Why are you a Republican or Democrat?

[twelvethirty]

I registered democrat because thats what my state and family does, but i by no means vote party lines. I will be voting trump in the fall just because i can.

[May90]

What do you define "traditional america" as? Because thats a lot propaganda but short on facts

I suppose it is slaves, separate bus sections for whites and blacks, religious preachers knocking in everyone's doors and battles against natives!

[ITER]

Yes tell these hard "truths" and what "traditional america" is. Because all you have done is spew out bullshit rhetoric so far.

Sure, knock yourself out.

Men and women are physical and mental different and we both have different roles we need to perform. The sexes aren't interchangeable.
Some cultures are better than others. The west is the best culture humans have developed so far.
Evolution didn't stop at the neck. Different levels of testosterone and neoteny between the races. There are allele variation between the races and it would explain reality a lot better than ALL WHITE PEOPLE ARE RACISTS!
Female empowerment/feminism(whatever you want to call it) has been tried 5 times before in human history. Each time it has had the same result with the civilization collapse/being invaded.
Multiculturalism doesn't work due to tribalism and kin selection.

[Annoying]

much like one has to be licensed to drive a car

Sigh, for the millionth time, you don't have to be licensed to drive a car. You don't have to be insured, either. You have to be licensed/insured to drive a car on public roads.

Note, I'm not critiquing your political reasonings behind this point. I'm just tired of seeing the incorrect car example being used.

There are a few that I'd expand, though:

I believe it is ridiculous that young adults are expected to go to colleges in order to get jobs, and yet end up with crippling debt. An educated society is a more prosperous society so I believe in making college education cheap.

I feel like you missed half of this. We need programs for trade skill education as well. Not everyone needs or is fit for a degree. I know professional welders and mechanics that didn't go to college and are doing great. A few of them make more than I do with 2 college degrees.

14. I believe in a better path to citizenship for immigrants

I think our path to citizenship is pretty decent, actually. I'd like to see more control of visas and such, and maybe an easier path from (successful, repeatedly renewed) visa to citizenship, though.

Overall, though, there's a ton I agree on.

[Annoying]

Men and women having the option of doing what they want but society promoting the traditional/biological roles because its what works and what makes people happy.
To promote the nuclear family and tight-nit communities.

...

Small government that doesn't try to micromanage people's lives and let normal people solve their own problems.

...

No making special rules for the minority and having the minority dictate to the majority.

These points conflict with each other. Unless, of course, that last point is secretly "make special rules for the majority" in disguise. Even then, making special rules for any group of people conflicts with the middle point.

[ITER]

I thought we were going to see some "hard truths". These some like really bad talking points.

Go say some of that on at your job, twitter, public space and lets see how long you last before the SJW hive mind comes after you. I think you believe in the fairy tale that if we all just do as the progressives tell us we will all come together in one big hug and sing we are the world and there will be peace and prosperity for all.

[Stormspellz]

Men and women having the option of doing what they want but society promoting the traditional/biological roles because its what works and what makes people happy.
To promote the nuclear family and tight-nit communities.
To work hard and stop playing the victim.
Small government that doesn't try to micromanage people's lives and let normal people solve their own problems.
To only allowed the best, brightest, and people who want to ASSIMILATE and become Americans here.
To promote capitalism not crony capitalism/corporations in bed with the government.
No making special rules for the minority and having the minority dictate to the majority.

We ether already have these things or never existed. "small government" You mean all the state level legislation against gays. abortions, ect or how Trump not only wants to expand it but his tax plan will sky rocket the debt. he surely pushing policies that promote him and "phony" capitalism: how is the just "liberal" hating everything that made america the way it is?

has every left policy worked? no it haven't but can you name a policy from the left that gets pushed like trickle down voodoo economics after its failed and failed and failed and failed? Yes you have states like Illinois a blue bastion state, that over a generation of backdoor hand me down politics has turned the state into crisis mode, while we have the last 3? governors of the state sitting in jail. Brownback has turned Kansas into the same economic situation in one term, Just like Jindal did to Louisiana. While California is on its way to be the 5th biggest economy in the world on its very own doing things the right said would bring ruin, like tax the rich; the horror!

As for immigration the same thing that was said about the polish, the irish, is said about Latinos and now Muslims. Sure we passed laws saying "help wanted: No Irish" to be illegal. Is that a bad thing? are these special rules so bad? was separate but equal days of the civil rights movement really the best we can be as a people and a country? I sure the hell don't think so and don't see how anyone can legitimately say so.

[ITER]

These points conflict with each other. Unless, of course, that last point is secretly "make special rules for the majority" in disguise. Even then, making special rules for any group of people conflicts with the middle point.

No they don't. No it does not mean make special rules for majority. It just doesn't mean affirmative action type things. This was how america had the vast majority of their communities structured before the government interfered with perverse incentives to break it up.

[Deleted]

I'm a republican because I like low taxes, small government and conservatism. Both fiscal and social.

I don't really care about gay marriage or abortion, but just about everything else I agree 100% with the GOP policies.

[kail]

Also people hate on America for having borders when every other third world nation has them

Did you mistype that or are you saying we should be more like a third world nation?

[Zandalarian Paladin]

Neither. I think both are more or less the same thing, with one slightly emphasising on freedom of economy and the other on freedom of individuals.

From an international point of view, both parties are plain ridiculous.

[Annoying]

No they don't. No it does not mean make special rules for majority. It just doesn't mean affirmative action type things. This was how america had the vast majority of their communities structured before the government interfered with perverse incentives to break it up.

I'm ok with saying that you don't like affirmative action-type rules, but how do you explain the nuclear family part? Is that not special rules for the majority? Why not obey the middle part, which I'm all for, and just let people do what's not harming anyone else? Why have the government in any way concerned with family structure when you can simply not meddle in their lives and let them do what they want?

[BannedForViews]

I also very much appreciate the work done in the agricultural sector with government subsidies for products. Many people dont realize that farmers run on a deficit and the subsidy programs keep them running a profit.
.

Many people also don't realize that there is no guarantee in like that you will run in a surplus. If you are good at farming you do not need a subsidy. If you are not good at farming we would be better off if you did something other than farming and didn't have to subsidize you. Market equilibrium is actually a real thing, no matter how much people want to pretend it isn't, and for the "liberal minded" who tend to be overall much more utilitarian and support a "greater good", it's a massive contradiction that you do not see this.

[Barnabas]

I linked an article that's literally titled "It's Better To Be Raised By A Single Mom". I don't think any reasonable person would disagree that it's better to be raised by two parents, yet here we are. Some progressives hate tradition and religion so much that they don't just claim that we should be nice to single mothers, but actually claim that you're better off without a father. It's hard to believe anyone really believes that, but that's kinda my point.

I do not think we should act like single mothers are the worst kind of person, but I think we should all agree that they've made a very bad mistake that's quite harmful to their child. We should socially shun and ostracize the men that leave these women. Actions that result in a child needlessly having only one parent are immoral and I believe that people who are unwilling to say so are guilty of moral cowardice. The outcome of this moral cowardice is a generation of children where nearly half don't have fathers in the picture - I don't think this is healthy for society.

- - - Updated - - -


Our path to citizenship is an utter trainwreck for the smartest, most skilled people. Watching friends of mine in science get rebuffed and bounced around to various idiotic bureaucracies is pretty discouraging. These are people that we should be expediting citizenship for, the kind of industrious, productive people that we should love having become Americans.

They worked for a shitty company that didn't process their paperwork for them. Fortune 500 companies handle all of that for you. I don't know their situation either if the work was just temp or not? Many factors play into all of this if you come just to work. Other than that many people achieve citizenship every year.

[BannedForViews]

So why don't you move to Somalia? Small government haven there.

Bro you should totally move to Iran, or North Korea. You'd LOVE their government.

[Hemak]

What's the difference? If congress denies the right to make a living on inventions, isn't that also a threat to a life?

Return to the main point. Government protecting, "life, liberty, and property" is not cut, dry, nor clear.

If a man robs banks as his primary source of income and the authorities do not allow him to make a living robing banks, isn't that also a threat to a life?
The entity violating someone else's rights forfeit their rights. That is the basis of law. What your arguing would make it impossible to hold anyone to the law.

After thinking about your original post, I'm guessing you're talking about a scenario where a drug company is charging an exorbitant price for some medicine, which prevents someone from buying it, then that person to die. I would argue this scenario is not a violation of the persons life to begin with. If the drug company had not invented the drug, the person would have died anyway. To me, and you may disagree, you can only violate someones life if you directly cause someones death.

I thought the scenario was: a drug company creates a new drug, but it kills people. I view this as a violation of someones right to life because the person would not have died without the intervention of the drug company.

[Barnabas]

Many people also don't realize that there is no guarantee in like that you will run in a surplus. If you are good at farming you do not need a subsidy. If you are not good at farming we would be better off if you did something other than farming and didn't have to subsidize you. Market equilibrium is actually a real thing, no matter how much people want to pretend it isn't, and for the "liberal minded" who tend to be overall much more utilitarian and support a "greater good", it's a massive contradiction that you do not see this.

That's not how it works in the US. You are delusional.

[ITER]

We ether already have these things or never existed. "small government" You mean all the state level legislation against gays. abortions, ect or how Trump not only wants to expand it but his tax plan will sky rocket the debt. he surely pushing policies that promote him and "phony" capitalism: how is the just "liberal" hating everything that made america the way it is?

Enough of these against gay/Alphabet orientation arguments. Gays are roughly what 1% of the population, they say they want equality then say that means special treatment for them. Something with blacks, same thing with ever minority because in america "oppression" means special rights and money for them. Thats why everyone and their mom wants to say they are oppressed. The left always says how horrible America is to gays and minorities but then why aren't we killing them like other places in the world. Why do all the minorities still want to come here. Whites are the minority in the world so why aren't you fighting for whites rights in Africa or multiculturalism in other places?You talk about debt, but Obama expanded it the most and a bunch of people wanted to elect a socialist on the left even though socialism doesn't work and adds more to the debt.

has every left policy worked? no it haven't but can you name a policy from the left that gets pushed like trickle down voodoo economics after its failed and failed and failed and failed? Yes you have states like Illinois a blue bastion state, that over a generation of backdoor hand me down politics has turned the state into crisis mode, while we have the last 3? governors of the state sitting in jail. Brownback has turned Kansas into the same economic situation in one term, Just like Jindal did to Louisiana. While California is on its way to be the 5th biggest economy in the world on its very own doing things the right said would bring ruin, like tax the rich; the horror!

SOCIAL JUSTICE! BLM! THE PATIRCHY! PROGRESSIVE! WHITE GUILTY! MASS IMMIGRATION! MORE GIRLS IN STEM, IN SCHOOL(While boys and men are doing worse and worse) All have been pushed by the left since I can remember.

As for immigration the same thing that was said about the polish, the irish, is said about Latinos and now Muslims. Sure we passed laws saying "help wanted: No Irish" to be illegal. Is that a bad thing? are these special rules so bad? was separate but equal days of the civil rights movement really the best we can be as a people and a country? I sure the hell don't think so and don't see how anyone can legitimately say so.

Except for the fact the polish and Irish wanted to become Americans, they wanted to assimilate. There was no social programs they wanted to leech off of. Latinos don't integrate instead they create the same hellhole they came from and scream how good their old country is and at the same time tell me how bad my country is. Muslims don't assimilate, become more radicalized over generations, want to enforce sharia law and could be a potential terrorist. Why is it okay to restrict the personal right of a business by not letting them choose who they would hire? You put another person's right over another. You do realize if you let people be racist, sexiest, etc. most people probably wouldn't do business there.

You misunderstand me by the way. I am not a big fan of trump or the republicans. I think they both wouldn't be good. Both the democrats and republicans will run this country into the ground. However the democrats will do it faster so I vote republican to try to buy more time to fix things.

[BannedForViews]

If the world is doing better than it ever has, then that would imply the changes that keep getting forced on conservatives keep turning out to be improvements over whatever way of doing things they were defending.

This is a false cause. But nice try.

[Deleted]

It's funny, because Buck's perspective actually nicely outlines why I'm not a Republican. I would be a Democrat if I felt like they actually represented the ideals they try to sell, but given that it's the same money controlling both parties, I'd be more comfortable saying I'm a liberal than a Democrat.

To put it in the most civil way possible, I believe Democrats are naive and believe in fairy tale thinking, almost like a Disney movie. This head in the clouds thinking is amusing at best, and destructive at worse.

By comparison, I feel like Republicans are equally delusional in their misguided nationalism, unquestioning faith in open market capitalism, fundamental misunderstanding of the necessity of taxation, and perpetual view of the past through rose-tinted glasses.

Even though it would be nice if everybody in the world would get along, that is simply not how the world works. The human race is not perfect, and there are certain things hard-wired that won't go away. Cultures will always clash.

The best way to deal with cultural diversity if to have more of it, not less; as well as more education in general, and more opportunity to travel and work amongst other cultures. Backwards ideas of cultural isolationism, and restrictive migration policies are a great way to exacerbate cultural clashes, not prevent them.

There will always be rich people and poor people, because there are always hard working and lazy, and sometimes lucky and unlucky.

This is probably one of my biggest disagreements with the Republican, and generally conservative viewpoint. There is such a willful blindness to the reality of the world to believe that rich and poor is determined by level of work. I'm sorry, but there are far too many soldiers, police officers, firefighters, construction workers, etc etc. that work many more hours in much more dangerous conditions than any CEO will ever experience to possibly equate "hard work" with income earned. Being rich requires such a staggering confluence of factors beyond hard work, that making this the determining factor is simply farcical. What we should be aiming for as a society is greater opportunity and more equality between hardworking people, instead of watching wealth inquality increase and pretending the poor are the problem.

War is necessary. Violence has also solved more problems in the history of man than "love" and diplomacy.

War is an action of last resort, and always should be. Its disgraceful that the current political stage is dominated by people that have never served a day in their lives, and whose children will never serve, and yet these are the people deciding that war is an answer.

I love the USA. I feel Democrats either don't appreciate the USA at best, and hate it at worse. If somebody is in the USA and burning and American flag, I assume it's a liberal.

I feel like people that claim to love the USA are also generally people that have never left it, save to go on vacation, or live on a military base. Misguided American exceptionalism is both detrimental and embarrassing to the country as a whole. People that love the USA should show the world why it's great, instead of spending their time telling people that it is.

I value tradition. Change for the sake of it I do not agree with.

Tradition for the sake of tradition is pointless, and requires that anyone believing in it to live in a bubble. Our world and our society is progressing very quickly at this point, and the people clinging to the past are simply dragging the rest of us down with them.

I value the family unit. Wife, Husband, Kids. Strong family = strong community = strong nation.

I find it funny that Republicans tend to espouse this sort of logic, but ignore the middle of the equation. A strong family is apparently important, but a strong community made of people working together towards a common goal through strong social programs and a strong social safety net is an evil socialist plot. A strong community at every level (local, regional, state, national) is far more important than whether or not both a husband and wife are at home. A stronger, broader community can accommodate for any failings of the communities within it, right down to the family level.

I think their ideas on equality are backwards. Racism I already think will never go away, but it especially won't go away if you give certain parties special treatment, and tell them all their problems are due to another race.

I think the massive progress we've made in the last century in terms of social equality across the board should be enough to silence this criticism. Sure, in some small way racism may never go away, but accepting that it's just part of life that we should accept is not helping anyone.

I value capitalism. Let people innovate and create and compete.

I don't know what part of being liberal runs counter to capitalism. I've never understood that actually. People innovate, create, and compete in some of the most liberal and socialist societies on the planet. Some of the biggest hinderances to free market capitalism are corporate protectionism, and crony capitalism, that only serve to keep the money in the hands of those in power. We need more regulation, and better legislation, made by honest regulators and knowledgeable legislators, not a free for all that endangers everyone not currently in power.