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.
I am looking for common-sense conservative economics in a presidential candidate because the country is on the wrong track with the wasteful, misguided, redistributionist policies of the Obama administration in my opinion.
BUT so many of the announced Republican candidates combine a laissez-faire economic attitude with a dramatically interventionist approach on social issues. I'm straight (married a million years to the same fine lady) but I would like to see committed gays pay the marriage penalty just like heterosexuals do. I don't do drugs, but hate the counter-productive war on drugs (other than alcohol) that we cannot afford anyway. I'm about as conservative as they come when it comes to free markets and private enterprise, but in full agreement with the Founders' views on the evils of government-supported religion. I hate the idea of abortion, but doubt the wisdom of attempting to ban something that millions of people use.
It seems like the Tea Party was just about economics and it kept to that subject with great discipline for about 15 minutes. Then all this other stuff got drug into it. I don't have any interest in denying normal civil rights to gays, or posting the Ten Commandments in the schools or Courthouse, or denigrating people who believe in unpopular religions.
Where's my candidate? I don't need one who agrees 100% with me, but I can't vote for one whose laissez faire approach goes out the window on every social issue.
Location: Currently I physically reside on the 3rd planet from the sun
2,220 posts, read 1,877,427 times
Reputation: 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcopolo
I am looking for common-sense conservative economics in a presidential candidate because the country is on the wrong track with the wasteful, misguided, redistributionist policies of the Obama administration in my opinion.
BUT so many of the announced Republican candidates combine a laissez-faire economic attitude with a dramatically interventionist approach on social issues. I'm straight (married a million years to the same fine lady) but I would like to see committed gays pay the marriage penalty just like heterosexuals do. I don't do drugs, but hate the counter-productive war on drugs (other than alcohol) that we cannot afford anyway. I'm about as conservative as they come when it comes to free markets and private enterprise, but in full agreement with the Founders' views on the evils of government-supported religion. I hate the idea of abortion, but doubt the wisdom of attempting to ban something that millions of people use.
It seems like the Tea Party was just about economics and it kept to that subject with great discipline for about 15 minutes. Then all this other stuff got drug into it. I don't have any interest in denying normal civil rights to gays, or posting the Ten Commandments in the schools or Courthouse, or denigrating people who believe in unpopular religions.
Where's my candidate? I don't need one who agrees 100% with me, but I can't vote for one whose laissez faire approach goes out the window on every social issue.
Sounds like you are a RINO and looking for same. Good luck.
Seriously, I would welcome some sensible republicans. This debt ceiling debacle is really causing me to HATE the republican leadership. McConnell especially. What a complete creep. He is so obsessed with trashing Obama, and scorched earth politics, he cannot govern. And it is almost like the rightwing crazies want so badly to trash the government, and grab power, that if they govern ineptly enough they can prove their point that government is evil. The problem is, most of the country will be burned by their political napalm.
Sounds like you are a RINO and looking for same. Good luck.
Seriously, I would welcome some sensible republicans. This debt ceiling debacle is really causing me to HATE the republican leadership. McConnell especially. What a complete creep. He is so obsessed with trashing Obama, and scorched earth politics, he cannot govern. And it is almost like the rightwing crazies want so badly to trash the government, and grab power, that if they govern ineptly enough they can prove their point that government is evil. The problem is, most of the country will be burned by their political napalm.
What about decent citizens running for office?
Fiddlehead, I hope your characterization of me as a RINO is wrong. Barry Goldwater, although he was immolated in the 1964 presidential election, helped make later Republican successes possible. And he had a libertarian streak a mile wide. William F. Buckley promoted legalizing marijuana decades ago. This is the historical strand of the party that I hope has not dried up completely.
I just cannot get over the philosophical inconsistency between the economics and social issues stances of some of these candidates. If we understand free people operating in free markets, making their own decisions, why can't we translate that into freedom to choose drugs other than alcohol, or people thriving and participating fully in society with same-sex orientation?
Thank you for what I perceive to be kind words, even though I am certain we are 180 degrees apart on many issues.
Ron Paul has stated he is personally socially conservative but wouldn't press his social views on others and prefers states legislate on social issues and drug policy, not the Feds
Fiddlehead, I hope your characterization of me as a RINO is wrong. Barry Goldwater, although he was immolated in the 1964 presidential election, helped make later Republican successes possible. And he had a libertarian streak a mile wide. William F. Buckley promoted legalizing marijuana decades ago. This is the historical strand of the party that I hope has not dried up completely.
I just cannot get over the philosophical inconsistency between the economics and social issues stances of some of these candidates. If we understand free people operating in free markets, making their own decisions, why can't we translate that into freedom to choose drugs other than alcohol, or people thriving and participating fully in society with same-sex orientation?
Thank you for what I perceive to be kind words, even though I am certain we are 180 degrees apart on many issues.
You're welcome. No, I don't think you are a RINO, but my opinion does not count for much with righties. How about Michael Bloomberg? Elizabeth Dole? Olympia Snow?
I actually think a socially moderate, fiscally conservative woman would have the best chance at the presidency. Unfortunately, neither Bachmann nor Palin come close to qualifying, and the party bosses have essentially snuffed out independent thinkers in recent years.
At first I thought the TP types would emerge as somewhat moderate, but they have clearly crystallized as the next manifestation of the belligerant Southern Christian Social Conservative block we have seen since Reagan. As a moderate democrat, I will never vote of a candidate put forward by those people, but I would consider a moderate Republican who really exuded fiscal mastery, say Bloomberg. People love to trash Obama, but he seems much more intellectually capable of grasping the current complexity than the slash and burn team he is facing now.
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.
