What's your party affiliation and why?

[Grounded]

What's your party affiliation and why?

[johnflesh]

I'm a moderate conservative as I align more with conservatives than I do liberals but I do see benefit from both party lines.

It would be irresponsible of me to give myself to one side since they both share corruption, underhanded methods, lying, but they also hold elements that make a lot of sense if they could just come together and work instead of pitting one another against.

[Rokerijdude11]

I dont affiliate with any party ......the 2 party, electoral vote system, is far far outdated... and does not represent the will of the people

the only way we will achieve any change in the status quo is by looking to a 3rd party....outside of the current failed system

[vyo476]

I dont affiliate with any party ......the 2 party, electoral vote system, is far far outdated... and does not represent the will of the people

the only way we will achieve any change in the status quo is by looking to a 3rd party....outside of the current failed system

Personally, I think the whole "party" system is just an invitation for corruption. Even a third party would eventually be subject to that kind of thing. We've seen it before - the Democratic-Republican Party in Jefferson's time was the first administration to adhere strictly to the ideals of democracy (and not ignore them whenever they felt like it); by 1826 the Democratic-Republicans were scattered and corrupt and had to resort to extreme smear tactics to keep Jackson (ironically a Dem-Rep himself) out of the White House. The Republican Party, which won its first election in 1860, was all about idealism - and by 1876 they were willing to trade their principles for another election victory.

Whenever an idealistic new party emerges and the people vote it in, eventually it succumbs to corruption. I think we should try to dismantle the party system altogether and make all candidates run independently. Really, what's the need for the parties, anyway?

[Sgt Schultz]

I don't belong to any political party. I vote depending for the candidate who's overall position best reflects mine even if I may disagree with them on one issue or another. The two party system to me doesn't offer the public much choice and leads to too much corruption and consolidation of power within the government.

[Rokerijdude11]

I don't belong to any political party. I vote depending for the candidate who's overall position best reflects mine even if I may disagree with them on one issue or another. The two party system to me doesn't offer the public much choice and leads to too much corruption and consolidation of power within the government.

I agree this is how i too vote.... whomever best represents my position, gets the vote

[Rokerijdude11]

Personally, I think the whole "party" system is just an invitation for corruption. Even a third party would eventually be subject to that kind of thing. We've seen it before - the Democratic-Republican Party in Jefferson's time was the first administration to adhere strictly to the ideals of democracy (and not ignore them whenever they felt like it); by 1826 the Democratic-Republicans were scattered and corrupt and had to resort to extreme smear tactics to keep Jackson (ironically a Dem-Rep himself) out of the White House. The Republican Party, which won its first election in 1860, was all about idealism - and by 1876 they were willing to trade their principles for another election victory.

Whenever an idealistic new party emerges and the people vote it in, eventually it succumbs to corruption. I think we should try to dismantle the party system altogether and make all candidates run independently. Really, what's the need for the parties, anyway?
I agree with the probability for corruption......but it is a way to move away from the failed system we currently use

[vyo476]

I agree with the probability for corruption......but it is a way to move away from the failed system we currently use

As a step towards a full deconstruction of the party system? Good point. Trying to dismantle the whole thing in one step would be a bit chaotic, I suppose. An intermediary step (or perhaps several) would make the transition easier.

Only problem is: how do you make sure your new party doesn't succumb to corruption before making that transition?

[Rokerijdude11]

As a step towards a full deconstruction of the party system? Good point. Trying to dismantle the whole thing in one step would be a bit chaotic, I suppose. An intermediary step (or perhaps several) would make the transition easier.

Only problem is: how do you make sure your new party doesn't succumb to corruption before making that transition?

Thats the Rub..................i dont have the end all answer?

[vyo476]

Thats the Rub..................i dont have the end all answer?

No one does. This is the classic problem with communism, too - they never managed that intermediary step between capitalism and the decentralized, government-less system that Marx saw as "true Communism." They always got stuck at the step in between, where the government takes over everything and starts shuffling things around to make sure everyone gets a piece of the eventual pie. Unfortunately, that huge government always brought huge corruption and when it came time to let go of all that power, no one would.

I'm afraid we'd wind up in a similar situation if we were to attempt a transition to a no-party system. That singular party in charge of the government as the other parties are dismantled would be awfully tempted to maintain itself once its chief enemies, the other parties, are gone.

[Justinian]

I'm a Paleocon currently in the GOP but things might change in the future. The constitution party is appealing more to me.

[Bunz]

I am a left leaning independant. I dont like the overall views of either party and the two party system bothers me to no end. Its 6 of one or half a dozen of the other. Plus the one thing both the parties seem to agree on is squashing an rising third party candidate.
The whole concept of a party (team as I like to call it) is not democratic in its practice as members of one caucus are often pressuring thier own members to either support legislation they wouldnt otherwise support or reject legislation they would. Often intra-party politics dominate behind the scenes in capital cities all across the USA, this is harmful to the voters ultimately. We need to stop electing people by party and take a close hard look at thier individual politcs. I often vote for either party in the same election.

[JavaBlack]

I'm a liberal independent... but a de facto Democrat. The Democrats come closest to my political philosophy... but at the same time they are so far away. It's the bummer of coalition. As a liberal I must compromise with "illiberals' and protectionist-isolationists, ultimately hoping my way wins out. But the alternative is joining forces with monoculturalists, social cons, and corporate-capitalist ideologues.

[qalam]

I am an Independent working with Unity08 to try and give the American people an alternative to 2 party system. My ideology would be considered to be way Left, but what do they know they think a democrat is a leftist.

[lipmonkey]

I don't have any loyalty to a party or an agenda. I base my vote on who comes closest to representing my views on the issues.

I registered with the Green Party in my state so they could be represented on our ballot on election day.

I'm fiscal conservative, socially liberal, and consider myself an Independent.

[ilikeboobs]

I guess I'd have to classify myself as a constitutionalist.

If I had my way, I'd repeal some of the constitutional amendments we have (for instance, I think only property owners should have the right to vote). And I'd make this government so small and I'd take us back to isolationism (like George Washington advised).

No offense to anyone here.

But since that's simply a pipe dream, I usually end up voting for the republican party - even though it makes my skin crawl to do so.
:cool:

[ChairmanMeow]

When I registered to vote, I decided to join the Pacific Green Party (which is the Green Party counterpart of Oregon.) I became a member of the Green Party mainly because I agree with green philosophy and just didn’t want to be a democrat. Although speaking in ideology, I am a Socialist Reformist.

[drippinhun]

I'm an independant that holds disdain for most Democrats and their spineless panderings. However, all I see the Republicans, especially the neo-con branch, to be good for is to pull the lever on the toilet bowl or dry them out and use them as fertilizer.

I can't stand the likes of Hillary or Obama. But after constantly countering the vile ignorance of right wingers on the chat board I frequent, I've decided I can hold my nose and vote for any Democrat candidate if it means I can help wrestle the White House from the party that is ruining our nation at high speed.

[PoliticalGrrrl]

Right leaning Libertarian.

[Coyote]

Green leaning Independent

[dragonfly5]

Democrat and proud of it!

[USMC the Almighty]

Democrat and proud of it!

Don't know exactly what there is to be proud of.

[9sublime]

Don't know exactly what there is to be proud of.

Yeah, but I think you'd have to say the same about the Republican party too now...

I don't even know where I stand anymore. I continually loose faith in every political party, every political system and ideology.

I want the government out of my home, but I want to help the less fortunate too... so I suppose I'm some kind of sociolibertarian if we're going to go into classification here.

[USMC the Almighty]

Yeah, but I think you'd have to say the same about the Republican party too now...

Most definitely. Comedian Lewis Black put it best: "Democrats -- the party of no ideas. Republicans -- the party of bad ideas." The only thing politicians in either party are concerned with is getting re-elected.


I don't even know where I stand anymore. I continually loose faith in every political party, every political system and ideology.

See, I haven't lost faith in the conservative ideology. I still believe the core philosophy of minimal government interference, strong defense, secure borders, states' rights, low taxes, entrepreneurship, and job creation is the best suited for 21st century solutions. The problem is how far the Republicans have drifted from this philosophy.

I want the government out of my home, but I want to help the less fortunate too... so I suppose I'm some kind of sociolibertarian if we're going to go into classification here.

Well that's quite a paradox you've got here sublime.

[9sublime]

Well that's quite a paradox you've got here sublime.

Indeed, I need some time to think my stances through.

[dragonfly5]

Most definitely. Comedian Lewis Black put it best: "Democrats -- the party of no ideas. Republicans -- the party of bad ideas." The only thing politicians in either party are concerned with is getting re-elected.


I think "no ideas" trumps "bad ideas" everytime. :D

[USMC the Almighty]

I think "no ideas" trumps "bad ideas" everytime. :D

Haha, at least it shows the Republicans are trying.

[Bunz]

Haha, at least it shows the Republicans are trying.

You might be onto something there Jarhead. Except that its nothing but lip service. They squandered thier opportunity to actually do something on several issues when they controlled the government. Putting foreign policy aside, no real action on immigration, Social security is in limbo, etc etc.

Its time to minimize the influence the parties wield.

[USMC the Almighty]

You might be onto something there Jarhead. Except that its nothing but lip service. They squandered thier opportunity to actually do something on several issues when they controlled the government. Putting foreign policy aside, no real action on immigration, Social security is in limbo, etc etc.

Its time to minimize the influence the parties wield.

Right on all account, Bunz.