POLL: Democrat, republican, or other?

[justintempler]

Not enough options to answer the poll.

I'm fiscally conservative but socially liberal.

[daruckis]

yeah the republican party today has really gotten ****ing downright ignorant. its pretty sad really. the mere fact that sarah palin was almost vice president showcases said ignorance.

[justintempler]

McCain's choice of Palin was the deal breaker for me. I want someone in office that understands joe sixpack, not someone who IS joe sixpack.

[lxskllr]

McCain's choice of Palin was the deal breaker for me. I want someone in office that understands joe sixpack, not someone who IS joe sixpack.

:^D

That's a funny way of putting it, and absolutely true :^)

[Jason]

My graph looked fairly similar, except that I was a little closer to the right and a little more authoritarian. That is a tough quiz; there are too many variables enclosed in each answer.

I don't claim a party because I don't believe in choosing the lesser of two (or more) evils.....in ANY case, especially politics. That being said, I think I rated a little higher towards authoritarian simply due to the fact that I believe it is the government's job to keep certain things sorted out. It may not end up that way, or even be possible at all, but it is still their job and that is what I expect out of them.

[snusjus]

Here's my placing, which comes to no surprise!

I would describe myself as an Anarcho-Syndicalist, but I voted "Liberal" since I agree with most of their views.

[tom502]

I'm more a Libertarian Geniocratist Fascist.

[MrSnusNSnuff]

<img src=http://i594.photobucket.com/albums/tt23/antnego/th_pcgraphpngphp.png height=320 width= 320></img>

[Mullolley]

I AM THE DALAI LAMA!!!!

[MrSnusNSnuff]

[quote="VBSnus"]

VBSnus wrote:
I'm starting to think my political party is going to soon be Conspiracy Theorist. Some of the things going on in government just don't add up.

* Republicans are the party of choice and reason, yet scientific advances are often thrust aside in favor of religious concepts
* Democrats are the party of social programs, yet Barack Obama is still allowing extraordinary rendition and has not altered the timetable on the Iraq pullout
* Republicans would NEVER think to socialize banks, yet George W Bush did the first bank bailout (and Obama followed up with more)
* Arlen Specter moved over the the Dems at exactly the right time to give them a filibuster proof majority, which is a huge slap in the face to the Republican party
* Most of the people I know who believe in the right to quality foods, no forced immunizations or medications, etc are Republicans, yet it is the Republicans who pass the most laws empowering the drug companies and additive/chemical companies

Seriously, what the hell is up with this?

It makes me wonder...George W Bush, nearly out of the blue, decides to bail out the banks. This was something so far out of the party line that it was extraordinary. Then we get to the next election, and the Republican party puts in (forgive me for saying this) a total dolt for the position of VP, when they had a slew of stronger candidates to choose from. It's almost like they wanted Obama to win. He wins, we get a Democrat majority, and Arlen Specter moves over to guarantee it. Obama gets into office and backs out on many of his most supported policies, bails out more banks, bails out auto companies, bails out newspapers.

Are the two parties working together to keep things in balance? Could the fear of bank failures or foreign takeovers have driven our government to decide we needed a president who was expected to bailout banks? Why don't we have more political parties by now?

Maybe, just maybe, the illusion of an epic battle of parties is what keeps us in line. Two parties who, despite the differences present in every man, woman, and child on earth, somehow agree with each other on the broadest and most random array of issues. It keeps us arguing, and the government machine keeps rolling forward with our without our urging, because no matter what we, the people, believe, you can always find a consensus with everyone argues.

It's probably crazy, untrue, and downright loony, and I'm sure I'm not the first person to think of it, but it is at the least food for thought.

I suspect a lot of politicians hold massive corporate interests, particularly in those banks that were "bailed out." This was all orchestrated, even if unintentionally - hard left groups like ACORN and diversity Nazis pressured Dems in congress to mandate the solicitation of garbage loans while politicians in bed with real estate companies simultaneously inflated real estate prices. The Dems in turned "pressured" Bush to sign these reformations into law. This was a bubble that was bound to burst. I also suspect someone made a shitload of money off of this whole "economic crisis." Note how most of the stimulus money hasn't made it to where it was promised to go. Also note the egregious payouts to the CEOs and execs of many financial companies. The favor was probably returned to those bastard politicians at some point.

The truth must be revealed to the public about these people running our country. Psychopaths thrive and seek power in political circles, readily toying with our personal and economic futures for their own personal benefit. Bernie Madoff is an obvious one that comes to mind. But Democrats, despite their heroic appeal, are just as guilty. Trade unions and radical fringe groups heavily finance their campaigns and keep their lives quite comfortable as well. And check out the whole George Soros deal with the oil companies in Brazil. Tell me Barack Obama is still about "hope" and "change."
_________________

[sheilalynn]

Wow, am I the only dyed in the wool Republican that ended up over in the blue box?

[paulwall9]

HAHA, great post sheilalynn!

[sgreger1]

You didn't include an option for third parties. A libertarian doesn't fit any of those, really.

Well, I am for the most part a libertarian, but the party as a whole is kind of devided. Some libertarians believe they are left of center, some believe the party is right of center. If you are a libertarian just choose left/right of center

[sagedil]

Exactly where I expected (Have done this before)

[sgreger1]

I'm starting to think my political party is going to soon be Conspiracy Theorist. Some of the things going on in government just don't add up.

* Republicans are the party of choice and reason, yet scientific advances are often thrust aside in favor of religious concepts
* Democrats are the party of social programs, yet Barack Obama is still allowing extraordinary rendition and has not altered the timetable on the Iraq pullout
* Republicans would NEVER think to socialize banks, yet George W Bush did the first bank bailout (and Obama followed up with more)
* Arlen Specter moved over the the Dems at exactly the right time to give them a filibuster proof majority, which is a huge slap in the face to the Republican party
* Most of the people I know who believe in the right to quality foods, no forced immunizations or medications, etc are Republicans, yet it is the Republicans who pass the most laws empowering the drug companies and additive/chemical companies

Seriously, what the hell is up with this?

It makes me wonder...George W Bush, nearly out of the blue, decides to bail out the banks. This was something so far out of the party line that it was extraordinary. Then we get to the next election, and the Republican party puts in (forgive me for saying this) a total dolt for the position of VP, when they had a slew of stronger candidates to choose from. It's almost like they wanted Obama to win. He wins, we get a Democrat majority, and Arlen Specter moves over to guarantee it. Obama gets into office and backs out on many of his most supported policies, bails out more banks, bails out auto companies, bails out newspapers.

Are the two parties working together to keep things in balance? Could the fear of bank failures or foreign takeovers have driven our government to decide we needed a president who was expected to bailout banks? Why don't we have more political parties by now?

Maybe, just maybe, the illusion of an epic battle of parties is what keeps us in line. Two parties who, despite the differences present in every man, woman, and child on earth, somehow agree with each other on the broadest and most random array of issues. It keeps us arguing, and the government machine keeps rolling forward with our without our urging, because no matter what we, the people, believe, you can always find a consensus with everyone argues.

It's probably crazy, untrue, and downright loony, and I'm sure I'm not the first person to think of it, but it is at the least food for thought.

This... was ****ing beautifull. Its so true, they have to be working together, it only makes sense. It seems that they are bought and sold before they even get into office. Like Obama who campaigned for going line by line and eliminating pork etc, and once elected immediately gives huge corporate bailouts to the banks etc.

He demonizes evil corporations and rich people with one hand, and then with the other gives the largest corporations billions and gives rich executive million dollar bonuses etc.

This has to be part of an orchestrated plan. I think multinational companies have hijacked our country, and we need to load up the rifles and take it back.