Social Democrat or Republican

[Fight To Win]

Wouldn't a government that's cheaper fit into that?

We're already paying the money, and then some, for worse results.

True, then there are other ways to reform the spending. And it shouldn't have to be compulsory like everyone loses their insurance they already had privately. I just don't like it. Again that's just me.

 

[Rational Poster]

True, then there are other ways to reform the spending. And it shouldn't have to be compulsory like everyone loses their insurance they already had privately. I just don't like it. Again that's just me.

That's why it's called a public option.... It's optional.

 

[MikeMcMann]

There is no pretending Republicans are for smaller gov't/less deficits so stop the nonsense. Repub's like Bush and Trump are presiding over some of the biggest growth of gov't/deficits ever and Trump so under a good economy which is shameful.

Obama had similar growth but did so tied to the Great Recession clean up, which is exactly when you are supposed to use those tools. And Dem's do not pretend to be for smaller gov't/deficits, despite the fact they seem to be the only party capable of not utilizing deficit spending and actually creating a surplus.

 

[bref]

Do Americans not understand the difference between social programs and full blown socialism?

 

[TheOldMan]

Democrat because I support universal healthcare, labor rights, and environmentalism.

Lol..not that I assume you care but when I saw "environmentalism" i was in the process of liking. Big step! <Lmaoo>
That's one issue me and every other left leaning person here are going to agree on, seriously. Try not to laugh your ass off too hard but if I weren't at least in part playing I can think of names like Barker, Irwin, Goodell, etc. over Alex Jones <45>

Edit: fuck it you get a like too.

 

[Fight To Win]

That's why it's called a public option.... It's optional.

As long as there's no government force and fining I'd be fine with it.

 

[AndroidRage]

0/10

Are you rating your mental abilities?

 

[LangfordBarrow]

On paper, I would vote for the republicans because of:

- smaller government
- personal freedom
- controlled immigration
- gun ownership, less arbitrary gun laws
- less war-mongering

But in reality, they are not really living up to their optics. So, at the end of the day, I would vote libertarian.

It's too bad any third party votes are just basically going to be wasted. It just helps siphon votes from one candidate or the other. I'm a never Trumper because he's a corrupt lying sack of shit, it has nothing to do with him being a Republican, although at this point it's hard to argue they haven't sold out. Not only to Trump but going back to the tea party and guys like Cruz willing to shut down the government, and McConnell burying legislation he doesn't like, trying to impose their views over the will of American voters. Its seems like there's no civil discourse or compromises being made any more.

 

[LangfordBarrow]

They've also been the world's battlefield twice in less than a century.

 

[Rational Poster]

Do Americans not understand the difference between social programs and full blown socialism?

They do not.

 

[Higus]

You ever notice how the folks that say "both sides suck" almost always lean right?

 

[LangfordBarrow]

Do Americans not understand the difference between social programs and full blown socialism?

That's how it starts, then next thing you know, Venezuela...

 

[Hollywood Jack]

Which one are you and why?

I'm a Republican because I think government should be smaller and they don't have Third party that works this way.

I was a registered Republican up until very recently. Just switched to independent. I supported small government, but realized the Republicans would never deliver. These days I'm more about smart government. Don't think government should be in our bedrooms or surveilling us or engaged in regime change wars or spending 10x more than the next highest country on defense. I do think government is good at delivering certain services like Social Security and as a single payer for health care.

 

[Hollywood Jack]

The Fuck it ain't. Show me stats. God you guys like to whine and complain about Allfather but never provide proof to back it up. You ain't got shit cunt

Why is this allowed here?

 

[all caps]

You ever notice how the folks that say "both sides suck" almost always lean right?

If personal freedom is a right wing trait than I guess that's me. But I have never and will never vote right (or vote)

 

[Hollywood Jack]

I don't want America to be like Europe either. Sorry.

I would like to not only keep but reinvigorate our Constitutional protections while also adding aspects of their vibrant social democracies.

 

[Falsedawn]

No one advocating for that kind of socialism though.

This is a pure fantasy on your part.

Aside from the fact that by the criteria most use to attribute deaths to socialism, Capitalism has a body count just as long, if not longer.

Most of them struggle with that.

 

[Higus]

If personal freedom is a right wing trait than I guess that's me. But I have never and will never vote right (or vote)

Personal freedom is not a "right wing" trait, in the sense that "right wing" is generally associated with preserving hierarchical social and power structures. Most attempts to frame personal freedom in a right-wing perspective are about providing the groups at the top of the pyramid less restrictions on how to control the groups at the bottom.

 

[Trotsky]

Do Americans not understand the difference between social programs and full blown socialism?

They do not.

I don't think this is a meaningful or generally well-understood distinction. And I don't think that distinguishing social programs as parts or composites of "full blown socialism," which ostensibly refers to an command economy in which all economic decisions are made by a central, undemocratic state, is either helpful or accurate.

I say this because such social programs are neither necessary to nor the hallmark of either said command economy system or an actual socialistic system of government in which the economy is effectively democratized and workers maintain equity and decisionmaking powers in a given industry, firm, etc. For instance, a country could abolish state healthcare and people would still call it socialist because of restrictions on property ownership, investment, and market mechanisms. Meanwhile, a country could become fundamentally socialist, where all workplaces and industries are collectively owned and managed by workers and all state investments are voted on by the populace, and socialistically decide to forgo social programs like state healthcare.

You ever notice how the folks that say "both sides suck" almost always lean right?

100% of the time.

 

[The Diplomat]

I don't think this is a meaningful or generally well-understood distinction. And I don't think that distinguishing social programs as parts or composites of "full blown socialism," which ostensibly refers to an command economy in which all economic decisions are made by a central, undemocratic state, is either helpful or accurate.

I say this because such social programs are neither necessary to nor the hallmark of either said command economy system or an actual socialistic system of government in which the economy is effectively democratized and workers maintain equity and decisionmaking powers in a given industry, firm, etc. For instance, a country could abolish state healthcare and people would still call it socialist because of restrictions on property ownership, investment, and market mechanisms. Meanwhile, a country could become fundamentally socialist, where all workplaces and industries are collectively owned and managed by workers and all state investments are voted on by the populace, and socialistically decide to forgo social programs like state healthcare.



100% of the time.

I've always stuck with the term socio-capitalism, even though it irks my good friend @Jack V Savage.

We haven't been a totally free market capitalistic society the minute tax revenue attributed towards social well being of the population.