Why are the posters on P&N so far to the left?

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
What democrats fail to concede is that unless they have enough votes to override, they will get very little done in 2 years if they manage to get a majority.

My guess is if the Dems get a majority, Bush will be going to the VETO stamp store.

I agree, though I think D.C. gridlock is generally a good thing. It's our only hope for restraining spending and slowing the growth of big government. The downside is America will probably have to wait until 2008 to start repairing the damage caused by the Bush administration and his Congressional lap dogs.

 

[GoPackGo]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
What democrats fail to concede is that unless they have enough votes to override, they will get very little done in 2 years if they manage to get a majority.

My guess is if the Dems get a majority, Bush will be going to the VETO stamp store.

I agree, though I think D.C. gridlock is generally a good thing. It's our only hope for restraining spending and slowing the growth of big government. The downside is America will probably have to wait until 2008 to start repairing the damage caused by the Bush administration and his Congressional lap dogs.

I read somewhere once that Gridlock is Good for America.

Perhaps thats the real reason the 90s were so good?

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: sandorski
The further Right one goes, the more Left everyone else appears.

Hahaha... so true.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Topic Title: Why are the posters on P&N so far to the left?

Because the right wingers keep getting banninated. :beer::beer:

 

[daveymark]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
[ ... ]
LET'S GET OFF SPECIFIC ISSUES AND BACK TO THE BIG PICTURE THOUGH OR ELSE THIS WILL TURN INTO EVERY OTHER THREAD. I THINK WE ARE DOING GOOD SO FAR

I did post a message specifically addressing your big picture, and you ignored it. Instead, you've mostly responded to the specific issue examples, a list you introduced to the thread I believe.

And you set up the straw man to create it. The only reason you wanted him to post examples was so you could rebut them, when this isn't supposed to be a debate on the issues.

Anyone who thinks this forum is not left leaning is not reading the threads. The fact is, for every conservative post made, there are 5 liberal posts made in response. There's nothing wrong with that, either. It's just a result of the liberals not being in control of the white house. The ratio was the exact oposite when Clinton was in the whitehouse. The losing side is always going to be louder.

 

[Painman]

I gave up posting in here a while ago because it is too often just a pissing and poo-flinging contest. I agree with what has been expressed with many posters already that the percieved "leftist" skew of the place has to do with dissatisfaction and backlash re: the current administration and its direction. But I'm sick and tired of this "leftist" frame that gets put out there. Does anyone here (particularly American contributors) really understand what constitutes "leftism"?

I'll direct P&N readers to this essay - it's quite long and takes time to get through, but it gets to the heart of what is really "left" and what is really "right" as far as the global spectrum of political ideology goes, in both fiscal and social ideology. It purports (and I agree) that in America, there really isn't much of a "left wing" and purports also that "liberalism" is the centrist position, when one steps back and examines the full continuum.

If one would like to pigeon-hole me ideologically, the term "liberal" more or less fits me within the context of that article, which really just paints me as a pragmatic relativist. I'm OK with that.

And for the record, I'm 38 - not old, though not exactly young any longer.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: sandorski
The further Right one goes, the more Left everyone else appears.

Right... :roll:

Oil protests
Vegans/PETA
Gay weddings
Gun laws
Government spending at 35% gdp (5% in 1920)

These were all things of the past...
Looks like people are moving left not right...

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: sandorski
The further Right one goes, the more Left everyone else appears.

Right... :roll:

Oil protests
Vegans/PETA
Gay weddings
Gun laws
Government spending at 35% gdp (5% in 1920)

These were all things of the past...
Looks like people are moving left not right...

More like, Forward.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: sandorski
The further Right one goes, the more Left everyone else appears.

Right... :roll:

Oil protests
Vegans/PETA
Gay weddings
Gun laws
Government spending at 35% gdp (5% in 1920)

These were all things of the past...
Looks like people are moving left not right...

More like, Forward.

Merely pointing out who are changing...
I wasn't endorsing any of the above.

Unfortunately you have.

 

[daveymark]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: sandorski
The further Right one goes, the more Left everyone else appears.

Right... :roll:

Oil protests
Vegans/PETA
Gay weddings
Gun laws
Government spending at 35% gdp (5% in 1920)

These were all things of the past...
Looks like people are moving left not right...

More like, Forward.

Merely pointing out who are changing...
I wasn't endorsing any of the above.

Unfortunately you have.

ZING! :laugh:

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: sandorski
The further Right one goes, the more Left everyone else appears.

Right... :roll:

Oil protests
Vegans/PETA
Gay weddings
Gun laws
Government spending at 35% gdp (5% in 1920)

These were all things of the past...
Looks like people are moving left not right...

More like, Forward.

Merely pointing out who are changing...
I wasn't endorsing any of the above.

Unfortunately you have.

Things change.

 

[eleison]

ProfJohn,

Anandtech is to the left because all the conservatives got tired arguing with the liberals and they either tend to lurk or just don't visit the political forum anymore. I've been reading the stuff you wrote... and the debates you get into... frustrating isn't it when debating a liberal? Like most conservative, I'm sure you will give up and fade away. Hopefully, some other conservative will come along and pick up the slack. That's how its seems to be like.

Also, don't you notice how repetitive the liberals are?The liberals keep on arguing the same points, e.g., Bush is evil... Iraq is evil (yet, they don't even have an answer if we should get out or not.. just that its evil)... The republicans suck.. Democracts are the best... etc... by the way, Bush sucks... etc.. It gets boring and conservatives, after a while, just don't care.

-Eleison

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: eleison
ProfJohn,

Anandtech is to the left because all the conservatives got tired arguing with the liberals and they either tend to lurk or just don't visit the political forum anymore. I've been reading the stuff you wrote... and the debates you get into... frustrating isn't it when debating a liberal? Like most conservative, I'm sure you will give up and fade away. Hopefully, some other conservative will come along and pick up the slack. That's how its seems to be like.

Also, don't you notice how repetitive the liberals are?The liberals keep on arguing the same points, e.g., Bush is evil... Iraq is evil (yet, they don't even have an answer if we should get out or not.. just that its evil)... The republicans suck.. Democracts are the best... etc... by the way, Bush sucks... etc.. It gets boring and conservatives, after a while, just don't care.

-Eleison

The opposite is as true(even more that I can see) the other way. "Conservatives" are just more likely to Cut and Run I spose.

 

[Steeplerot]

Far left...yeah right.

Anyone here admit they are even a socialist..ever?

Go to far left forums sometime, you may even meet a real communist.

This place is just another type of amd/intel debate fanboi pissing match debating mostly mainstream us news gossip.

oh yeah and Bowfingers post starting with "I think your premise is flawed on many fronts." on the bottom of page 2 = /thread

The premise of the question is flawed and your sources suck.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Uhtrinity
Perhaps most of us are actually in the middle and you are so far to the right .... that's my take. Blame it all on the whole, "if your not with us mentality", if you keep pushing everyone away while you move farther to the right you will make everyone else the 'liberals' you despise. FYI I consider myself slightly off center to the left.

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
Dave...I dont think of you as Left-Wing...where does that put me ?

Like Trinity I used to consider myself slightly left of center but thanks to the radicals that have ruined the Country I seem so far left I might as well be off the planet.

I would consider you right of center, you occasionally have a center opinion but most of the time side with the radicals.

I live in Minnesota and the example of the taxis at the airport push me to the far right a bit.

Its like the Democrats here are against a full four year college for my city, despite the fact we have over 100000 people now and are the third largest city in the state.

We had Jesse Ventura as governor several years ago and he gave away so much money that it put the state way in the red.

The economy was in the tank so the legislature really couldnt raise taxes anymore so they had to cut spending to bring us back to even.

Now the Dems are blaming him for cutting education spending. What choice did the state government have? Lots of spending got cut.

The economy has improved here and we now are looking at having a tax surplus so some of that funding should be restored.

So I would say the Minnesota Republicans are doing OK.

I see no need to establish an entirely new university just because rochester is now the third largest city in the state.

 

[miketheidiot]

i could say something about people hear being a bit more informed, but eh? wtf

 

[Czar]

The forum used to be balanced, alot more balanced, expecialy when Clinton was president. Then we had what I call real conservatives, people who wanted less government, wanted more responsibility from the government, wanted more personal freedoms. The current US covernment does not reprisent them at all even though they both call themselves republicangs. Those people have either left the forum, speak against the current US gov so they seem left to people who support them or they have turned liberterian.

 

[AutumnRayne]

I consider myself more middle of the road, although in recent years I have been moving in a more left direction. Funny thing is I am 25, raised in a smallish southern town, right in the middle of the bible belt. I grew up in a hugely republican town. I did support republicans, for a time. However I think the republican party today has moved to the far right. The further right they move, the more they push me to the left. I am very disturbed by the republican's trend to label everyone that doesn't agree with them as a liberal. I am also beyond sick of them using 9/11 as an excuse to terrorize the country. I've never cared much for Bush/Cheney, however, after 9/11 you saw this country unified. We all put our differences aside and supported the administration. The administration has screwed it up big time. They have repeatedly lied and manipulated us. Started us in a war under false pretenses, while allowing the true masterminds of 9/11 to go free. They have ruined our reputation around the world.

ProfJohn I strongly disagree with your attitude that the democrats will do worse. For the last 6 years the republicans have showed us what they can do. I for one am not impressed. The republicans continue to screw up, yet instead of ever standing up, and saying "yeah we screwed up, an this is how we plan to fix it" you instead hear them say "yeah well the democrats wouldn't do any better". If you want to show me how much better your party is, don't try to show me how bad the other one is. Give me actual reasons to trust and vote republican, and I would consider it.

 

[International Machine Consortium]

Well done, AutumnRayne.
I don't consider most posters here "far left" or really any of them. A basic review of the political spectrum might be instructional, ProfJohn?
Anti Bush !=far left.

 

[daveymark]

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium
Well done, AutumnRayne.
I don't consider most posters here "far left" or really any of them. A basic review of the political spectrum might be instructional, ProfJohn?
Anti Bush !=far left.

this has already been explained earlier in the thread.

Anti Hillary != far right.

 

[International Machine Consortium]

I agree Anti-Hillary !=far Right. Thanks for the response though.

 

[daveymark]

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium
I agree Anti-Hillary !=far Right. Thanks for the response though.

and thank you for rehashing what has already been discussed.

from earlier in the thread, in case you missed it:

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: Ferocious
I'm actually surprised at how many righties there are here now. I mean considering how horrid Bush and company are.

Just as it's possible (and common) to be a liberal and hate Hillary, it's just as possible to dissapprove of Bush and Co. and still maintain conservative views.

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium
I agree Anti-Hillary !=far Right. Thanks for the response though.

and thank you for rehashing what has already been discussed.

from earlier in the thread, in case you missed it:

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: Ferocious
I'm actually surprised at how many righties there are here now. I mean considering how horrid Bush and company are.

Just as it's possible (and common) to be a liberal and hate Hillary, it's just as possible to dissapprove of Bush and Co. and still maintain conservative views.

is it then possible to be conservative and hate bush and not just dissaprove of him?

 

[daveymark]

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium
I agree Anti-Hillary !=far Right. Thanks for the response though.

and thank you for rehashing what has already been discussed.

from earlier in the thread, in case you missed it:

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: Ferocious
I'm actually surprised at how many righties there are here now. I mean considering how horrid Bush and company are.

Just as it's possible (and common) to be a liberal and hate Hillary, it's just as possible to dissapprove of Bush and Co. and still maintain conservative views.

is it then possible to be conservative and hate bush and not just dissaprove of him?

You honestly don't know?

 

[Czar]

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: Czar

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: International Machine Consortium
I agree Anti-Hillary !=far Right. Thanks for the response though.

and thank you for rehashing what has already been discussed.

from earlier in the thread, in case you missed it:

Originally posted by: daveymark

Originally posted by: Ferocious
I'm actually surprised at how many righties there are here now. I mean considering how horrid Bush and company are.

Just as it's possible (and common) to be a liberal and hate Hillary, it's just as possible to dissapprove of Bush and Co. and still maintain conservative views.

is it then possible to be conservative and hate bush and not just dissaprove of him?

You honestly don't know?

I'm asking you since your explination compared hate of clinton to dissaprovement of Bush