Who's a Democrat Here?

[nw_hunter]

To keep this fair and balanced, as Foxy News would say................Who's a Democrat here?
I noticed few just came out and said....I'm a Republican.

[yellowtail3]

I've been registered as a Repub for 20+ years, but I'm not, really... I'm a Libertarian, if I had to take a label

[Guy Pike]

Ultra Libertarian. We realize that to be a Libertarian there cannot be a Party.

[twoshooter]

True. I also am a Libertarian. And a member of the National Procrastinators Alliance....... we were going to have an organizational meeting but we decided to put it off.......
      The only party I want to be involved with has BBQ ribs and is in my back yard. Parties always want money. That is because they are planning to pay someone to vote to either prevent others from telling you what to do, or to enable you to tell others what to do.
       I don't give a damn what others do, and have no wish to pay to tell them
       I see no reason I should have to pay to keep others from telling me what to do.

      Republicans and Democrats are like an AR and a BAR....... different.... but the same. Underneath it all is the love of power, the desire to control, the smug belief that THEY are Gods chosen few- and the other side is a bunch of halfwit semi-evil incompetent morons, which should be readily apparent to all.
       They are ALL politicians.

[Oldshooter]

I wouldn't belong to any organization that would accept me as a member!

[45-70.gov]

5 post  and no one stepping up and explaining themselves as a democrat
they should be embarrassed



one thing  worse than a republican is a democrat


i will support the republicans  as long as they are the ONLY   hope to stop the democrats


a 3rd party vote  is  only  to make you  feel better about yourself...and nobody cares, they won't win
as a 3rd party  vote  is  absolutely irrelevant .....maybe a good thing in small local elections

[nw_hunter]

Perhaps not as many Democrats on the forum as it appears. I guess YT and I are the only registered Republicans  who are keeping up with this thread..

[ChungDoQuan]

Real Independent.

[Oldshooter]

Yt may have said he is republican but his posts indicate he might not be.      about the only thing we can be sure of is the fact that  he has access to a computer and the Internet. the same as the rest of us but some of us post in a manner that describes who we are....... Oh I forgot....he does also.

[powderman]

Perhaps not as many Democrats on the forum as it appears. I guess YT and I are the only registered Republicans  who are keeping up with this thread..

 
HUNTER. NOPE, I'm a reg Republican. I didn't say it on the other thread because the OP was done simply to start an arguement that I chose not to take part in. POWDERMAN. 

[ChungDoQuan]

Actually, the other thread was initiated to point out logical inconsistencies in knee jerk criticism of Obama, even when he mostly supports ideas that have been in the Republican platform for over 50 years. Just tryin' to get some people to be a little less blind. No one HAD to participate... 

[JonnyReb]

 Maybe this thread should have been titled "Who votes Democrat", but maybe we couldn't get an honest answer then either. There are no people who call themselves democrats on the whole forum, just people who vote that way 

  My voter card says UNA on it. I always figured that meant unaffiliated. I never really ever thought about it. I do always end up voting for Republicans on a straight ticket, so I guess by my actions I'm a republican. I did vote for Ron Paul back in whatever fateful election it was..maybe the one against Bill Clinton. I felt like a third party vote killed that election and have avoided them since. Not because I wouldn't love a libertarian pres but because numbers wise it always kills the conservative opponent too. I have never voted for any party whom I felt threatened firearm ownership or the 2nd amendment. I'm a single issue voter.   J

[Oldshooter]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_AAEp0J_hzU


This guy was!


Egads, he wanted tax cuts for everybody, even the rich and those danged corporations. No wonder somebody shot him, prolly a democrat!

[mcwoodduck]

Real Independent.

Is that the new name of the American Communist party?
After reading your posts, that is the only thing I can figure.

[ChungDoQuan]

THAT'S not trolling... 

[DDZ]

Yt may have said he is republican but his posts indicate he might not be.      about the only thing we can be sure of is the fact that  he has access to a computer and the Internet. the same as the rest of us but some of us post in a manner that describes who we are....... Oh I forgot....he does also.

I agree Oldshooter. People can claim to be anything, but over time, what they say describes what they really are.

[ironglow]

  I think we have a verbal conundrum here.  In recent years, people have avoided labels..because labels tend to restrict them to certain "party assumptions".
   A large body of people do not consider themselves either Democrat or Republican..but rather,  "independent".

  Some consider themselves independent because the Democrats are not enough to the left.
Others;      "             "                 "                "       "  Republiucans are not enough to the right.

  I would suggest these independents would for the most part either "independent left"   or "independent right"..
 
  If an independent cannot fit either of these two descriptions..he is either a fence-straddler..or lying.

      BTW:    I am "independent right"....  in case you haven't guessed.

[ChungDoQuan]

As far as most here are concerned, I'm a socialist. I AM a socialist in that I feel we live in a society, and that the government should be devoted to taking care of ALL of that society, not just some, no matter if they are stronger, meaner, or more willing to beat down other members of that society. That is why the government needs to exert itself to do away with the extremes in society. If that means restricting the very rich a little so that the very poor can have a little more help, then so be it. I started the other thread, mainly to show that My own values have not changed--- instead the Republicans have changed (gone crazy) to the point I can no longer support them in their wack-job mentality. Anything taken to extreme becomes its opposite, and the Republican party is a good example.

[45-70.gov]

Real Independent.

define  this


to me a real indepentant  ..does not vote in primaries
and ONLY  choices between the left overs  form the  two major parties  or an irrelevent 3rd


by definition  you cannot vote in the primaries...where the partied pick a candidate


correct me here   where i am  wrong

[ChungDoQuan]

I can't vote in the primaries. Never have. (Voter reg card says DTS for party--- "declined to state." )

[tobster]

I didn't know there was a National Procrastinators Alliance. I think I'll send in my dues and be a card carrying member as soon as I get around to it. That's all for now, the wife's still raggin' at me to put on the storm windows- winter's comin'.

[George Foster]

I am a registered Independent and I am not able to vote in any primaries.  I have always voted for whoever I felt was the best person and the one I liked the most.  I have never voted a straight party ticket and I never will as I feel it is wrong.  I personally feel those who do are wrong as there are good people from both parties.  I have voted for presidents from both the Republican and Democrat parties and feel some from both parties have been good and some from both parties have been bad.

[45-70.gov]

I can't vote in the primaries. Never have. (Voter reg card says DTS for party--- "declined to state." )

if you don't vote in the primaries.....you  have far less say so then some one that does


if you can't decide  what party is closest to  what you beleive...AND HAS A CHANCE TO WINN


don't complain about the choices in the general election


as a 20 year member  of the libertarian  party
 ....I WASTED 20 YEARS  I COULD HAVE VOTED IN THE PRIMARIES  AND HAD SOME INFLUENCE
ON  WHO WAS IN THE GENERAL ELECTION

[45-70.gov]

I can't vote in the primaries. Never have. (Voter reg card says DTS for party--- "declined to state." )

DEFINE  CAN'T VOTE IN THE PRIMARIES......OR IS IT A CAUCUS IN YOUR STATE???


i don't like open primaries
only  people in a party should vote on who that party nominates


if  not  demz  and  repubs  would vote BOZO   as the libertarian  candidate
is this fare??

[JonnyReb]

  Went to vote in the last general election, and realized how an unaffiliated voter is limited in the political process. Guess a registered republican is what I'll end up having to become. Still would love to see a viable 3rd party.  J

[JonnyReb]

  Went to vote in the last primary election, and realized how an unaffiliated voter is limited in the political process. Guess a registered republican is what I'll end up having to become. Still would love to see a viable 3rd party.  J

[45-70.gov]

  Went to vote in the last general election, and realized how an unaffiliated voter is limited in the political process. Guess a registered republican is what I'll end up having to become. Still would love to see a viable 3rd party.  J

then  maybe with  more like you voting in the primaries
the republicans  might nominate better people
and  it  WON'T have to be a lesser of 2 evils game


we  too are a closed primary in florida....georgia is open primary

[JonnyReb]

  Went to vote in the last general election, and realized how an unaffiliated voter is limited in the political process. Guess a registered republican is what I'll end up having to become. Still would love to see a viable 3rd party.  J

then  maybe with  more like you voting in the primaries
the republicans  might nominate better people
and  it  WON'T have to be a lesser of 2 evils game


we  too are a closed primary in florida....georgia is open primary

 I agree, if all of us were to become part of the entire election, it certainly could lead to better, more conservative canidates running for important offices. I'll wager 20+% of the population could shift a lot of the vote of the country. If we'd all who detest liberal ideology had left the 3rd part ideal and gone and become republicans, BHO wouldn't be president right now.  J

[magooch]

According to the party of the left, there is no such thing as the "Democrat" Party.  They want to be called the "Democratic" Party.  So it follows that a member of that party must be a democratic.  It's much easier to call them what they really are--communists.

[ironglow]

As far as most here are concerned, I'm a socialist. I AM a socialist in that I feel we live in a society, and that the government should be devoted to taking care of ALL of that society, not just some,
    According to our constitution, the government should not "take care" of any group.  The only responsibility of government, is to see that all are given equal rights to win or lose..and given "equal protection' under the law.  Beyond that, as proven by the Bill of Rights..it is the government's DUTY to stay out of our lives.
    no matter if they are stronger, meaner, or more willing to beat down other members of that society. That is why the government needs to exert itself to do away with the extremes in society. If that means restricting the very rich a little so that the very poor can have a little more help, then so be it. And at that point the govt is going beyond "civil rights" and "equal protection".... and sticking it's nose where it doesn't belong.I started the other thread, mainly to show that My own values have not changed--- instead the Republicans have changed (gone crazy) to the point I can no longer support them in their wack-job mentality. Anything taken to extreme becomes its opposite, and the Republican party is a good example.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
     I like to see the less fortunate cared for, but it is simply not the federal government's job to do it.  There always have been entities which did this, but with the growth of government and it's accompanying taxes, those entities cannot perform nearly as well as they once did.
  If individual states want to support such cases and their constitutions don't prohibit it, fine..proceed.
 
  I don't believe I am alone whae I say I don't mind supporting the truly sick and lame...but i will kick like a mule when forced to pay for the lazy.
  Contrary to what you may think, I am not "stronger, meaner or more willing to beat down" other people.  Actually, much of my life I worked physically VERY HARD for what I took home.  Perhaps that is why I am so bereft of sympathy for those who simply refuse to work hard.
  My son also works hard for a living ..and runs an active charity which requires a minimum of 40 hours per week..just for that charity, which he does not get paid a dime for.. 
       He has a slogan concerning work, which says:
       " The first 40 hours of work you make a living, the second 40 hours you start to make a success".
 
  With that type work ethic..should we be concerned for the very lazy among us?
 
  A word of wisdom:
     " For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.  (2 Thessalonians 3:10)
 
   Note:  The operative word is will not work;  God had no problem helping those who cannot work, in fact He encourages us to help the poor.
   BIG DIFFERENCE..