TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › What political party are you?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What political party are you?

post #1 of 44
Thread Starter 
I thought this would be a great poll, as it would help give the demographics of the forum. And those who vote don't have to post, in case you are afraid to do so.

Personally I incline myself a bit more to the democrats, but I think that is more because of the current Bush situation. Quite frankly they are both the same, and IMO in American elections you have to filter "who's the least bad?". I would rather consider myself a liberal. But if I was old enough to vote and living in the states I would definitely vote democrat, just to oust Bush.
post #2 of 44
That's a no brainer for me, since, as an emigré, I can't register. Even if I could, I'd still have to choose "none". Actually, I personally would distinguish "party affiliation" on the basis of local, state and national criteria (and, since Germany, my country of residence, is a member of the EU, international criteria), rather than any real or imagined ideology. I'm not fond of the coalition governments the German political system produces, since parties that receive as little as 5 or 6% of the national vote get an excessive amount of power, but I like the registration system. Anyone 18 or over is automatically registered to vote, and there is no party affiliation connected therewith. That form of registration would probably increase voter turnout in the U.S., but would necessitate adoption of open primaries in all states, and the abolition of caucuses. There aren't any primaries here, so candidates are basically determined by connections and political maneuvering, and, on the basis of what I see in Germany, I wholly endorse the primary election system in the U.S., except for the fact that the incumbent generally goes unchallenged. Just supposing that I could vote in the upcoming elections: I definitely wouldn't vote for Bush, because I believe he has been a national disaster, but I couldn't in good conscience vote for Kerry, as I question his leadership qualities and convictions. The way the system works, I would be left with voting for Nader, who, as an Independent, realistically has no chance. Were the "the incumbent = the automatic candidate" system not to exist, I might be tempted to vote Republican, provided that an intelligent moderate were to run. That's not the case, so my alternatives would be: stay home (convenient for me, because I can plead my disenfranchisement), vote for Nader, knowing that he doesn't stand a chance, or vote for Kerry, as the "lesser of two evils". That's a pretty bleak picture, but I would probably choose the latter course.
post #3 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by jcat
Anyone 18 or over is automatically registered to vote, and there is no party affiliation connected therewith.
You mean that one doesn't have to register to vote? Neat! As for no party affiliation. Here in Puerto Rico there is no such. You do not present any kind of affiliation when you register. Even if you would like to. And for primaries, all the primaries of all the parties are held on the same day, therefore, although you do not present any affiliation, you can legally vote in primaries of a single party. When I learned that in the states many electoral IDs have the party you are affiliated, I found it virtually a foreign concept. And quite frankly, it still doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
post #4 of 44
It makes sense to me that you can't vote in the other party's primary. I mean, I think a lot of Republicans would have voted for Dean just because he would be SO EASY to beat in an election! You wouldn't necessarily end up with the best candidate, but rather the candidate who the other party thinks has the greatest weaknesses.
post #5 of 44
Thread Starter 
Yes, that is the reason for which it is done that way here. You can vote in the primary of another party, but in the process you lose the chance of voting in your party's primary. However, at the same time it makes sense not to have party affiliations in your electoral registry, because IMO, it gives a blow to the secrecy of one's vote, which is why there is no such thing as putting a party's affiliation in your electoral registration.

BTW, I agree. Had Dean gotten the nomination he would not last a minute. When he was frontrunner I was worried sick that the Demos would virtually give over the election to the Republicans as a Christmas gift, by nominating Dean.
post #6 of 44
I object to the party labels, too. The Republican party supposedly objects to "big government", but has expanded the federal government to an alarming degree. The Democrats supposedly are "big spenders", yet Clinton reduced the deficit, while it has reached incredible proportions under Bush. Clinton had to deal with al Queda; Bush had to manage the aftermath of 9/11, so I'll reserve judgment there. I long ago reached the conclusion that most of what our politicians try to make us believe is B.S.. At my age (46), a certain amount of cynicism is inevitable, but I find it sad that people of your age (I'm going by my nieces, nephews, friends' kids and students) have not been afforded the luxury of idealism. With cable, satellite, Internet, today's youth is probably better informed than my generation was, but I wonder if they have actually been prepared to deal with the influx of information they're faced with. Their parents most probably grew up in the Cold War era, as most current politicial leaders did. Most of what appplied then has been turned on its head. How, for example, can you make a decision about the course politics should follow in the Middle East, when you are constantly confronted with scenes of dismantled houses and residences cut off by the new "Berlin Wall", while seeing the aftermath of terrorist attacks in buses and pizzarias in Israel?
post #7 of 44
Thread Starter 
Jcat, I presume that what you mean by idealism, you mean precisely that young people are almost just as cynical as the elder Baby boomers? I guess, that a small portion of people my age are as informed as you say. But in the incredibly vast majority of young people my age, what I find (which really saddens me and appalls me) is ignorance, which is much more dangerous than not having idealism.

However, at the same time I have to disagree when you say today's youth is more informed than previous generations. When of my age and even younger, my mother would always be aware of news going on. And she was raised in the 1950s and 60s in a rural area, where the principal method of learning what is going on in the world was a single radio.

Nowadays, with all the media there is and all the tools available to keep you informed, I talk to my friends and have to wonder if I am the only 15 year old in Puerto Rico who gives a nickel who John Kerry is, or who is Ariel Sharon. Even with what happens right here! Most of their knowledge of what's going on in Puerto Rico doesn't go beyond the names of the political candidates for governor. That is what I have always found saddening and even dangerous. Most young people don't seem to care about what happens that doesn't affect their immediate enviroment.
post #8 of 44
Quote:
Originally posted by valanhb
It makes sense to me that you can't vote in the other party's primary. I mean, I think a lot of Republicans would have voted for Dean just because he would be SO EASY to beat in an election! You wouldn't necessarily end up with the best candidate, but rather the candidate who the other party thinks has the greatest weaknesses.
There are some states in the US where you don't need to be a member of a political party to vote in that party's primary election. As you said, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but it is indeed the case. I don't recall which ones they are, but there are a few of them.
post #9 of 44
I know that in Wisconsin, you are not asked what political party you are affiliated with when you go and vote in a primary. Yes, some Republicans could go out and vote for someone like Dean because he doesn't have a chance, however, Bush's name was also on the ticket, so it wasn't just simply a democratic primary (even though Bush did get 100% of the vote on the Republican ticket obviously). Most Republicans I know chose not to vote in the primary because they knew they would vote for Bush in November anyway. I would say most of the voters were democratic or middle of the road and voted for the candidate they thought would be the best to run against Bushand the one that is more likely to win against him. Also, in such cases as the 2000 primaries....you go and vote for the candidate you would want to see in office...I believe most people take that same mentality with them when voting in a primary such as this.
post #10 of 44
Democrat
post #11 of 44
I'm a republicratarian...

I believe in the right to bear arms in defense of self and state.

I believe in smaller governments and less taxes

I believe in a woman's right to choose.

I believe in medical marijuana for those who suffer.

I believe in the right of all innocent creatures to live a full and free life.

I believe in the death penalty for monsters who have no regard for life.

I believe I have the right to live how I want, own and worship whatever I want as long as I am not harming other living things.

I believe the Government has no place in my bedroom (or living room, bathroom or kitchen for that matter)

I believe that laws should be written to protect others, not to protect ourselves from our own stupidity.

I believe that workers/women/minorities have equal rights.

I believe that if I can afford an expensive powerful sports car, I have a right to own one.

I believe that if I operate said above referenced car in an unsafe or illegal manner, I deserve to be punished.

I hate the electoral college.

I miss Regan (sorry to all the Reagan haters)

*stepping off my soapbox*

Sang
post #12 of 44
Thread Starter 
Ok, we have to disagree a lot in a couple of things (specially your missing Reagan) but I want to say something: I am glad to know I ain't the only one who hates the electoral college! I mean, since when it is a democracy if the guy who wasn't elected by his people become president? Yes, Bush was elected legally, but democratically, not. The electoral college should be abolished and be left entirely by popular vote.
post #13 of 44
I just look at the Political Parties as labels. I'm probably more liberal than I am conservative, but I'm not a Democrat or Republican by any sence of the term.

I usually say I'm an Independant.
post #14 of 44
If you pin me down totally, I am a Republican, but I usually vote more for the person and their campaign than partywise
Cindy
post #15 of 44
I registered as an Independant. Arkansas is one of the states that you can vote in any partys primary but you can't vote in more than one. We had something like that happen here a few yrs ago when Beyrl Anthony was chair of the house ways and means. Anthony had a pet project of bend cuts and straightening the Ouachita River for barge traffic. The project was hotly debated and got ugly. The southern district of Arkansas is large and people from other areas were keeping Anthony in office. Anthony (Dem.) seemed unstopable,he was a democrate in a state that since reconstruction has always voted democrate. There was only one Rep. running in the Rep. primary so the Republicans in my home county got together and voted in the Dem. primary and beat Anthony in the primary. Just a few people CAN make a difference.
post #16 of 44
I have no affiliation but I am very liberal. I only vote Democrat in presidential elections. I agree with the two previous posters, the electoral college is a joke! It's time to bring back the popular vote.

I think cats should run for president, but of course nothing would get done
post #17 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by TaoOfCat

I think cats should run for president, but of course nothing would get done
Well it would certainly be safer than what we've got sitting in the oval office!
post #18 of 44
I'm a Democrat and I'm very Liberal except on one issue. I am VERY anti-feminist. I want to be a wife and mom, I like to wear sexy clothes and makeup, and I have no problem with women who choose to go into pornography. Its their choice.
post #19 of 44
Quote:
Originally posted by vinceneilsgirl
I'm a Democrat and I'm very Liberal except on one issue. I am VERY anti-feminist. I want to be a wife and mom, I like to wear sexy clothes and makeup, and I have no problem with women who choose to go into pornography. Its their choice.
It is posible to be a feminist and still be feminine. The women's movement was hijacked, years ago, by pushy, abrasive man-hating females.

MY brand of feminism concerns control over my own body and property (got that), equal access to jobs and education (got that), equal pay for equal work (got that).

I wear makeup, nice clothes and sky-high heels. That doesn't mean that I'm not a strong independent woman but, that I'm a strong, independent woman, who likes nice clothes and sky-high heels.

The issue is choice: somewhere, along the line, being a stay-at-home wife and mother became a bad thing. The feminazis have forgotten that we have the right CHOOSE how we live our lives. My mother liked staying home and she liked cleaning house. Her choice. I'm a doer, hate housework and would rather work, even when I didn't have to. My choice.
post #20 of 44
I am registered Libertarian, tend to vote Republican. On some issues I am conservative and on some issues I am liberal. I voted for Bush, but I think I might vote for Kerry this year.

Goblin
post #21 of 44
Quote:
Originally posted by yoviher
Quite frankly they are both the same, and IMO in American elections you have to filter "who's the least bad?". I would rather consider myself a liberal. But if I was old enough to vote and living in the states I would definitely vote democrat, just to oust Bush.
They're not the same. Far from it. And all elections in all countries it is pretty much filtering out the least bad. That is not exclusive to America. For goodness sake... you keep talking about all the corruption in your own government!
post #22 of 44
Republican registered this year.
post #23 of 44
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by mzjazz2u
They're not the same. Far from it. And all elections in all countries it is pretty much filtering out the least bad. That is not exclusive to America. For goodness sake... you keep talking about all the corruption in your own government!
I already knew that before I said it. In my country it's the same. Here they are all corrupt. I just have to filter who's least bad by the status. And end up with independentists. So, the truth is that you are right. I never said that America was the only place like that. I said that it was one of those places.
post #24 of 44
Victor...The electoral college became the system years and years ago when many people were too poor or lived in the west away from everything and their claim was that there were too many uninformed voters in order to hold a popular vote-type of election, now I don't think that is the case with all of the media we have available today. Unfortunately, in order to get rid of the electoral college, congress has to vote on it...and you just know they don't want to give away their own power.
post #25 of 44
We have 51 candidates to choose from for miss america and basically 2 candidates (who have even the slightest chance that is) to choose from for President......something to think about guys!

post #26 of 44
Thread Starter 
That's quite a thought... only two people to choose from and many times they are both just as disfunctional.

BTW, who is the 51st candidate for miss America? Washington DC?
post #27 of 44
You are SOOO right about both parties being disfunctional, I found myself voting for the lesser of the two evils in 2000, but Gore wasn't much better. Now it's almost time to make a decision again. I try not to be biased towards either pary and look at the issues...so I know I'm in for yet another ride


And yes, the 51st candidate for Miss America is from Washington D.C.
post #28 of 44
He he he he... it is time to reveal myself... many of you will gape in disbelief.. many of you will laugh.. I vote at home in Canada, both provincially and federally for the Green party because I think voting is important, but in my beliefs about women's rights, gay rights, enviornmental etc.. I am a radical activist and I support many anarchist ideas.. but I don't outright call myself an anarchist.. I usually call myself radical.. but even then I try to get into conversations of what it means to call myself a radical.. like you know.. I can't go see Kill Bill 2 at the movie theatres cuz it isn't "radical"...
post #29 of 44
Victor,
Are these really your political views or merely the views of your parents?
post #30 of 44
Although I am not registered to vote I like the ideas of liberatarianism.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: IMO: In My Opinion
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › IMO: In My Opinion › What political party are you?