What's your party affiliation (U.S.)
 

Ok, here's the deal.

you HAVE TO vote straight ticket.

there is NO alternative.


the names of the candidates are NOT shown.

and you HAVE to vote.


so, which party would u choose? and why?

Under different circumstances, I wouldn't go simply by party.

Under your rules, I choose green. The major two are out because they're sellouts and play to the polls. In my experience, Green is the least political/pragmatic and the most ideological. I haven't done much research into Libertarians but they have ideas about the justice system that I simply can't agree with.

Unrealistic and unAmerican.

This obviously isn't an American election, so I wouldn't vote :D

They don't have political parties in the rest of the world.

We scratch around in the dirt with twigs instead.

I don't know enough of the American parties to make a choice.

Its a frustrating issue for me. Most of my friends (when were not arguing) are conservatives. I think the really close ones are still close because we were in the military together and went through a lot, so there will always be a brotherhood respect thing between us. I use to follow the Republican way of thinking, but now I’m known by those I have this type of discussion with as a “conspiracy theorist” although I clearly don’t see the theory part of it, but I’ve had to come to acceptance that we’ll all find out one way or the other. Even though he is not running this time I really liked what the current governor of Iowa had to say. His ideas seem fresh and what direction I think would take America to a good place. He’s a democrat that I saw on Hannity and Colmes and for anyone that watches that show, for Sean to say he would vote for him may give some an idea of how impressive he is. The sad thing is I don’t think the oil barrens will ever allow him to get into office; if he did he wouldn’t be there long. Thomas Jefferson said that this country would need a good revolution every couple of hundred years to keep the ideas in Congress fresh. While that’s a little strong, I see both parties have become stagnant; at least they agree on giving themselves a raise.

Democrat, all the way. Always have been liberal, always will be. As for the comment that voting straight ticket is "unAmerican", we're actually the starters of the whole idea :) used to be that you could go into a polling place and one of the choices on the ballot was straight ticket. this, of course, was in the days of the political machines of the late 1800s, and was left over until recently. in many states you can still choose to vote straight ticket.

Republican!

I grew up surrounded by feminist liberal demoncrats. Good times... :)

I don't have to choose a party.

That being said, I haven't heard anything realistic enough to pay any serious attention to from a Democrat in an amazingly long time.

Took the words right out of my mouth ART!

I voted Green Party last election because GW scared me and I didn't like who Al Gore surrounded himself with (i.e Liberman, his wife and Tipper) if it was just Al Gore on the ticket I would have voted for him.

Libertarian. I want to run my own life.

Isn't what I said.

If you look at the original post, it said that you "HAVE TO" vote a straight ticket.

That is what I rejected as unAmerican.

I would definitaly vote Democrat. After really following the Senate and seeing the HORRIBAL things Bush and his Repub friends are doing, I would definitaly vot Democrat. I will this election be voting for anyone who has the best chance of beating bush.

I wouldn't vote. If I lived in a country that forced me to vote by party I would move to a different country where voting was fair. A country with those kinds of rules is bound to not last very long.

see there is the rub... I disagree with about 60% of BOTH parties platforms. Right now the republicans seem closer to caring about the things going on in my life

Republican, growing up in the major tobacco belt, the way the Dems killed the tobacco growers and my local economy definitely shaped my views.

i'd vote libertarian if they actually had some power and seats.

till then, i'm a yellow dog

Macheath is right, we just roll around in the mud when it comes to politics down under. political parties?

I'm a libertarian. I get called all kinds of bizarre insults for saying this, I don't quite know why. People claim I'm ultra right, but I'm in favor of most civil liberties which the right is against. Weird. Whatever.

Frosstbyte,

I don't think anyone around here will insult you for being a libertarian. I have several libertarian leanings myself as do some other members.

I do think that libertarians are much to isolationist and I'm not sure I want rampant drug use legalized.

The drug issue with the liberatarians is with throws me off as well. I agree with alot of what they say, I dont know if legalizing herion would be a good idea.

Who is the main threat to Bush in 2004? Haven't heard anything.

I think the only thing that could throw him off is an extremely strong independent with a prior military background.

I once did a very long test that quizzed me on various issues in the world, north america and various other topics. at the end it told you how you related to the various political parties.

I came out in line with the democrats quite solidly.

Well, I'm not going to insult you, but maybe I have some insight into why that is!

Libertarians can't really be classified as "right" or "left". A one-dimensional line can't really capture the ideas of the party - if you put their core beliefs somewhere on the line, all the economic statements would be far-right, and the civil liberties would be far-left. So it's a pretty equal balance looked at in that light.

However, the essential philosophy of Libertarianism is the minimization of government control over individual lives. They agree with the Right on supporting free-market capitalism, and with the left in supporting social equality and non-interference in personal affairs. Seen in this light, the right and the left are the inconsistent ones - get the government out of this, but not that, sort of thing.

But also under the essential philosophy, you can see that your beliefs contrast with the essential belief of the Left - that groups should work together for the benefit of the members within. The idea of collective power and responsibility is the core of the Left, while the Libertarian[1] rejects all groups and is a rugged individualist - almost an ethical egoist, in fact.

So, while leftists like myself agree with Libertarian stances on certain issues (drug legalization, free speech, equal rights for minorities and women) we are actually diametrically opposed on a philosophical level; the similar stances are just concidences, if you will. For what it's worth, I think the Libertarians as a party are currently much more honest than either the Democrats or the Republicans... But I am voting Green until we win something! ;-)

Bingle
[1] I am using Libertarian in the strict, capital-L sense, of course... Meaning a member of the Libertarian Party. A libertarian is simply one who fights for liberties; I consider myself a civil libertarian, and you will frequently find the ACLU called the same thing.

I'm libertarian. I tend to be more towards the conservative side of the spectrum on many issues, however, I feel the government is way over-extending it's limited powers. For instance, the war on drugs was lost a long time ago. When some of the most heavily guarded prisoners in the US get addicted to heroin, we need to change tactics. While not a user of drugs, I don't care if my neighbor smokes pot, and I think if taxed and regulated correctly would be a good source of income. I'm tired of the mis-appropriation of funds and the huge burocracies. Federal govt should only exist to the things that the local govt/communities can't do on their own. At least, imho.

socially left, economically moderate

I would never vote by party. That said the part I agree with most is the Libertarian party. I don't agree with EVERYTHING they say but I agree with alot. And I took that test (or a test) that said politcal sides and it placed me right in the center of the left and right part and as a Libertarian so... I defitntly agree that pot should be legalized and probably a few other drugs too. And I think the goverment should be cut into about 1/4th its current size.

I can't choose a party. I like the idea of a meritocracy which I think fits more into a conservative philosophy, but I support some taxes which fits into a liberal philosphy, but I like the RESPONSIBLE use of taxes which fits into a conservative philosophy, but I like personal freedom (including freedom from the religious right) which fits into a liberal philosophy. I'm also for less government which fits into a libertarian philosophy. (It used to be a conservative tenet, but I don't think that holds true anymore).

I see the Green, Libertarian and Reform parties as too far on the extreme of the ideological spectrum but the GOP and Democrats aren't exactly godsends either. If I had to make the choice, Democratic seems to me to clearly be the lesser of two evils.

Impossible for me to stick to one party - I am very liberal on some issues, and very conservative on others. In the next presidential election, however, I will vote for whomever the Democrats nominate. A vote for Bush is morally unacceptable to me, and a 3rd party vote is a wasted vote, sadly.

Well, since I had to choose one, I chose Republican. I usually do what most people (I hope) do. I vote for the candidate that I feel is most likely going to do the best job for whatever the office they are running for.

What Art said!

Republican.

I'd like to keep as much of my money as possible. I think I can handle it better than they can.

I vote Republican, but only because a Libertarian would not be treated as an equal in the minds of his collegues. Nobody would take him seriously, which is truly a shame.

I guess I would like to say Libertarian, but at this moment, Republican is my vote.

dem's were leading this 16 to repub's 10, damn whaat happened?

Why isn't there a "Not affiliated with any party" choice up there? Not every chooses to belong to a party. Or how about Independent? They're bigger than the Libertarian and the Greens (I think).

Hi! It's time for Essay With Bingle, the new series where I write a long, sometimes rambling dissertation on some idea which popped into my head about the thread! You can see an example above.

Political parties. I see a lot of people here saying they don't want to be forced to vote along party lines, or shouting the virtues of independents. However, I think that political parties are simply a natural outgrowth of the fact that people have basic general philosophies that steer their beliefs.

For instance, if one is a certain denomination of Christian, one's religious beliefs will have a profound effect on one's politics. If you believe in a literal interpretation of the bible, for instance, you will likely be supportive of prayer in schools, teaching creationism, and be anti-homosexual and anti-abortion. There are also likely to be a large number of people who hold the same basic tenets as you, who will tend to agree with you on any proposed political issue, *even if that issue has never been previously discussed and is not explicitely spelled out in your beliefs*. For this reason, it makes sense to vote for a group of people who hold the same basic philosophy as you do, because if they are faced with a totally new decision, you can trust them to react in the same way you would.

In addition, it is only natural that if you hold the same basic belief as many other people, you will end up voting the same way they do, every time. Thus 'unofficial' political parties would naturally arise; an example would be the religious right, or the environmental movement, or even 'soccer moms'. These groups have no formal political connection, but because of shared interests or circumstances they will tend to vote the same way anyway, and will get treated as a party or a sub-party even if there is no formal definition.

Of course, there will be individuals or small groups who don't fit exactly into the mold of any particular party, however most of these people will, for convenience's sake, choose the party that most closely represents their views.

So, really, belonging to a party doesn't subvert one's decision-making power, or subsume one's individuality, it is simply a natural phenomenon that will happen regardless, in most cases. When it happens voluntarily, it gives you more strength and flexibility politically. In fact, one reason the far left is not nearly as politically effective as the far right is because they have too many splintered parties - fifteen varieties of socialism, eight subtly different environmental groups, or whatever, that compete among each other for clout.

That's all today, tune in next week for another Essay With Bingle!

Your host, Bingle Bing Whotsit.

true that

Your analysis of the libertarian position is skewed which might be the cause of your confusion over the determination that their views are inconsistent. The libertarian position regarding civil rights is not a leftish ideal that all minorities *will* be treated equally. Theirs is a subtle argument that a) laws should not govern morality vis-a-vis an individual's right to choose who he/she employs and b) race should not matter because everyone should be treated as equal under the laws. Now, this does not provide the protection of the law to various minorities that leftist movements have been fighting to maintain for the past fifty years. It's a neo-right movement to eradicate distinction between racial differences. The vast majority of social researchers recognize that while the notion of everyone's equality under the law is a noble ideal the practical implications of eradicating racial distinctions wouldn't result in equal or equitable treatment of ethnic minorities as it would serve to maintain the status quo--white hegemony. Hopefully this small tidbit will give you some insight as to how you were misarticulating the implications of the libertarian platform and concluding they were contradicting themselves. If you want more information then Michael Omi and Howard Winant's Racial Formation in the United States: From the 1960s to the 1990s is considered the definitive book on race/ethnic theory. You might like Cornel West's Race Matters more since it is written from a non-academic style (even though West has been at Princeton and is currently at Harvard) and was listed on the best seller for some time.

i get the notion that a large portion of Americans feel the same way. Some people do not want to be classified as being in a particular group....so when they vote for the person who represents their closest opinions, there may be a handful of issues that the voter does not want to support or does not agree with. Also, there exists a good portion of ideals that the candidate does not even discuss, and those being the ones that get thrown into action right after election.

i'm more democratic than anything else.

but i stay independent.

republicans and democrats are tied... who shall be the winner!?! :D

Actually, I didn't say this. :-) I said that, when viewed with the mindset of a 2-dimensional political spectrum (right and left), Libertarian stances may *appear* inconsistent. This was simply meant to point out the failures of such a view!

I also said later that, when viewed on a government interference scale, both the basic left and right arguments appear inconsistent!

And I understand the distinction between the Libertarian approach and the leftist approach to civil rights. In fact, that was the point of my post: despite seemingly similar stances on many issues, the Libertarians are actually diametrically opposed to the Left on a basic philosophical level. This is why Leftists disagree with Libertarians, which is what the original poster was confused on :-)

I suggest you read my post again, this time more than the first paragraph ;-)

Bingle

I don't really follow a party....during presidential election I voted Green Party because I didn't like the top choices.....I look at what each individual canidate is about and then I make my choice...Has nothing to do with what party they're in.

Actually, I read your whole post. You explicitly stated that their views regarding civil rights could be placed far-left. That's incorrect. They don't believe in protecting equal treatment for minorities and women. That's incorrect. Your conclusion that they believed that the government should be involved in the civil rights sector but not the economic one is incorrect. A more correct articulation is that they believe that the government should be removed from *all* sectors of private life. This does not claim to support equal treatment of individuals. This instead claims to support that there should be no *preferential* treatment of anyone. The distinction is subtle yet important--one protects minority rights, the other claims no one should be protected by the government and each should fend for his or herself in an open market. This is a far-right argument--in regards to both economics and civil rights.

I'm socially conservative, fiscally moderate to conservative, and environmentally moderate. I usually vote Republican even if I don't fully agree with the candidates because most of the candidates the Democrats put up are way too far out there for my tastes.

I refuse to vote for the goverments:
MAN A democrat
MAN B republican
Each is pretty much, the same the powers that be
I will vote green, reform, independant, or others!
Mainstream voters tell me "that's throwing away your vote"
I say it's not!
To throw away a vote is not to vote
If more people kept this in mind
The rep./dem. would not dominate america.

I'm a mean-spirited Republican who is also a proud member of the vast right wing conspiracy. For lack of a viable 3rd party. I'm conservative and disagree with the repubs alot but a 3rd party vote is a vote for the dems. Can't have that.

100% Conservative Republican American

Umm. This is exactly what I said. I stated that the left and right believe that the government should be involved in some things (such as personal morality for the right, and economic justice for the left). Libertarians, I said quite clearly, are for wholesale government non-interference. Keep in mind, too, I don't think that the left and right are inconsistent, I just mean that viewed along a certain axis they can be perceived that way. That's the trouble with one-dimensional political spectrums!

My inclusion of civil rights issues into the platforms is also valid: I was making the point that there are several civil rights issues (for instance, gay rights) on which the left and Libertarians agree. But again, this is just a coincidence - they do so for entirely different philosophical motives, as you pointed out. And you're right, there are some civil rights issues that Libertarians and leftists disagree on, such as affirmative action. But you missed the point of my post, which is that, despite some superficial similarities, the left and Libertarians are more deeply opposed than the left and the right. (Which is what you seem to be trying to argue!)

Bingle

I so whole heartedly agree. A lot of my friends just don't vote because they don't like the democrat/republican canidates. As a whole, at least 50% of the US does not vote. One year there was a voter turn out of 30%. That's 30% who get to control the other 70% who didn't vote because they didn't like the 2 main parties. If just 20% of those people who don't vote, voted 3rd party, we would have a viable 3 party system instead of just 2 party. Sometimes I just want to smack my friends over the head with same beer we're drinking while talking about this, because they think that no vote is better than voting for the "two evil's"

People just arn't educated enough because they think politics are dirty. I'm not saying they arn't, but bitch about getting dirty if you're not willing help contain the mud from being slung.

I vote democrat because voting for other alternatives such as Libertarian Party, and Green Party actually divides the liberal vote and thus leads to the results of the 2000 election. Ideally I would support no particular party.

The Greens and Libertarians seem to be going for the holy grail: the white house.

They need to begin by seeping into the congress and then over time with enough influence make their way toward the White house and turn America into a multi party system where anything goes. None of the other parties seem to be pursuing this path rigorously.

Democrat all the way.

George W. Hitler, oops I mean Bush is obviously not bright enough to run the show. If it were't for all his daddy's people around him, W. would not even know how to spell Iraq.

While I don't necesarilly agree with ALL of the Party Platform, I will, and do, vote Libertarian. I became disillusioned by the major parties (ie the Republicrats and the Demopublicans) years ago. Time for some fresh air. Give someone else a shot at cleaning up the mess that the big two have made over the years.

Lawdy- One simple question. Has everyone who replied to this post voted in their local/state/fed elections? If so, take a bow. Otherwise, you are part of the problem. Voter apathy enables the twisting and morphing of memes like patriotism, american and war to mean go bomb the bejesus out of 5th rate dictators for profit.

I don't vote along party lines, Greens and Libertarians strike a chord within me however, they aren't (yet) huge profit driven behemoths that pay lip service to values, and line their pockets on the back of the working classes.

Intriguing post, who knew a simple survey would bring out such splendid discourse?

It not safe to vote for a Dem yet.
A Lib vote is a wased vote.
A Green vote is just stupid.
Rep vote gives me right to shoot the sumbitchs.

I don't so much vote for a given person, rather I tend to vote against the person who I believe will do the worst job at protecting my interests (read, my money.)