So basically a return to states rights...
The Whig Party is a centrist party. We now have our first candidate running for Congress in Virginia. He has not yet announced his adoption of the Whig Party, which just happened this past week, but we are working on going public. At that time, I will announce it here.
I've looked at the Whig Party for my state, and it is too conservative for me. While I support Congress taking back more of it's power from the Presidency, I do not support things such as repealing the direct election of Senators and their stance on taxation.
Unfortunately, there is not an independent party whose platform is close to my political views. I see myself as left-leaning, but few independent parties are left-leaning; most of them are on the far-left.
Where was there an expression of support for repealing direct elections of Senators? I oppose this completely.
What is the stance of taxation that you don't agree with?
The issue is that we are such a new small party that we attract moderates of all stripes and some of the ideas that have been floated are not moderate in my humble opinion. They are not part of the official philosophy. We want to be open enough to attract a membership, but certain things we need to keep in balance. To this end, we have consciously chosen to not specify explicit issues. Instead we express principles.
Having more third parties adds in a new political problem. ... More political groups often means more fighting and dealing for allies rather than focusing on issues.
I've voted Libertarian or Constitution Pty at times, but not with any expectation of winning: just because the two pragmatic choices were both so utterly morally repulsive to me that I could not bear to put my name to either.
Not at all. I think state governments are just as corrupt as the federal government.
I'm talking about popular initiatives on the federal level, where voters can directly make legislation. At the very least, I think the people should be able to use popular initiatives to override unpopular laws made by the federal government. While the people may not deserve the power to write laws, they should at least have the power to recall them.
If your comment is that you want more control then you have one shot...reduce the role of federal government and empower the states. The citizens of the state MIGHT just be more inspired to vote if they knew their vote counted.
I'm not talking about empowering the states. I'm talking about empowering the people.
I hate state governments. I think that they are just as prone to abuses and tyranny as the federal government is. After all, it's state governments that continued segregation for 100 years, and it was the empowering of state governments by the federal government that allowed them to do so.
So no, I don't believe in empowering states' rights. I believe in directly empowering the people. And for that I think we need the ability to affect federal legislation via national legislation. Which has absolutely nothing to do with states' rights.
If we had a voting system that gave 3rd party candidates a chance to actually be elected, I'd consider voting for one if their beliefs more closely matched my own than the candidates from the two main parties did. Until then, I'm not wasting my vote.
Most of the third parties I tend to see on the ballot are either extreme right (constitutionalist, libertarian) or extreme left (green). If I could find a third party that was more centrist, I would consider it.
No.
Time to vote the Democrats out of office. They've done enough damage over the last 60 years. Time to put them in the dustbin of history, where the trash can complain about the smell.
Then, if the replacement Republicans aren't smart enough to swing to the right where they have to be, replace them.
But the FIRST priority MUST be depowering the Messiah and derailing his evil agenda.
Them agreeing with the right more than the left is why I consider them right wing. The extreme part comes later. You are confusing two points and thinking that they are the same.
Of course. Whether a person thinks something is extreme is largely an opinion. I see no problem there. But I think you misunderstood, you guys are not extreme conservatives, you guys are just extreme and happen to have more in common with conservatives, enough that you are essentially a conservative philosophy with a bit of weird mixed in ( only wanting private roads, etc). The extremism and the conservativism are separate functions that junction (I like rhyming)
Blah blah blah
Because something is similar does not mean it is the same. Like I posted, liberals and libertarians tend to agree on some social stances for completely different reasons, so any correlation there is moot.
Weird stuff like wanting to get rid of paper money is pretty extreme. :shrug: But again, its an opinion thing.
Ahh authoritative stuff. Thats why libertarians and liberals might find themselves on the same side of stuff, but for different reasons. That was part of my point. You cannot say you have much in common with liberals if you agree on stuff for completely different reasons.
We will agree to disagree on this one.
So am I. And you arent going to change the fed. So if you want greater legislative control of the government BY the people, it has to come locally.
I would respond to you Ikari, but you have no responded to my points, so I see no use in it, except the blah blah blah part. The reason I responded that way was because I think you should use an argument that has some bearing on what we are talking about. As for the rest, my suggestion is to reread my posts and figure out what I am actually posting.
I read what you actually posted. You posted crap arguments and bias; that's it. I've given you every reason why a) The 1-D political mapping doesn't allow for proper designation of political platforms and b) why your designation of libertarian as extreme right-wing is incorrect.
Sorry you lost this one and now you have to run away; but that's just life. Learn to deal with it.
Why blamethe system? most third parties continually shoot themselves in the foot...start there when assessing blame. Then move on to "we the people". Most people in this coutry are wrapped up tight and securely in their ideologies. They vote party ticket. They tolerate the same scumbags every two and six years going back. IF they bother to vote at all.
I am not running away, but I am giving up because you aren't learning, so there is no point in trying to teach you. :shrug:
It's because what you're trying to teach is crap. There's no reason to sit and learn incorrect lessons. You are doing exactly what you accuse me of doing, BTW. So when you're trying to throw those stones at me, be careful of your own glass house.
Did I somehow not address your points or argue something that you did not intend? If so, than yes, we did the same thing.
Yes, you did exactly that. In fact, you'd just get to "well have to agree to disagree" when backed into a corner about needing another axis to properly identify and catagorize libertarian politics.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?