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

[David in FL]

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.

How does that differentiate you from a conservative or a liberal? Don't you believe that they both think that they care about their country and want to improve things?

[Lihu]

Originally Posted by David in FL

How does that differentiate you from a conservative or a liberal?

Don't you believe that they both think that they care about their country and want to improve things?

The separation of moderate to either conservative or liberal is that many convervatives and liberals will vote irrationally for the party of their choice no matter what. A moderate could vote either way depending upon what this country needs at the time of the vote.

Moderates attempt to separate personal views from what the country needs.

[David in FL]

The separation of moderate to either conservative or liberal is that many convervatives and liberals will vote irrationally for the party of their choice no matter what. A moderate could vote either way depending upon what this country needs at the time of the vote. Moderates attempt to separate personal views from what the country needs.

You don't think that conservatives and liberals (note I didn't say Republicans and Democrats) don't think that they're voting for what they think the Country "needs"?

[onesome]

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.....

And of course handing out tax breaks while starting a war over a lie is fiscally responsible as well, see this argument swings both ways very easy, however the liberal programs you claim that are bankrupting this country at least help citizens, I honestly can't recall the Iraq military invading our shores once can you?

[David in FL]

And of course handing out tax breaks while starting a war over a lie is fiscally responsible as well, see this argument swings both ways very easy, however the liberal programs you claim that are bankrupting this country at least help citizens, I honestly can't recall the Iraq military invading our shores once can you?

What the heck did that little rant have to do with my post? Pls point out to me where I said that "liberal programs are bankrupting the Country"......

[onesome]

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.

[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.

Please read it carefully. What I said is that you cannot fund social liberalism with fiscal conservatism. I made no comment at all as to whether either one was good or bad, responsible or irresponsible.....

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by David in FL

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.

But as far as somebody wanting to accept the label of "liberal" or "conservative" I think you are simplifying it too much.  I would bet that most people - even those like yourself who are proud of their label - don't go along with 100% of what that label stands for.  (nevermind the fact that it means different things to different people)

For example, what label do you give to a person who is pro-life and pro-gay marriage?  Or somebody who is in favor of welfare but against Obamacare?  Or somebody who is against gun control but for the legalization of marijuana?

Now, that said, count me as one of the ignorant ones, because I would contend that you can be socially liberal and fiscally conservative.  Just because we want the government to spend money on socially liberal programs, doesn't mean that we want them to spend MORE money than they already do.  We just would prefer they spend it there than on things like random unnecessary wars.

P.S.  As a "liberal," I was not offended by your "ignorant" comment.  I took it as meaning simply "lacking knowledge," as opposed to if you said, for example, "idiot."

[Lihu]

You don't think that conservatives and liberals (note I didn't say Republicans and Democrats) don't think that they're voting for what they think the Country "needs"?

I noted that you did not say the R and the D parties :-) I think moderates are more agenda or issue based voters, and not specific party voters. They are called "swing voters" by either the liberals or conservatives, and I am going back to swinging a club for a bit of exercise :-)

[David in FL]

But as far as somebody wanting to accept the label of "liberal" or "conservative" I think you are simplifying it too much.  I would bet that most people - even those like yourself who are proud of their label - don't go along with 100% of what that label stands for.  (nevermind the fact that it means different things to different people) For example, what label do you give to a person who is pro-life and pro-gay marriage?  Or somebody who is in favor of welfare but against Obamacare?  Or somebody who is against gun control but for the legalization of marijuana? Now, that said, count me as one of the ignorant ones, because I would contend that you can be socially liberal and fiscally conservative.  Just because we want the government to spend money on socially liberal programs, doesn't mean that we want them to spend MORE money than they already do.  We just would prefer they spend it there than on things like random unnecessary wars.

Fiscal conservatism isn't about not spending more....it's, among many other things, about spending a lot less. Neither conservatives nor liberals necessarily believe everything that every other conservative or liberal believes. But they DO hold some key core values that defines them. In the case of conservatism those core values include smaller and less intrusive government, lower taxes coupled with less government spending, the free market, and personal responsibility. In addition to the core values, there are any number of issues that most liberals and conservatives tend to agree on amongst themselves......but those things aren't universal by any means. There are conservatives that are pro-choice, and liberals who support the 2d amendment. But their core values remain the same. While I disagree with the tenets of liberalism, (larger government, more regulation, higher taxes, less personal responsibility, etc....) at least liberals HAVE a set of core values and conduct themselves accordingly. True moderates on the other hand have few core values of their own. They tend to wander through life with a wet finger in the air, testing to see which way the breeze is blowing. They'll tell you that they're "thinking" men and women who want to weigh all sides before making a decision, but without any core values of their own upon which to base any kind of decision, all they're really doing is waiting to be persuaded by one side or the other. [quote name="Lihu" url="/t/62367/jack-nicklaus-endorses-romney-mitt-calls-jack-greatest-athlete-of-the-20th-century/342#post_776572"] ...., and I am going back to swinging a club for a bit of exercise :-)[/quote] Now THAT'S something on which we can agree! :-)

[Golfingdad]

Originally Posted by David in FL

True moderates on the other hand have few core values of their own. They tend to wander through life with a wet finger in the air, testing to see which way the breeze is blowing. They'll tell you that they're "thinking" men and women who want to weigh all sides before making a decision, but without any core values of their own upon which to base any kind of decision, all they're really doing is waiting to be persuaded by one side or the other.

This sounds like Mitt Romney.

P.S.  You would love the SNL commercial about the "undecided voters."  It's a crack up.

[Lihu]

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

This sounds like Mitt Romney.

P.S.  You would love the SNL commercial about the "undecided voters."  It's a crack up.

Watched part of it on Youtube, I can't stop laughing .

Undecided is different from a "swing voting" moderate, though. Don't know how swing and undecided came to have the same meaning.

Kind of like swinging a golf club, you can't do it if you are undecided.

[Mr. Desmond]

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.....

Uh, NO.

Clinton had no problem getting to a balance budget with what would be labeled as a socially liberal agenda. It's a balance.

Labels are a lazy man's way to stereotype people and leads to misunderstanding.

[David in FL]

P.S.  You would love the SNL commercial about the "undecided voters."  It's a crack up.

I saw that. It's hilarious! My favorite is still Tina Fey doing Sarah Palin though.....! :-D

[Subaroo]

Originally Posted by Subaroo

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by David in FL

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

Dude I’ve never said anything here that wasn't true.  If you can’t have a dialogue based on what I say and just get butthurt, then go away.  You haven’t responded to anything, it’s just, “waaaaa, waaaaa...”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0n5oa55EsmI

You belong to a party of dumbasses, and you embrace it.

[Subaroo]

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/high_iq_liberal_atheist_monogamous_/

Here's a fun article about intelligence and political affiliation.  But my point about Republicans being dumbasses isn't about intelligence, it is about their quest for education.  Republicans demonize education in every facet.

And what about (it was something like the Texas Republican Platform) being against "higher ordered thinking skills."  Give me a break. Republicans are the definition of ignorance.  Pppfffft, talk to me about ignorance, GTFO!

[x129]

Personally I like

We really need a few more gaffe's on both sides to get things going.

Moderates do have core values. Those values just aren't at the 2nd grade level of "Government bad; private sector good" or "private sector evil; government good". The recognize that each entity has pluses and minuses.

And a lot of people are stuck because no party represents their views. Where does the social liberal, financial conservative go these days given the Rockerfeller republicans are dead and the blue dog democrats are on life support?  Or what about the guy that believes that government shouldn't be messing around with their private lives (neither party really has a home)? In theory there are 3rd parties for these in people. In reality you pick the major party whose candidate you agree with the most.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lihu

Watched part of it on Youtube, I can't stop laughing .

Undecided is different from a "swing voting" moderate, though. Don't know how swing and undecided came to have the same meaning.

Kind of like swinging a golf club, you can't do it if you are undecided.

[Dave H]

Originally Posted by Subaroo

Dude I’ve never said anything here that wasn't true.  If you can’t have a dialogue based on what I say and just get butthurt, then go away.  You haven’t responded to anything, it’s just, “waaaaa, waaaaa...”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0n5oa55EsmI

You belong to a party of dumbasses, and you embrace it.

Aren't you supposed to be the compassionate party and the republicans the hateful party? Your vitriol for people with differing opinions shows your true colors.