Poll: Where do you disagree with your party and agree with another

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
39,421
32,931
136
What is your party affiliation?

One issue where you disagree with your party.

One issue where you agree with another party.

I'll go first

Democrat

Disagree: Immigration. I want the borders locked down first and stop the benefits for illegals.

Agree: Parental notification on underage child getting an abortion
 

Xavier434

Lifer
Oct 14, 2002
10,373
1
0
I wish Obama was more into Nuclear. I know he does not oppose it, but he doesn't talk about it as much as I would prefer. I do not support how aggressive McCain is when it comes to Nuclear, but I do wish Obama showed more support for it.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
I'm neither a republican nor a democrat, I'm a small government, fiscally conservative, social progressive. Apparently there is no party for that combination of thinking.....

Agree with republicans on immigration and taxes, disagree with them on the war, government powers (fisa etc).

Agree with dems on healthcare reform, disagree on opposition to personal responsibility and socialist wealth redistribution mentality.
 

SP33Demon

Lifer
Jun 22, 2001
27,928
143
106
Originally posted by: Xavier434
I wish Obama was more into Nuclear. I know he does not oppose it, but he doesn't talk about it as much as I would prefer. I do not support how aggressive McCain is when it comes to Nuclear, but I do wish Obama showed more support for it.
What more do you want him to say about it? Before expanding, he wants to investigate if there are better ways to mitigate the nuclear waste as opposed to shooting it into space. I don't think that's unreasonable, whereas McCain wants to charge headfirst without thinking about the consequences because he served on ships that were powered by it. lawl.

Sen. Barack Obama tells crowds that his policy "as president, I will tap our natural gas reserves, invest in clean coal technology and find ways to safely harness nuclear power."

Obama does say that nuclear fuel and waste security, waste storage, and proliferation must be taken into account "before an expansion of nuclear power is considered".

 

jackschmittusa

Diamond Member
Apr 16, 2003
5,972
1
0
I have no party affiliation, but my "live and let live" attitude puts me left of center.

I think there are hundreds of gun control laws that are useless at best, and interfere with the rights of law-abiding citizens at worst.

Illegal immigrants are criminals and should be treated as such.

I like trees and whales and all, but some of the enviro-nuts are too far out there.

Political correctness is BS. Speak your mind. If you are condemned for it by your peers, it is the social price you pay for free speech. But you should not be penalized with loss of job or other punitive measures.

Welfare should only be thought of as a temporary measure to bridge extraordinary circumstances.

Any policy that involves reverse discrimination has outlived any usefulness it may have had. Discrimination against minorities made something of a case for corrective measures, but people who were affected have had ample opportunity to take advantage of such measures. Any who feel that they have been discriminated against in more recent times have numerous legal remedies available if there is sufficient evidence.
 

AstroManLuca

Lifer
Jun 24, 2004
15,628
5
81
Poll?

Regardless, I'm a Democrat, but I agree with the Republican stances on expanding nuclear energy and protecting 2nd Amendment rights.
 

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,995
1,688
126
Liberal - but I'll make the arguments as though I was a Democrat

Agree - Abuse of Eminent Domain; the government should not be allowed to take your property because it's in the way of a new Wal-Mart. Tort reform; excessive financial rewards have had corrosive effects on the legal system and commerce. On the other hand, I don't support eliminating them entirely - that seems like a sledge hammer approach. There needs to be common sense guidelines for determining financial rewards.

Disagree - Israel. How in the world can you pledge unconditional support for an external state? This is reprehensible and is done solely to satiate The AIPAC pro-Israel lobby.
 

Xavier434

Lifer
Oct 14, 2002
10,373
1
0
Originally posted by: SP33Demon
Originally posted by: Xavier434
I wish Obama was more into Nuclear. I know he does not oppose it, but he doesn't talk about it as much as I would prefer. I do not support how aggressive McCain is when it comes to Nuclear, but I do wish Obama showed more support for it.
What more do you want him to say about it? Before expanding, he wants to investigate if there are better ways to mitigate the nuclear waste as opposed to shooting it into space. I don't think that's unreasonable, whereas McCain wants to charge headfirst without thinking about the consequences because he served on ships that were powered by it. lawl.

Sen. Barack Obama tells crowds that his policy "as president, I will tap our natural gas reserves, invest in clean coal technology and find ways to safely harness nuclear power."

Obama does say that nuclear fuel and waste security, waste storage, and proliferation must be taken into account "before an expansion of nuclear power is considered".

Don't get me wrong. I support Obama's energy plan over McCain's plan. I know he supports Nuclear and I agree with a lot of his logic when it comes to energy as a whole. I guess what I am really looking for is that extra nudge when it comes to Nuclear which may already exist and I only feel the way I do because I missed a key speech of his or article or something. Who knows?

What I like more about Obama's plan is that he appears to be dividing his dependencies more than McCain when it comes to the overall solution. I think that is the right way to go.
 

GTKeeper

Golden Member
Apr 14, 2005
1,118
0
0
I consider myself independent, fiscally conservative.


Republicans:

Agree: No child left behind is a good first step in making schools accountable for bad performance. Where the program needs improvement though is it should be on a teacher/classroom basis. Good teachers quit all the time because they are underpaid, and the only way to get a raise as a teacher is more degrees + years of service. Also a GOOD teacher in a BAD school should still be paid well, and not be penalized if 90% of other teachers suck. Tenure is a ridiculous notion. They day you stink it up as a teacher, is the day the firing process should begin. The teacher's union needs major reform. Case and point: if a state wants to pay all teachers more, it can't, because of the union and it would be 'unfair' to all other teachers. I call bs.

Disagree: Iraq War, major deficit spending, creation of Department of Homeland Security. A 100 billion dollar WASTE imho.

Democrats:

Agree: They want to pump serious money into US infrastructure. We need this badly, and investing in our own nation first is the way to go. During a time of recession it will allow some people to be employed, a good idea.

Disagree:

Immigration - as an immigrant myself who has been naturalized, I find it really disheartening that there is even talk of 'amnesty' .... I just want illegals to start paying taxes, when they do, they can stay.

Health Care - instead of going gun - ho about UHC, lets first find out WHY THE HELL DO WE SPEND SO MUCH MONEY! Seems like a logical approach. Lets spend less than 500 million to investigate why everything is so expensive before we start addressing the problem. I hate this whole idea of solutions without understanding the problems first.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,808
83
91
I'm technically a republican.... I disagree with basically their entire domestic agenda, but lean neocon when it comes to foreign policy.
 

Farang

Lifer
Jul 7, 2003
10,913
3
0
I'm voting Democrat this cycle, so..

Republicans: I hate how they cut taxes for the rich.
Democrats: I wish they wouldn't raise my taxes when I'm rich.
 

Xavier434

Lifer
Oct 14, 2002
10,373
1
0
Originally posted by: GTKeeper
Disagree:

Immigration - as an immigrant myself who has been naturalized, I find it really disheartening that there is even talk of 'amnesty' .... I just want illegals to start paying taxes, when they do, they can stay.

A part of making that work is making it easier for our current illegal immigrants to become legal citizens so that they can stop being paid under the table everywhere they go. I don't want to lower the bar for all of them to the point of nothing and I don't want criminals whose crimes go well beyond illegal immigration, but I think at this point we are so deep in over our heads that it would just be best to make the process easier and "grandfather" a lot of them in based on something more simple while raising the bar a lot on all new immigrants who have yet to come here.

I realize that many of these immigrants who get grandfathered in are not the most productive of people, but the fact of the matter is we are already paying for them anyways and we will never be hunting them down and sending them home. It is also true that many of their kids have shown to have a much better shot an exceeding their parents as it stands with our current system. However, that doesn't do us much good if we keep letting new illegals into our states. We need to put an end to that part and raise the bar on our standards for the new ones.

From there, time should heal the wounds.
 

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
26,353
1,862
126
I'm a Democrat

I disagree with government hand outs, Welfare, etc.... I think that anybody who is capable of working, should work. They should work minimum wage if they can't get a good job.

Now, people who make minimum wage, but can't afford to support their families should be entitled to safe/secure housing, and food enough to keep their families from going hungry. So I don't want to totally cut off government hand outs, I just want people to at least try to earn their keep.

 

Xavier434

Lifer
Oct 14, 2002
10,373
1
0
Originally posted by: BurnItDwn
I'm a Democrat

I disagree with government hand outs, Welfare, etc.... I think that anybody who is capable of working, should work. They should work minimum wage if they can't get a good job.

Now, people who make minimum wage, but can't afford to support their families should be entitled to safe/secure housing, and food enough to keep their families from going hungry. So I don't want to totally cut off government hand outs, I just want people to at least try to earn their keep.

Even if I were single with no dependents, I would not be able to afford to live even in the lowest of housing in my area on a minimum wage job. Far from it in fact. In regards to single people, I would agree with you if we fixed the wage problems, but if I am not mistaken the vast majority of those on welfare are not single. If the greater majority of them were single the problem would be 10 times easier.
 

Stuxnet

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2005
8,392
1
0
Libertarian

Agree: Damn near everything

Disagree: The government should play a larger role in infrastructure than a pure Libertarian might suggest. I'm also a very strong supporter of Capitalism, but total deregulation is a fantasy not unlike Communism. Sounds great on paper, but totally unrealistic.

Agree with Other Party:

Since my believes are a little more closely aligned with REAL Republicans, I'll cite Democrats as the "other" party. On that note, I agree with them on Capital Punishment. However, the Libertarian in me would kill the man who harmed my family, so I don't have a need for CP anyway.

Does that count?
 

retrospooty

Platinum Member
Apr 3, 2002
2,031
74
86
I am a democrat. I disagree with the dems stance on...

1. Drilling for Oil - just do it now as a bridge to get us over the next decade until the next thing becomes a viable alternative (as long as we are heavily investing in the next thing)
2. Welfare (if you are able you should work - cant find job? Do govt work for your welfare check).
3. Nancy Pelosi - WTF?

 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,858
10,167
136
Originally posted by: HomerJS
What is your party affiliation?

I started off Republican, the ideals of power in the hands of the people - the tenant of conservatism against government expanse appeals to me.

One issue where you disagree with your party.

They betrayed their own stated tenants. I oppose the Patriot Act.

One issue where you agree with another party.

They oppose the Patriot Act, or at least claim to. I support repealing it, but I doubt they will.

Hmm, what do I agree on with Democrats.... that's a difficult one when the entire campaign is centralization of power.

Oh, I know. No one who lives here should be forced to hide in the shadows. No person living in our nation should be disenfranchised. Keep them out, kick them out, or treat them equally under the law. Democrats completely fail at the first two, but they have the third part covered ? unless you want to mention the fairness doctrine.
 
May 16, 2000
13,522
0
0
I have no party affiliation because parties inherently inhibit democracy. They are unnecessary, dangerous, and moreover incapable of actually representing someone completely anyway as no two persons are likely to ever agree on everything.

But to continue your game, I will list a number of parties and where they fall short in my mind, including a comment on one theory/aspect of the party which they claim to adhere to, but in practice do not:

Democrats:
Agree - The military should be GREATLY reduced. I'm being gracious on this one, since we haven't seen any active movement on this policy issue in at least 8 years. However, over the course of several decades it's one of the issues that Democrats have generally stayed strong on. Military spending is out of control, and a military focus is largely corrupting/defeating.
Disagree - Gun control is good, right, and effective. In point of fact, it is largely ineffective, an abuse of our rights, and generally a bad thing for all involved. Rational regulation isn't inherently bad, but control/abolishment is.
Lie - They stand against the practices of other political ideologies like those of Republicans. In point of fact they almost consistently vote in FAVOR of Republican policies including the Patriot Act, authorization of broad military powers, expanding executive power, corporate bailouts, etc. At least enough do that there is no meaningful opposition or counter to conservative policies.

Republicans:
Agree - Capital Punishment is necessary, strict punishment for committing crimes. Although it has been shown to not actually reduce the overall amount of crime, it does remove the worst offenders (at least in theory), thus preventing things from getting worse. Unless the government turns it's support to empowering individual citizens to remove dangerous criminals permanently, it has to step up as the agent of action and work to protect its citizens.
Disagree - Opposition of labor unions. While it's true that such organizations often become corrupted, the goal of unions is completely laudable and vitally important. Unless government takes an active role against wealth as power, and against corporate corruption and exploitive business practices someone else has to. The ONLY group which has been a successful counter to business abuses is unions.
Lie - Less government is what they work towards. An absolute core ideology of the party, it has been eroded over the years until the party is now FAR more expansionist than even Democrats. Republicans expand the physical size of government, government spending, and government power.

Libertarian:
Agree - Victimless crimes, or crimes purely of morality/ideology, should not be regulated by the government. While there are health concerns concerning prostitution and drugs, they can be addressed through rational regulation instead of criminalization.
Disagree - Taxation is bad. Taxation is not only good, it's an absolute necessity. The level of taxation is questionable, the manner of taxation is debatable, the best agents of collection and distribution are perhaps unknowable - but some taxation is an absolute requirement for a nation to exist.
Lie - Laissez-faire capitalism taken to the extreme supports individual rights. While it's true that government interference in anything runs in opposition to the less is better philosophy, in business and economic matters it is a necessary evil in order to combat greed and the power of wealth. Because those without wealth are wholly at the mercy of those with wealth, and those with wealth generally act in ways harmful to those without, some more powerful balancing force must stand for the poor unless they are otherwise empowered to do so themselves.

Constitution:
Agree - The United States rights and role ends at our border. Noninterventionism is a far preferable international policy.
Disagree - Opposition of pornography . This stances immediately prove that they do not support our founding ideas and documents. Opposition is an abuse of our rights to free speech, and personal pursuit of happiness.
Lie - They defend the principles of our founding documents and forefathers. In point of fact, the rampant zealotry of the party is in direct opposition to our origins. America was not founded as a Christian nation, and was absolutely established with safeguards to prevent the mixing of religious and political powers.

Green:
Agree - The environment/ecology is of central importance to our existence, and the government MUST step up as the agent of action in it's protection.
Disagree - Non-violence doesn't work, however beautiful of a dream it may be. Violence is sometimes necessary and preparation to do violence is required to make it effective.
Lie - I was in a hurry and didn't come up with a good example for this, i'll get back to it later.
 

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
26,353
1,862
126
Originally posted by: Xavier434
Originally posted by: BurnItDwn
I'm a Democrat

I disagree with government hand outs, Welfare, etc.... I think that anybody who is capable of working, should work. They should work minimum wage if they can't get a good job.

Now, people who make minimum wage, but can't afford to support their families should be entitled to safe/secure housing, and food enough to keep their families from going hungry. So I don't want to totally cut off government hand outs, I just want people to at least try to earn their keep.

Even if I were single with no dependents, I would not be able to afford to live even in the lowest of housing in my area on a minimum wage job. Far from it in fact. In regards to single people, I would agree with you if we fixed the wage problems, but if I am not mistaken the vast majority of those on welfare are not single. If the greater majority of them were single the problem would be 10 times easier.

I guess my entire point is that the welfare money should go to people who DO work but don't make enough to make ends meet. People who don't work shouldn't get benefits unless they are disabled to a point where they can not work.
 

Xavier434

Lifer
Oct 14, 2002
10,373
1
0
Originally posted by: BurnItDwn
Originally posted by: Xavier434
Even if I were single with no dependents, I would not be able to afford to live even in the lowest of housing in my area on a minimum wage job. Far from it in fact. In regards to single people, I would agree with you if we fixed the wage problems, but if I am not mistaken the vast majority of those on welfare are not single. If the greater majority of them were single the problem would be 10 times easier.

I guess my entire point is that the welfare money should go to people who DO work but don't make enough to make ends meet. People who don't work shouldn't get benefits unless they are disabled to a point where they can not work.

Well, I agree with you conceptually, but the truth is that the solutions necessary to fix welfare do not involve changing welfare. At least, not until the very end. Welfare and social services like it act as a band aid solution to the real problems such as education, the lack of available jobs which pay better money that a lot of these people could do like manufacturing which are now mostly overseas, health care costs, and wages that do not reflect the increases in costs of living. Once we fix the real problems then we will be in a position to start making slow changes to social services like welfare. We will never be able to do that though unless the country starts putting their money where their mouth is when it comes to the real problems.
 

quest55720

Golden Member
Nov 3, 2004
1,339
0
0
I agree with the republicans who believe in small government and low taxes. I believe this government gets plenty of money just needs to spend it better.

I disagree with Republican party when it comes to the RR. From prayer in school to abortion I disagree with the RR.

The democrats I agree with the moderates on abortion and other social issues.

I disagree with the democrats on immigration, energy, taxes and social spending.
 

badnewcastle

Golden Member
Jun 30, 2004
1,016
0
0
Republican

Disagree with just about every way any politician is tied to donations...

Disagree with GOP/Bush:
1) No child left behind act.
2) The Bailout (I know many were against but they stay signed on in the end)
3) Waste of money and time trying to amend the constitution to ban gay marriage, stem-cell research and other things they do for the religious right.
4) Stimulous packages for the most part of any kind for example the one we all received in spring 08.
5) Imagration

Agree Dems:
1) Their support for Israel