(June 21, 2014 at 10:58 am)Heywood Wrote: I'm staunchly pro-life so I basically always vote republican. However if Obama were pro-life and Romney were pro-choice(but both otherwise the same) I would have voted for Obama even though I think he is the worst president ever. I am a one issue voter in that respect. Many of my positions don't mix with the republican platform so I don't like to call myself a republican.

The fact that you are a self confessed one issue voter makes your thoughts on other issues irrelevant. Your issue and your stance on it makes you a Republican by default. Not withstanding your freedom to discuss and share your ideas about other political topics, for all intents and purposes you are a Republican.

I loathe one issue voters. One issue voters or these lazy pieces of shit that want a party line vote option on ballots contribute to the partisan malaise we experience. There's absolutely no reason to discuss issues or compromise on solutions if everyone can go home, say the usual shit, and stamp their ticket back to D.C.

Abortion is only an issue because Republican office seekers know they can get people like you to vote for them. The abortion laws as they exist today are a good compromise. Neither side is fully satisfied, but the system works compared to what was happening before Roe v. Wade. Let it fucking go.

Heywould Yablowme, you're an idiot. Nice name, probably should've thought that one through better, eh?

(June 21, 2014 at 4:29 am)Heywood Wrote:

(June 21, 2014 at 3:05 am)Rhythm Wrote: Perhaps political parties with roots stretching nearly a century or more have failed to keep up with our changing societal awareness. Is it so surprising that antiques aren't offering you any modern conveniences (by way of analogy)?

I blame the voting system not the parties.

I often wonder how things would have turned out if we did instant run-off elections.





Clinton would not have been elected, nor Bush jr, under such a system. I am an advocate for alternative votes or instant run off elections.

how about putting a "NO" block on the ballot for all candidates?? After all, once the midterm and general elections roll around, we don't really "vote" (yea or ney); we're forced to choose.

I want both candidates to realize that I vote "NO" for them both. It won't change anything, and given that I don't believe the candidate gives two hoots in hell about why I chose them....so long as I did, it's probably a useless point.

But still, it would be nice to be able to vent my spleen instead of not choosing.....er....... voting at all.

(June 21, 2014 at 2:25 pm)Faith No More Wrote: I think you should stop asking what party you belong to and examine politicians on an individual basis. Stop trying to label yourself and follow a crowd. One of the biggest problems our country faces today is that people are trapped in this "Us vs. Them" mentality that comes from forcing extremely complex and diverse beliefs into just a few categories.

Don't be a sheep.

I'm about as far a way a sheep as you can get. I don't believe I fit in any party. I was simply curious as to what party you guys would pigeon hole me into.

---

(June 21, 2014 at 2:32 pm)Cato Wrote:

(June 21, 2014 at 10:58 am)Heywood Wrote: I'm staunchly pro-life so I basically always vote republican. However if Obama were pro-life and Romney were pro-choice(but both otherwise the same) I would have voted for Obama even though I think he is the worst president ever. I am a one issue voter in that respect. Many of my positions don't mix with the republican platform so I don't like to call myself a republican.

The fact that you are a self confessed one issue voter makes your thoughts on other issues irrelevant. Your issue and your stance on it makes you a Republican by default. Not withstanding your freedom to discuss and share your ideas about other political topics, for all intents and purposes you are a Republican.

I loathe one issue voters. One issue voters or these lazy pieces of shit that want a party line vote option on ballots contribute to the partisan malaise we experience. There's absolutely no reason to discuss issues or compromise on solutions if everyone can go home, say the usual shit, and stamp their ticket back to D.C.

Abortion is only an issue because Republican office seekers know they can get people like you to vote for them. The abortion laws as they exist today are a good compromise. Neither side is fully satisfied, but the system works compared to what was happening before Roe v. Wade. Let it fucking go.

If the democratic party advocated the killing of Jews, I bet you Cato, would either abstain or vote republican. Maybe you wouldn't....because you're not a one issue voter.

Some issues are so important that they can out weigh all the rest. One issue voters are not lazy. People who pride themselves on not being one issue voters simply have no unwavering principles.

Quote:We all have our faults Chuck,

You happen to be an arrogant prick.

For the record, Chuck is NOT an arrogant prick. I know, because I am an arrogant prick, and Chuck isn't at the monthly meetings and doesn't take our newsletter.

I don't much care what political philosophy Heywood (or anyone else) fits into. Pigeonholes are for pigeons, not people.

Boru

(June 21, 2014 at 6:29 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

Quote:We all have our faults Chuck,

You happen to be an arrogant prick.

For the record, Chuck is NOT an arrogant prick. I know, because I am an arrogant prick, and Chuck isn't at the monthly meetings and doesn't take our newsletter.

I don't much care what political philosophy Heywood (or anyone else) fits into. Pigeonholes are for pigeons, not people.

Boru

You're just a junior prick Brian, full on pricks like Chuck have their own meetings.

(June 21, 2014 at 7:01 pm)Heywood Wrote:

(June 21, 2014 at 6:29 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: For the record, Chuck is NOT an arrogant prick. I know, because I am an arrogant prick, and Chuck isn't at the monthly meetings and doesn't take our newsletter.

I don't much care what political philosophy Heywood (or anyone else) fits into. Pigeonholes are for pigeons, not people.

Boru

You're just a junior prick Brian, full on pricks like Chuck have their own meetings.

Woody buddy, you're just adding fuel to the fire.

To address the topic, I'd say you are a Republican. Of course, Republicans have a wide array of beliefs that conflict from each other, so in order to find the politician/group that best represents your values and wants, you have to research them yourself.

(June 21, 2014 at 7:08 pm)Broseph Ballin Wrote:

(June 21, 2014 at 7:01 pm)Heywood Wrote: You're just a junior prick Brian, full on pricks like Chuck have their own meetings.

Woody buddy, you're just adding fuel to the fire.

To address the topic, I'd say you are a Republican. Of course, Republicans have a wide array of beliefs that conflict from each other, so in order to find the politician/group that best represents your values and wants, you have to research them yourself.

Just so we are clear, Boru doesn't really strike me as being a prick. I was simply playing along with him calling himself a prick.

Chuck on the other hand....yes I truly believe that asshole is an arrogant prick. A very bright and intelligent one....but none the less an ass/prick chimera he is.

(June 21, 2014 at 5:36 pm)Heywood Wrote: If the democratic party advocated the killing of Jews, I bet you Cato, would either abstain or vote republican. Maybe you wouldn't....because you're not a one issue voter.

Some issues are so important that they can out weigh all the rest. One issue voters are not lazy. People who pride themselves on not being one issue voters simply have no unwavering principles.

You're going to have to explain in detail how all of a sudden Jews got involved in the conversation.

(June 21, 2014 at 8:25 pm)Cato Wrote:

(June 21, 2014 at 5:36 pm)Heywood Wrote: If the democratic party advocated the killing of Jews, I bet you Cato, would either abstain or vote republican. Maybe you wouldn't....because you're not a one issue voter.

Some issues are so important that they can out weigh all the rest. One issue voters are not lazy. People who pride themselves on not being one issue voters simply have no unwavering principles.

You're going to have to explain in detail how all of a sudden Jews got involved in the conversation.

Its a thought experiment grounded in history. Would you have voted for a Nazi platform that included slaughtering the Jews even if you wholeheartedly agreed with the rest of the platform(hypothetically speaking)? Somehow I doubt you would even though you profess disdain for one issue voters. Some issues require unwavering opposition despite extraneous circumstances. For me Abortion is one of those issues. There is nothing wrong with being a one issue voter.