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'd vote Libertarian if they would moderate and they were big enough that I wouldn't be simply throwing away my vote.
I think this is exactly what makes people shy away from the Libertarian's, fear of throwing away their vote.
I knew lots of conservatives during the election who didn't particularly care for McCain or Palin and maybe did like what some of the other candidates had to say but still gave McCain the vote because they didn't want to throw it away and sway things to much in Obama's direction.
From what i'm observing on this forum, it's the homosexuals that have a problem with the "family values" thing.
With the number of anti-gay statements you've made, I've not surprised to hear you say that.
I don't see the complaints about "family values" as coming mostly from homosexuals at all. Besides, how do you know about every poster's sexual orientation? I see a lot of complaints coming from posters who haven't said a word about their own orientation, so I would assume that most of them are heterosexual.
1. America's fear of freedom. I think most Americans actually like to be controlled by a higher authority.
2. The Libertarian Party's purity. If they could be a little more realistic and practical and allow a few compromises, they could probably gain some support.
So you don't think some government regulation and oversight is at least somewhat necessary?
To your second point, it seems that the LP's purity is exactly what would make them attractive, since the Dems and Repubs are both so baseless and ridden with competing investments and interests.
I agree but the point is the same. The thread suggests that republicans stop pushing moral issues when some republicans obviously have a hard time following them themselves. Or, being hypocritical in other words.
With the number of anti-gay statements you've made, I've not surprised to hear you say that.
I don't see the complaints about "family values" as coming mostly from homosexuals at all. Besides, how do you know about every poster's sexual orientation? I see a lot of complaints coming from posters who haven't said a word about their own orientation, so I would assume that most of them are heterosexual.
Ok, would it make you feel better if I said the "known" homosexuals on the forum? Those that are known to be openly gay are speaking very loudly about the "GOP family values hypocrisy." All you have to do is go back to the Sanford thread and see that.
Which social issues? Are we talking along the lines of gay marriage or abortion, or more along the lines of welfare, healthcare, or war? Personally, I do not believe a party could survive for long on just a fiscal or economic platform. You need a well rounded base, and in order to gain one you need diverse goals and platforms in order to attract supporters.
Lets look at the current GOP - They have a focus more or less on social issues, while more practical issues take a backseat. The primaries and general election showed us that Republican support does not come from a religious base, and those votes still require pandering in order to sway their votes to the Republican side. Case in point - McCain's landslides over Huckabee and Romney, and of course Palin as the VP choice.
Social issues should still remain on the platform, however, they should not be allowed to steal the spotlight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by godsavethequeens
What's stopping the Libertarian Party from being the other major party?
So you don't think some government regulation and oversight is at least somewhat necessary?
I'm very libertarian on social issues but the "honor system" doesn't work in business. There is no honor in business. You lie, you cheat, you steal and you hope like hell you don't get caught. What people don't know can't hurt them.
Personally, I think that people are so accustomed to lying politicians, not to mention most people know an adulterer, that its became so watered down that it has little overall affect on political views. From what i'm observing on this forum, it's the homosexuals that have a problem with the "family values" thing. I think most American's think cheating is disgusting but are highly unlikely to carry that disgust to the ballot box. Especially if the election is several years away. That's the nature of politics in America.
"Family Values" is codespeak for exclusivity and discrimination. So, yes, I do have a problem with it.
So you don't think some government regulation and oversight is at least somewhat necessary?
Yes, I think some regulation is good. My point is that Americans - especially Republicans - say they want government out of their lives, but they don't really mean it. They're afraid of people having too much freedom.
Quote:
To your second point, it seems that the LP's purity is exactly what would make them attractive, since the Dems and Repubs are both so baseless and ridden with competing investments and interests.
Nope. The fact that the LP has a lot fewer rules than the Republican and Democratic Parties is what scares people off, in my opinion.
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.
