not all that unlikely), they really won't be all that far apart.
If you have proof that the ACA has caused a reduced mortality rate, or bankruptcy rate, I'd love to see it. The fact that we all pay MUCH more since the passage of the ACA is beyond debate.
It's a little early, since the ACA has only been implemented for a short time and several states have refused to expand their medicaid program for low income people, but it looks like it has done a lot to halt the deterioration of US medical care.
Most of us are so polarized that once we decide on one party (face it, even if we claim not be affiliated there are only 2 and one is on the right and one on the left) we can no longer accept the other as even being a reasonable choice. The odd thing is that while we are starting out with some major extremes (like Huckaby at one end and Sanders at the other) if we end up with something like Clinton versus Kasich (unlikely) or Rubio (not all that unlikely), they really won't be all that far apart.
That is refreshing to hear. While I would love to have a female Democrat as President, I'm a little concerned that Clinton has a problem with male voters. After reading that Rubio was winning the debates (but I suppose that is a matter of opinion), I actually looked up Rubio's positions yesterday. But it is difficult to judge him based on a one page writeup.
Most of us are so polarized that once we decide on one party (face it, even if we claim not be affiliated there are only 2 and one is on the right and one on the left) we can no longer accept the other as even being a reasonable choice. The odd thing is that while we are starting out with some major extremes (like Huckaby at one end and Sanders at the other) if we end up with something like Clinton versus Kasich (unlikely) or Rubio (not all that unlikely), they really won't be all that far apart.
That is refreshing to hear. While I would love to have a female Democrat as President, I'm a little concerned that Clinton has a problem with male voters. After reading that Rubio was winning the debates (but I suppose that is a matter of opinion), I actually looked up Rubio's positions yesterday. But it is difficult to judge him based on a one page writeup.
The question is, do you vote for a woman to be President because it would be cool to have a woman president or do you do it because she is the best person for the job?
I bring that up because a lot of people are not even looking at Hillary for what she believes in. They just want a woman in the white house. I don't have a problem with a woman in the White House. I have a problem with Hillary in the White House. Way too many issues and concerns for her to be in office.
I've always viewed the parties, at the national level, as 2 sides of the same dirty coin.
What one party starts the other party finishes or continues.
Bush made a great governor but a horrible President.
State politics is not the same as national politics.
So I just vote third party for President in hopes that one day they'll get their 5% and get a foothold into breaking up the 2 dominate parties we have now.
At state level I look at the person and their platform and then vote.
The question is, do you vote for a woman to be President because it would be cool to have a woman president or do you do it because she is the best person for the job?
I bring that up because a lot of people are not even looking at Hillary for what she believes in. They just want a woman in the white house. I don't have a problem with a woman in the White House. I have a problem with Hillary in the White House. Way too many issues and concerns for her to be in office.
My biggest concern with her is I don't trust her. I am left leaning and would probably end up voting for her because I think what she will probably push for is more in line with my thinking than the GOP candidate, even if it is one of the closer to center candidates. For example, her resistance to reinstating Glass-Steagall bothers me. "I would do something more comprehensive" sounds like she is ready to compromise with the banks which maybe means really doing nothing. But the the GOP position is definitely to do nothing. See the problem? I have to vote for maybe getting what I think is the right course instead of definitely not getting it.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
