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 18 and I have become interested in politics and current affairs even more so over the summer break. I have never identified as one ideology but would be interested to know, in simple terms, what I would be considered? So I have included some key views on various policy issues.
Well lets do a quick count:
Quote:
1. I think defense spending should be increased. Especially with the new threats in the Middle East. I would support boots on the ground in Syria, etc. to stop those cowards in robes.
Republican 1, Democrat 0, Libertarian -1.
Quote:
2. I am against the legalization of marijuana. I believe the effects are not fully known and we should keep it illegal to prevent even more people using it than at current. HOWEVER, I support medicinal marijuana.
Republican 2, Democrat 0, Libertarian -2
Quote:
3. I support Israel NOT Palestine. I see it as self-defense, and how anyone can support Palestine, many Palestinians being pro-Hamas (Hamas having links to ISIS) is beyond me.
Republican 3, Democrat 0, Libertarian -2
Quote:
4. I support gay marriage however think churches should be able to refuse holding them.
Republican 3, Democrat 1, Libertarian -2
Quote:
5. I believe abortion should be legal. Although I see it morally wrong I think it's even worse for a child to be born into a family who are unprepared or to a mother who was raped and impregnated.
Republican 3, Democrat 2, Libertarian -2
Quote:
6. I am not particularly economically aware but believe in free market economics and laissez faire policies.
Republican 4, Democrat 2, Libertarian -1
Quote:
7. Those on welfare who can work and refuse to should have no benefits AT ALL.
Republican 5, Democrat 2, Libertarian -1
Quote:
8. I support the police in the Ferguson case. If the protesters hadn't rioted so much I would still be impartial,however, the tragic event seems to be the result of a robbery and i believe the officer acted rightfully.
Republican 6, Democrat 2, Libertarian -1
Quote:
I am unsure what I would be considered? I guess a moderate but would like your input.
FINAL SCORE:
Republican 6, Democrat 2, Libertarian -1.
Congratulations. You are a moderate Republican. While you do have views that agree with the Left, most of your views are lock step with the Right. And your first two points are the very antithesis of a Libertarian, so you're definitely not one of those.
I prefer not to categorize people. I think the best response I've seen so far was "voter." But you did ask.
I am 18 and I have become interested in politics and current affairs even more so over the summer break. I have never identified as one ideology but would be interested to know, in simple terms, what I would be considered? So I have included some key views on various policy issues
1. I think defence spending should be increased. Especially with the new threats in the Middle East. I would support boots on the ground in Syria, etc. to stop those cowards in robes.
2. I am against the legalization of marijuana. I believe the effects are not fully known and we should keep it illegal to prevent even more people using it than at current. HOWEVER, I support medicinal marijuana.
3. I support Israel NOT Palestine. I see it as self-defence, and how anyone can support Palestine, many Palestinians being pro-Hamas (Hamas having links to ISIS) is beyond me.
4. I support gay marriage however think churches should be able to refuse holding them.
5. I believe abortion should be legal. Although I see it morally wrong I think it's even worse for a child to be born into a family who are unprepared or to a mother who was raped and impregnated.
6. I am not particularly economically aware but believe in free market economics and laissez faire policies.
7. Those on welfare who can work and refuse to should have no benefits AT ALL.
8. I support the police in the Ferguson case. If the protestors hadn't rioted so much I would still be impartial,however, the tragic event seems to be the result of a robbery and i believe the officer acted rightfully.
I am unsure what I would be considered? I guess a moderate but would like your input.
Nice that you're thinking about things. Unfortunately, a lot of what you're writing is really emotionally based. That's really unfortunate as you should keep such things for your interpersonal relationships. You also have opinions on things which you don't know about.
1. Defense, not defence and unless you're going to pay for the new spending then maybe you should think twice about your thoughts. Boots in the ground solves the immediate problem which is only followed by a repeat of the situation. The country is war weary and it's rather unlikely to happen.
2. Wait, the effects aren't known, but it's ok to use as medicine? You just contradicted yourself.
6. You don't know about this so why do you have opinions about it?
7. Have you looked at what happens in countries with no social cushion? What are the criteria for being on welfare. Are there actual jobs there that those people can realistically do. If they can't work, what do they do? What is the cost of the alternative?
8. The rioting has nothing to do with the case. Your emotions are telling you that rioting bad so I must side with police. That's emotional and unintelligent.
Bravo. You may be a hybrid. That shows you are a thinker. Keep doing research to find the truth of policies/ideologies, which is surprisingly hard to find, to determine what is right for you.
Based on what I'm seeing, your a moderate conservative-authoritarian type. Conservative for your stance on the social issues, authoritarian for your support of expansion of military and police forces. The moderate comes from your not-so strict stance on the social issues, as in you think abortion should be legal but still consider it morally reprehensible.
Bottom line, you don't need to 'be' something to have a relevant opinion. Keep in mind, despite how it seems, the world isn't actually easily described as just 'left and right.' The political spectrum isn't a linear 'left-right' scale. For that to work, we'd put Gandhi and Stalin on the same side of the scale and I think most people would agree that the comparison doesn't really work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MScott123
2. I am against the legalization of marijuana. I believe the effects are not fully known and we should keep it illegal to prevent even more people using it than at current. HOWEVER, I support medicinal marijuana.
While I recognize the point of this post is not to discuss your view, I feel compelled to ask what your line of thinking was supposed to be here. You are against deregulation and recreational use for reasons of safety yet support it's use as a medicine?
Quote:
8. I support the police in the Ferguson case. If the protestors hadn't rioted so much I would still be impartial,however, the tragic event seems to be the result of a robbery and i believe the officer acted rightfully.
The police should not be given military grade anything. If we've looked back at history, we know that a police force is more than capable of violently apprehending protesters with just handguns and tasers. The need for grenade launcher or mine resistance vehicles seems completely non-existent.
I am 18 and I have become interested in politics and current affairs even more so over the summer break. I have never identified as one ideology but would be interested to know, in simple terms, what I would be considered? So I have included some key views on various policy issues
1. I think defence spending should be increased. Especially with the new threats in the Middle East. I would support boots on the ground in Syria, etc. to stop those cowards in robes.
2. I am against the legalization of marijuana. I believe the effects are not fully known and we should keep it illegal to prevent even more people using it than at current. HOWEVER, I support medicinal marijuana.
3. I support Israel NOT Palestine. I see it as self-defence, and how anyone can support Palestine, many Palestinians being pro-Hamas (Hamas having links to ISIS) is beyond me.
4. I support gay marriage however think churches should be able to refuse holding them.
5. I believe abortion should be legal. Although I see it morally wrong I think it's even worse for a child to be born into a family who are unprepared or to a mother who was raped and impregnated.
6. I am not particularly economically aware but believe in free market economics and laissez faire policies.
7. Those on welfare who can work and refuse to should have no benefits AT ALL.
8. I support the police in the Ferguson case. If the protestors hadn't rioted so much I would still be impartial,however, the tragic event seems to be the result of a robbery and i believe the officer acted rightfully.
I am unsure what I would be considered? I guess a moderate but would like your input.
So abortion is OK?
Well, that makes it easy.
You're a statist.
You think government should have the power to decide who is or is not a person.
This one power has the potential to render the entire Bill of Rights null and void.
Nice that you're thinking about things. Unfortunately, a lot of what you're writing is really emotionally based. That's really unfortunate as you should keep such things for your interpersonal relationships. You also have opinions on things which you don't know about.
1. Defense, not defence and unless you're going to pay for the new spending then maybe you should think twice about your thoughts. Boots in the ground solves the immediate problem which is only followed by a repeat of the situation. The country is war weary and it's rather unlikely to happen.
If he wasn't willing to pay for the new spending then he wouldn't have said he supported more spending. When you aren't willing to pay for something, you don't advocate buying it.
Quote:
2. Wait, the effects aren't known, but it's ok to use as medicine? You just contradicted yourself.
No, he made perfect sense. Just because the full effects aren't known for the general population, doesn't mean it hasn't been shown to help with certain medical conditions.
Quote:
6. You don't know about this so why do you have opinions about it?
Sorry, but "not agreeing with remoddahouse" and "not knowing about this" aren't synonyms.
Quote:
7. Have you looked at what happens in countries with no social cushion? What are the criteria for being on welfare. Are there actual jobs there that those people can realistically do. If they can't work, what do they do? What is the cost of the alternative?
Yes, there are jobs out there. When welfare reform was enacted in the 90s, the number of people on welfare went down while neither the poverty rate nor unemployment went up. Thus, people previously on welfare went out and got jobs once the state was no longer willing to send them a check every month.
Quote:
8. The rioting has nothing to do with the case. Your emotions are telling you that rioting bad so I must side with police. That's emotional and unintelligent.
He said he believed that the police acted correctly since the man shot had just committed robbery. Learn to comprehend what you read before you call someone else unintelligent.
Nice that you're thinking about things. Unfortunately, a lot of what you're writing is really emotionally based. That's really unfortunate as you should keep such things for your interpersonal relationships. You also have opinions on things which you don't know about.
1. Defense, not defence and unless you're going to pay for the new spending then maybe you should think twice about your thoughts. Boots in the ground solves the immediate problem which is only followed by a repeat of the situation. The country is war weary and it's rather unlikely to happen.
firstly, despite being a USC I was educated in the UK so defence is correct in UK English. I return to USA for college
I would be willing to pay more taxes to fund it. I feel it's imperative that in this current situation we increase spending
2. Wait, the effects aren't known, but it's ok to use as medicine? You just contradicted yourself.
We know it's medically beneficial, however, the effects for the general populace are questionable.
6. You don't know about this so why do you have opinions about it?
I don't know MUCH about it but from the little I do know the free market is the way forward.
7. Have you looked at what happens in countries with no social cushion? What are the criteria for being on welfare. Are there actual jobs there that those people can realistically do. If they can't work, what do they do? What is the cost of the alternative?
Criteria for receiving welfare: Seriously or mentally ill and physically incapable to work. Those who have the opportunities to apply for jobs and are just either lazy, unqualified, etc, should not receive welfare and should focus on either getting qualified or using their incentive.
8. The rioting has nothing to do with the case. Your emotions are telling you that rioting bad so I must side with police. That's emotional and unintelligent
No. The police officer stopped a criminal. I'm sure there could have been a non-lethal way, however, the officer alleges Brown reached for his gun so his actions are lawful..
Based on what I'm seeing, your a moderate conservative-authoritarian type. Conservative for your stance on the social issues, authoritarian for your support of expansion of military and police forces. The moderate comes from your not-so strict stance on the social issues, as in you think abortion should be legal but still consider it morally reprehensible.
Bottom line, you don't need to 'be' something to have a relevant opinion. Keep in mind, despite how it seems, the world isn't actually easily described as just 'left and right.' The political spectrum isn't a linear 'left-right' scale. For that to work, we'd put Gandhi and Stalin on the same side of the scale and I think most people would agree that the comparison doesn't really work.
While I recognize the point of this post is not to discuss your view, I feel compelled to ask what your line of thinking was supposed to be here. You are against deregulation and recreational use for reasons of safety yet support it's use as a medicine?
Medical benefits are proven. General population has no need for another drug on the market.
The police should not be given military grade anything. If we've looked back at history, we know that a police force is more than capable of violently apprehending protesters with just handguns and tasers. The need for grenade launcher or mine resistance vehicles seems completely non-existent
despite the widespread looting of small businesses and the abuse of police? The media stirring things to to sale papers?.
....
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.
