Jack Nicklaus Endorses Romney, Mitt calls Jack “Greatest athlete of the 20th century.”

[Mr. Desmond]

Originally Posted by David in FL

Define moderate.

In my experience, most golfers are very conservative. Bill Clinton is still too far to the left for them. Ronald Reagan would not be accepted in today's GOP. I mean, with all the deficits and tax hikes Reagan accepted not to mention entitlements that continued - he would be a disappointment.

[Subaroo]

Originally Posted by Lihu

You only hear the 10% of the extremes.

Most of us are moderate. We just don't have any moderate candidates.

We are not mostly moderates.  We are mostly progressives.  People think they are conservative because they think it sounds better, they think that is what they are supposed to be.  But actually poll after poll shows that the American people have progressive/liberal ideology.

Ask them who they identify with, they will say conservatives.  Ask them issue by issue, they will reveal themselves to be progressive.

Economically...progressive.  Socially...progressive.  People want tighter gun laws, higher taxes, access to abortion and birth control.  And almost every provision in the health reform law is favored by the American people.  Even same sex marriage (the last hold out) is shifting to the progressive side.

Republicans are a dumbass party with a great marketing team.

http://www.alterpolitics.com/politics/new-study-the-american-public-prefers-liberal-policies-which-would-cut-budget-by-437-billion/

[Mr. Desmond]

Originally Posted by Subaroo

We are not mostly moderates.  We are mostly progressives.  People think they are conservative because they think it sounds better, they think that is what they are supposed to be.  But actually poll after poll shows that the American people have progressive/liberal ideology.

Ask them who they identify with, they will say conservatives.  Ask them issue by issue, they will reveal themselves to be progressive.

Economically...progressive.  Socially...progressive.  People want tighter gun laws, higher taxes, access to abortion and birth control.  And almost every provision in the health reform law is favored by the American people.  Even same sex marriage (the last hold out) is shifting to the progressive side.

Republicans are a dumbass party with a great marketing team.

http://www.alterpolitics.com/politics/new-study-the-american-public-prefers-liberal-policies-which-would-cut-budget-by-437-billion/

Ahhhh, post of the month...

[dak4n6]

Originally Posted by Subaroo

We are not mostly moderates.  We are mostly progressives.  People think they are conservative because they think it sounds better, they think that is what they are supposed to be.  But actually poll after poll shows that the American people have progressive/liberal ideology.

Ask them who they identify with, they will say conservatives.  Ask them issue by issue, they will reveal themselves to be progressive.

Economically...progressive.  Socially...progressive.  People want tighter gun laws, higher taxes, access to abortion and birth control.  And almost every provision in the health reform law is favored by the American people.  Even same sex marriage (the last hold out) is shifting to the progressive side.

Republicans are a dumbass party with a great marketing team.

http://www.alterpolitics.com/politics/new-study-the-american-public-prefers-liberal-policies-which-would-cut-budget-by-437-billion/

True that. I have noticed this for many years now. I have always called it the Limbaugh effect. I know many friends and co-workers who go around spouting Limbaugh quotes like puppets, but I know from knowing them that they live and believe differently. It's like they wear a conservative shell so that they don't get attacked or ridiculed by the other Limbaugh minions. When I have actually gotten into economic discussions with some of my 'conservative' friends, I find that not one of them deep down really believes in supply-side economics (actually it's trickle-down, as the term supply-side was subsituted later because trickle-down sounded as ridiculous as it really is) . Know why? Because none of them are multi-millionaires. Only the top 1% really believes in that bullsh!t.

[x129]

Since when are deficits not accepted in the republican party? Cheney was the guy that coined "deficits don't matter". They just don't like how the money is being spent. They would rather it be spent on their pet causes instead of democratic pet causes.

Most golfers are conservative. Most golfers are also old, white, and rich. I am guessing those matter more.

As far as the VP debates, who was the last VP candidate that you thought would be a decent president? I am going back to Bush Sr but you might be able to talk me into Gore or Kemp. The list of Biden, Palin, Cheney, Lieberman, Qualye, Ferraro, Mondale, and Ryan isn't exactly list of people that I want to be in charge.

Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond

In my experience, most golfers are very conservative. Bill Clinton is still too far to the left for them. Ronald Reagan would not be accepted in today's GOP. I mean, with all the deficits and tax hikes Reagan accepted not to mention entitlements that continued - he would be a disappointment.

[Chilli Dipper]

Originally Posted by x129

As far as the VP debates, who was the last VP candidate that you thought would be a decent president? I am going back to Bush Sr but you might be able to talk me into Gore or Kemp. The list of Biden, Palin, Cheney, Lieberman, Qualye, Ferraro, Mondale, and Ryan isn't exactly list of people that I want to be in charge.

How can you provide a list of mediocre vice presidential candidates without mentioning Admiral Stockdale? (A fellow western Illinois native, I must add)

To answer the question, Lloyd Bentsen's performance in the 1988 vice-presidential debate ("You're no Jack Kennedy") was considered to hurt the Dukakis campaign, because it made the public view the candidate as less presidential than his running mate.

[x129]

3rd party candidates are not running for president. They are running to feed their ego. But yeah that debate with Stockdale is pretty awesome.

I forgot about Bentsen. I am still probably repressing that campaign. I sort of doubt we will every see such crushing defeats as the ones that Mondale and Dukakis were able to etch out.

Originally Posted by Chilli Dipper

How can you provide a list of mediocre vice presidential candidates without mentioning Admiral Stockdale? (A fellow western Illinois native, I must add)

To answer the question, Lloyd Bentsen's performance in the 1988 vice-presidential debate ("You're no Jack Kennedy") was considered to hurt the Dukakis campaign, because it made the public view the candidate as less presidential than his running mate.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by Lihu

You only hear the 10% of the extremes.

Most of us are moderate. We just don't have any moderate candidates.

I agree with this ... except the part about the candidates.  I think the candidates are almost always closer to moderate than to the extremes.  In the effort to appease their biggest "fans" and donors, who are frequently those on the extremes, they seem to cater to them more than to those who are closer to the middle, especially in the primaries.

The other reason why they might go out of their way to appeal to the extremes is to try and show that they are so much different than the other guy.

[David in FL]

We are mostly progressives.

Why is it that so many Liberals refuse to acknowledge that? Instead they hide behind "moderate" or for the really rabid Libs, "progressive". Why are they so embarrassed by what they are? I'm conservative and proud of it.

[Mr. Desmond]

Originally Posted by David in FL

Why is it that so many Liberals refuse to acknowledge that? Instead they hide behind "moderate" or for the really rabid Libs, "progressive". Why are they so embarrassed by what they are?

I'm conservative and proud of it.

Because they're not hiding at all - I would say that labels are the problem.

Many might consider themselves economically conservative - believers in efficient government with something close to balanced budgets as a hope (a pipe dream since Reagan), but socially progressive, and so voila, they call themselves moderates! They probably didn't think of progressive because it is not used as much.

[Subaroo]

Originally Posted by David in FL

Why is it that so many Liberals refuse to acknowledge that? Instead they hide behind "moderate" or for the really rabid Libs, "progressive". Why are they so embarrassed by what they are?

I'm conservative and proud of it.

No one here is afraid of the label 'Liberal.'

[David in FL]

Because they're not hiding at all - I would say that labels are the problem. Many might consider themselves economically conservative - believers in efficient government with something close to balanced budgets as a hope (a pipe dream since Reagan), but socially progressive, and so voila, they call themselves moderates!

No, those people are ignorant. They want their cake and to eat it too, but they don't understand basic math and are generally incapable of balancing their own checkbook. You cannot fund a socially liberal agenda with fiscally conservative principles. I absolutely agree about the balanced budget though. Until we elect a true conservative, not a relative moderate like Mitt, we won't get there. Step one is to reduce spending like drunken sailors, and neither party is willing to go as far as is necessary there. The Republicans will do better than we've had the last 4 years, but still not even close to what we need. Still, you eat that elephant one bite at a time..... And there's nothing wrong with labels. Labels are nothing more than words, and words mean things. Some people are just uncomfortable admitting who they really are and for what they stand. I just wonder why.....

[David in FL]

[URL=http://thesandtrap.com/content/type/61/id/61419/] [/URL] No one here is afraid of the label 'Liberal.'

Then stop referring to yourself in any other way. You're not moderate, you're not progressive, you're simply a diehard Liberal. Embrace it and be proud of it.

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by David in FL

No, those people are ignorant. They want their cake and to eat it too, but they don't understand basic math and are generally incapable of balancing their own checkbook. You cannot fund a socially liberal agenda with fiscally conservative principles.

I absolutely agree about the balanced budget though. Until we elect a true conservative, not a relative moderate like Mitt, we won't get there. Step one is to reduce spending like drunken sailors, and neither party is willing to go as far as is necessary there. The Republicans will do better than we've had the last 4 years, but still not even close to what we need. Still, you eat that elephant one bite at a time.....

And there's nothing wrong with labels. Labels are nothing more than words, and words mean things. Some people are just uncomfortable admitting who they really are and for what they stand. I just wonder why.....

Perhaps because if people identify with certain labels, then others think they get to use that as a free pass to assume they know exactly what that means, (as if every "liberal," "progressive," "moderate," or "conservative" has the exact same beliefs)  and call them names ... like "ignorant?"

[Lihu]

Originally Posted by David in FL

Define moderate.

A person who is not persuaded irrationally to vote. We care about our country, and always strive to do everything in our power to improve things.

[Subaroo]

Originally Posted by David in FL

Then stop referring to yourself in any other way. You're not moderate, you're not progressive, you're simply a diehard Liberal. Embrace it and be proud of it.

I never called myself a moderate, and I wouldn't.  I am not a moderate, or an independent.  But I am both progressive and liberal.  Technically they don't mean the same thing, but in the context of American politics they are used interchangeably.  Just like 'racist,' 'bigot,' 'homophobe,' and 'dumbass,' can all be used for the word Republican.

[David in FL]

Perhaps because if people identify with certain labels, then others think they get to use that as a free pass to assume they know exactly what that means, (as if every "liberal," "progressive," "moderate," or "conservative" has the exact same beliefs)  and call them names ... like "ignorant?"

Ignorant isn't a word I use lightly, and although you might not believe it, I don't use it to offend. If you read all my posts on this thread, I think you'll realize that I try hard not to. But the fact remains, a socially liberal agenda cannot be funded by a government operating under fiscally conservative principles. The math just doesn't work. The key words there are "by a government". A great many social programs CAN be funded under a fiscally conservative government, but they're funded through the generosity of private philanthropy, not by the givernment. Funded by people who have reaped the benefits of the aforementioned fiscal conservatism. The difference between Liberals and Conservatives when it comes to social giving is simple. Conservatives want to donate their own money, and Liberals want to do much the same, but with other people's money.

[David in FL]

I never called myself a moderate, and I wouldn't.  I am not a moderate, or an independent.  But I am both progressive and liberal.  Technically they don't mean the same thing, but in the context of American politics they are used interchangeably.  Just like 'racist,' 'bigot,' 'homophobe,' and 'dumbass,' can all be used for the word Republican.

Ah yes. Now I remember why I stopped responding to your childishness.