"Middle of the Road" - Honesty in Political Preference (married, girls)
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'm suspicious of anyone who claims they are so dominant that the people around them assimilate to their POV. I've known some very charismatic people, many of whom are very close to me.
Most people don't change their minds that easily. I have, however, encountered quite a few people who inevitably adapt to their opinions to reflect their partners' opinions (or whomever is the most dominant personality in the area) - we're not talking about the most independent people. Extroversion has very little to do with conviction or strength of character.
Maybe they change their views because I will beat the pulp out them if they don't. Just kidding...maybe
I enjoy it a little when people back peddle, shows me that their convictions were never strong to begin with considering how flawed their logic was to begin with!
I'm suspicious of anyone who claims they are so dominant that the people around them assimilate to their POV. I've known some very charismatic people, many of whom are very close to me.
Most people don't change their minds that easily. I have, however, encountered quite a few people who inevitably adapt to their opinions to reflect their partners' opinions (or whomever is the most dominant personality in the area) - we're not talking about the most independent people. Extroversion has very little to do with conviction or strength of character.
I'll vouch for that. If a woman is willing to change something as important as her religion because she is so in to you, she could easily adapt to almost anything including changing her politcal views. Women have been adapting to a mans religion and politics for ever.
So Match.com gives the option of describing your politics with "ultra conservative", "conservative", "very liberal", "liberal" (that's me!) or "middle of the road."
I'd been chatting with a guy from Match who was self-described as "middle of the road." Fine, as a bona fide kale-juicing, intellectual NPR-listening librul I would prefer a Democratic-leaning guy, but I live in South Florida and the pickings are already slim for my demographic. So a moderate isn't out of the question. I would, perhaps (depending on his other nice qualities) consider dating a fiscal conservative, an educated and independent voter who can hold a reasoned argument based on factual substance.
I find his Facebook, and, there we are - the offensive jokes, Fox News quotes and Obama-bashing (some of which was very poor taste and racist) did not end. It was really over the top. It is clear to me that he was describing himself as "middle of the road" just to give himself better odds by appealing to women on both ends of the spectrum. Also, we are not Facebook friends (all this stuff was on his public news feed), so I find it evidence of very poor judgment that he would put all these offensive posts out there for all the world to see if they search for his name in FB.
Next!
Good riddance to that guy, eh? No way would I date someone like that.
Never mind the racism. I, for one, will not go anywhere near anyone who thinks Bush Jr., McCain, or Romney are good ideas for this country. It is unfortunate that the U.S. has become so polarized, and years ago, it didn't matter to me as much, but now, no way. Anyone who supports the GOP supports a party that wants to take away women's reproductive rights, and as a woman, I take that personally.
Libertarians are okay, because they don't want the government involved in such things. Most of my differences with them have to do with economics. I'm not that trusting of human nature to think that beating the drum of free markets does anything but encourage exploitation of the poor and middle class and the rape of the environment. But at least no libertarian I've ever known went around shrieking that his way is the right way because his holy book or god said so, and I can work with that. As long as they aren't one of those Ayn Rand Paul freaks, we're good.
I feel sorry for the spooks they'd assign to follow me. I'm a pretty boring guy in my day to day life. Maybe if I knew I had a shadow (cool spy term, I'm glad I finally got to use it) I'd purposefully not come to a full and complete stop at stop signs and not leave tips in the Starbucks cup next to the register. After a couple days filled with egregious crimes of such nature they would no doubt declare me public enemy #1.
Being followed by the NSA would be testimony to one's good character more often than not. As ol' TJ said, when people fear the government, there is tyranny. When government fears the people, there is liberty.
The NSA following you means the government is afraid of you.
Good riddance to that guy, eh? No way would I date someone like that.
Never mind the racism. I, for one, will not go anywhere near anyone who thinks Bush Jr., McCain, or Romney are good ideas for this country. It is unfortunate that the U.S. has become so polarized, and years ago, it didn't matter to me as much, but now, no way. Anyone who supports the GOP supports a party that wants to take away women's reproductive rights, and as a woman, I take that personally.
Libertarians are okay, because they don't want the government involved in such things. Most of my differences with them have to do with economics. I'm not that trusting of human nature to think that beating the drum of free markets does anything but encourage exploitation of the poor and middle class and the rape of the environment. But at least no libertarian I've ever known went around shrieking that his way is the right way because his holy book or god said so, and I can work with that. As long as they aren't one of those Ayn Rand Paul freaks, we're good.
Ayn Rand Paul?
lol
Yes, I hate Rand Paul he is a monkey but his father is not that bad. I like Ron Paul's foreign policy, he understands the major screw ups we have made. Dammit Lilly you baited me back into politics again!
I'm suspicious of anyone who claims they are so dominant that the people around them assimilate to their POV. I've known some very charismatic people, many of whom are very close to me.
Most people don't change their minds that easily. I have, however, encountered quite a few people who inevitably adapt to their opinions to reflect their partners' opinions (or whomever is the most dominant personality in the area) - we're not talking about the most independent people. Extroversion has very little to do with conviction or strength of character.
My vote is for weak/naive/gullible, because I know very few who would change or modify strong worldviews simply by being around a dominant personality, unless, of course, their views weren't well-established or firm to begin with.
And I agree, extroversion has little or nothing to do with people's convictions and how strongly they hold to certain worldviews or beliefs. I was a prime example of my worldview being molded and shaped to resemble that of my father's, and that was due to not having a firm set of my own presuppositions or a firm grasp of the presuppositions I was accepting. I was naive and "simple-minded," which makes it easy to be persuaded and guided into believing a variety of nonsensical things.
I've influenced some people's minds, and my personality is dominant in certain aspects. When it comes to beliefs/ideas/concepts and argumentation, I have been able to persuade and shine light on different perspectives. However, these weren't necessarily weak-minded individuals. These people held very strong convictions, and were not passive in their beliefs, and long term exposure to other points of view began to modify their presuppositions. But this wasn't just by being "around" me or others arguing similar positions. There was active participation on both ends, and it went beyond the superficial issues and matters commonly addressed.
My father is a die hard right wing republican/religious right and fundamentalist Christian. He has an extremely dominant personality, and can be very persuasive in the presence of unknowing or naive people (who don't know any better). But around those who know their sh*t, his "arguments" and mental gymnastics do not hold water.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,938 posts, read 36,838,343 times
Reputation: 40634
I can't deal with Ron Paul people. It's just idiotic. I mean, I respect Ron Paul. He's turned his style of politics into a multi million dollar family industry with donors/lemmings forking over small donation after small donation. I don't believe for a second he believes everything he says (not that most politicians do), and his voting record shows it, he was a master of voting one way at one point in the process to appeal to his followers and then voting against it to not upset the Republican party. He's very good at what he does and has made a ton of money doing it, but he knows isolationism, unregulated "free markets", etc can't be reality in today's world. He's not dumb.
So Match.com gives the option of describing your politics with "ultra conservative", "conservative", "very liberal", "liberal" (that's me!) or "middle of the road."
I'd been chatting with a guy from Match who was self-described as "middle of the road." Fine, as a bona fide kale-juicing, intellectual NPR-listening librul I would prefer a Democratic-leaning guy, but I live in South Florida and the pickings are already slim for my demographic. So a moderate isn't out of the question. I would, perhaps (depending on his other nice qualities) consider dating a fiscal conservative, an educated and independent voter who can hold a reasoned argument based on factual substance.
I find his Facebook, and, there we are - the offensive jokes, Fox News quotes and Obama-bashing (some of which was very poor taste and racist) did not end. It was really over the top. It is clear to me that he was describing himself as "middle of the road" just to give himself better odds by appealing to women on both ends of the spectrum. Also, we are not Facebook friends (all this stuff was on his public news feed), so I find it evidence of very poor judgment that he would put all these offensive posts out there for all the world to see if they search for his name in FB.
For example, a person who is socially-conservative + economically-liberal might potentially be described as Pro-Life and pro-family and pro-religious values, but also pro-Social Security, pro-Medicare, and supportive of higher taxes on upper-income individuals and similar more-liberal fiscal policies, etc. It could be seen as "conservative but without being fiscally conservative", or as a "socially conservative liberal". It's interesting to think about and I sometimes wonder why there aren't more people similar to that politically, who are out there...
Yes, many Catholics...I studied at a Jesuit university and these viewpoints are consistent with their teachings.
Someone extreme either left or right wouldn't be a good match for me. I'd also not be willing to stop working on political campaigns, but if our views differed I don't see that as causing a problem.
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.