If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fark)   Has anyone ever convinced you to change from being conservative to being liberal (or vice versa)?   (fark.com) divider line 737
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

1362 clicks; posted to Politics » on 22 Jul 2013 at 2:49 AM (50 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



737 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-22 11:17:40 AM
I was a liberal and voted that way (Carter) through the 70s.  I'm sorry about that I really am.
Once we started having children and employees things started to change.  We had other lives and livelihoods we were responsible for.  Good hard working people really do better when they can take care of themselves than they do when they have to give so much of the money they earned instead to the government(s) first, and then wait for it to come to them, the people who earned it in the first place.
 
2013-07-22 11:21:09 AM
I wouldn't say my overall alignment has changed -- I've always been somewhat liberal, since I grew up in a non-religious household and religious conservatives have always annoyed me with their anti-science attitudes.  But I'd say I have changed my stance on a few issues over the years:

-Sexual morality: being from China, my family didn't really talk about sex at all, so I grew up with an impression that the one-man, one-woman paradigm is the only correct orientation, just because.  It wasn't until I got acquainted with gay, lesbian, and transgender people in high school and college that I realized that they're not really that different, and that non-heterosexual orientations aren't by themselves any indication of bad moral character.  Also, I have relaxed ("liberalized", I suppose you might say) my position on sex before marriage after actually observing how people's relationships actually work out.  Also related, reading Lawrence Tribe on the abortion question (and talking with several friends who have been pregnant) helped me nail down a position on abortion, which I used to be kinda undecided on.

-International relations: I used to be a lot more hawkish, probably from reading too many Tom Clancy novels.  But after 9/11 and the Iraq experience, it's a lot harder to justify military adventurism.  I think smaller-scale engagements where we can act through local proxies (Libya, the initial phase of the Afghan War, maybe Syria if the Turks can commit) can be justifiable, but frankly I don't think there's really any war that is essential to American interests.

-Economic issues: I wasn't old enough to vote yet in 2000, but I used to think that the moderate Republican / neo-liberal view of economic development through credit support was an interesting idea for helping relieve poverty.  Since that came to fruition in the form of the financial collapse in 2008, I think that maybe if we just gave those people cold hard cash instead of making them (and ourselves, via bailouts) beholden to large financial institutions, we'd probably be better off today.  I also used to be more of a hard-money, strong-dollar, high-interest rate advocate, maybe because of how Asian culture encourages saving, but that was before I learned about how financial markets really work.
 
2013-07-22 11:23:55 AM

Wendy's Chili: Hayek and Friedman weren't as batshiat as their modern disciples would lead you to believe. They even supported guaranteed minimum incomes.


Friedman did not support minimum wage laws.
 
2013-07-22 11:24:25 AM

Tyee: I was a liberal and voted that way (Carter) through the 70s.  I'm sorry about that I really am.
Once we started having children and employees things started to change.  We had other lives and livelihoods we were responsible for.  Good hard working people really do better when they can take care of themselves than they do when they have to give so much of the money they earned instead to the government(s) first, and then wait for it to come to them, the people who earned it in the first place.


Really? People have to give their money to the government and wait for a bureaucratic death ninja to give that money back? When did this happen?
 
2013-07-22 11:25:51 AM
I guess one thing that I really changed my mind on in college: I'm a lot more appreciative of the value of religion.  I'm still atheist, but I don't assume religious people are ignorant anymore.

Interestingly enough, the guy who I mostly attribute that "conversion" to started college as an Evangelical Christian and ended up a flaming liberal.  And by "flaming" I mean "out-of-the-closet".
 
2013-07-22 11:26:42 AM

SunsetLament: Wendy's Chili: Hayek and Friedman weren't as batshiat as their modern disciples would lead you to believe. They even supported guaranteed minimum incomes.

Friedman did not support minimum wage laws.


This is what Wendy's Chili was talking about. It's not a minimum wage. It's a basic income guarantee that comes directly from the government in exchange for absolutely nothing.
 
2013-07-22 11:27:02 AM

trotsky: I considered myself a Conservative for years. I ran for a State House seat in the late 1990s as an (R), I even found one of my old positions papers last year... pretty right. I voted for Bush in 2000 and 2004. I voted for Obama in 2008 because of what Bush and Company did to the economy. But I was never really hardcore.

Then 2010 happened. Walker in Wisconsin, Kasich in Ohio, the ignorance of the Tea 'tards, the Christian Taliban shiat pulled by the Fundies, the idiots in the House. I went full blue collar libby lib because of this insanity. I disagree with many things the Obama administration does, but every time it says something kind of dumb, the Tea 'tards take it and run it into the ground with their stupidity and ignorance.

I want Single Payer Health Care, I don't care to listen to some idiot tell me why it's bad because they mis-understand Socialism.
I want the US out of Afghanistan ASAP. I'm glad the time table's been fast tracked.
I like guns but the bullshiat surrounding the debate, especially the three times as loud neanderthals on the right, have turned me off. I now agree there should be mild controls in place because of the ignorance of the pro-gun idiots.

Basically the Tea 'tard Nation has turned me around. Good job, guys.


... yet you selected your username "trotsky" in 2003?  I smell a little bullshiat.
 
2013-07-22 11:27:04 AM
Years ago, during the height of the insurgence in Iraq and the 2004 election, I almost became a conservative when, one day it was pointed out to me that by not supporting Bush I hated Amercia and I was helping the terrorists. But then I realized, "Well, those that hate terrorists and love the US say some things that have points, and those who support terrorism and hate America say some other things that also make points." It was very confusing. I mean, people were saying lots of stuff and both sides really disagreed about what "facts" were. In the end I bought a hot dog from a street vendor and realized that sometimes it's better just to follow your appetite. These days I find myself voting for the campaign that does free pancakes closest to my place.
 
2013-07-22 11:29:30 AM
I guess it's more accurate to say that what was important to me changed more than the content of my views. Events (data) tend to shape my views more than individual persuasion. I have had some people help clarify their positions, and those positions I found to have merit, so on some set of issues, I have waxed and waned conservative/liberal - and in many ways, I could have been seen as relatively libertarian - though never so much as to think Ron Paul was anything but insane.

I started out a Republican because of my staunch anti-communism and have always been (and remain) hawkish and interventionist. At the start of the '90s, I was working for a conservative "educational" organization (read: lobbying). But after the Cold War ended, I started seeing other issues as being more pressing. In 2000 I voted for Bush. In 2004, I cast my first vote for a Democrat for president - not because he was great but because the Libertarian part of me said you can't let a president get away with the kind of mistake Bush made in Iraq. (It's one thing to be neocon, it's another to implement neocon strategies stupidly.)

Republicans started to shift away from the William F. Buckley, Jr. model of conservatism after 9/11, and it became stark by 2006, the last time I voted for a Republican. The GOP didn't have to lose me. But by 2008, it became clear that the GOP had lost its collective mind. McCain was not the man I voted for in the 2000 primaries, and Palin simply added the whipped cream of retardation on top of the banana split of fail the GOP had become. I joined the Democratic Party because I decided trying to pull Democrats to the right was probably easier than pulling Republicans to the right.

I'm not as economically left as most Democrats. I don't buy into the left/libertarian MIC narrative. I believe way too much in externalities to be a Libertarian. I am almost, but not quite, libertarian in my belief in separation of church and state. (Get over pre-1950 christian monuments on government land. OMG - Who the Hell cares?) Socially, though, I'm pretty liberal. Legalize pot. Legalize gay marriage. Vice laws, for the most part, should go. I'm pro-universal health care - because it's both cheaper and leads to better outcomes than what we do. I like a strong FDA, OSHA, and other federal regulatory agencies. Get rid of most other forms of business distortions like tax incentives and subsidies. Simplify the tax code, especially for businesses.

That concludes my self-important wall of text. Probably, no one should have read through all of that.
 
2013-07-22 11:34:19 AM

feckingmorons: Rincewind53: Here are some statistics. In 2012,  80 million Americans didn't go to the doctor or access needed medical care because of cost.

How do they know what it costs? Call up a doctor's office and ask what you will have to pay for an exam and two standard blood tests. They can't tell you because of the nonsense that insurance/government programs/managed care is these days.

If patients knew that they had to spend $40 for a comprehensive (30 minute) exam and $6 for a CBC and $25 for a SMA-23 they could budget for those things. If the doctor knew he could count on getting paid those amounts they could actully charge those.

Now the doctor bills $167 and gets paid $19.23 for the visit. The lab gets $3.60 for the CBC and $14.44 for the SMA23 (those are real numbers for a Medicare patient) The patient is then billed about $17 dollars more for their 'co-payment' (a bullshiat term).

If I walk into Sears I pay the same price for a wrench as you and the guy down the street and the Pope if he were to stop in. The price fixing (or negotiated pricing) of managed care is bullshiat. It should be illegal.

Price things the same for everyone and it will be more affordable for everyone. Those who can't work because of disability, infirmity, or age we can cover with our social programs and we can better judge the costs and not force doctors, hospitals and drug companies to sell to government plans at below market rates.

Doctors will stop accepting Medicaid because it simply isn't enough money for the work they have to do.

Just because you get some insurance through a government sponsored exchange doesn't mean any doctor will take patients with that insurance.


THIS so much.

/better late than never?
 
2013-07-22 11:34:52 AM
Yes.  I used to be much more liberal.  I also was much more anti-christian having been bludgeoned by the bible in the 80's.  Now I guess I just have a higher tolerance for assholes.
 
2013-07-22 11:35:15 AM
jchuffyman:
I just left behind the supernatural element a long time ago

Yeah, I have too for the most part.  I think A LOT more people than some realize have.  My parents are both members of a small United Methodist church, in fact so am I as I don't believe it expires.  I still go on homecoming, sometimes Christmas and Easter, and it's really more of a social thing.  Mom's maybe agnostic leaning on the side of belief, dad's an atheist but he plays the piano there.  Covered dish dinners, chicken and biscuits, Easter ham breakfasts, it has very little to do with religion outside of the scripture readings.  I also stop in to get married once in awhile.  It is in many ways a more social than religious institution.
 
2013-07-22 11:35:38 AM

Arkanaut: Interestingly enough, the guy who I mostly attribute that "conversion" to started college as an Evangelical Christian and ended up a flaming liberal.  And by "flaming" I mean "out-of-the-closet".


I just realized it would have been much more poetic to use "fiery" as an adjective for "Evangelical Christian", to contrast that with the second part.  Oh well.

//should have sent a poet.
 
2013-07-22 11:36:18 AM
Stupid Question. Anyone who is "conservative" or "liberal" on every issue is a moron.

Anyone who thinks and is at all informed will fall on either side of the fictitious line between conservative and liberal on any number of unique issues. Beyond that, there are infinite nuances and degrees of "conservative" and "liberal" on each of these individual issues.

Is an environmentalist, limited pro-choice, civil-rights advocate, anti-gay discrimination, anti-gay marriage, small government, pro-public education, pro-gun rights, pro expanded background checks, pro-religion advocate who hates bible thumpers a conservative or a liberal? The answer is neither, because the question is stupid and assumes a false dichotomy.

More than anything else, we, as a nation, need to rid ourselves of this tribal political binary partisanship. We need "conservative" democrats and "liberal" republicans, and independents of no discernible ideology and we need to be evaluating candidates and politicians based on their actual policy and actions rather than just using a letter by their name to assume whether or not they are on our "team" or not.
 
2013-07-22 11:36:25 AM

Serious Black: SunsetLament: Wendy's Chili: Hayek and Friedman weren't as batshiat as their modern disciples would lead you to believe. They even supported guaranteed minimum incomes.

Friedman did not support minimum wage laws.

This is what Wendy's Chili was talking about. It's not a minimum wage. It's a basic income guarantee that comes directly from the government in exchange for absolutely nothing.


Friedman considered the Negative Income Tax to be a preferable replacement to all welfare and entitlements.  Friedman did not support the Negative Income Tax unless it meant the end of welfare as we know it.  And he advocated no income tax at all as the best option.  In no way, whatsoever, did Friedman advocate or support minimum wage laws.
 
2013-07-22 11:39:20 AM

Serious Black: SunsetLament: Wendy's Chili: Hayek and Friedman weren't as batshiat as their modern disciples would lead you to believe. They even supported guaranteed minimum incomes.

Friedman did not support minimum wage laws.

This is what Wendy's Chili was talking about. It's not a minimum wage. It's a basic income guarantee that comes directly from the government in exchange for absolutely nothing.


Can't see Youtube at work, but I believe Friedman's idea was for "negative taxation" in lieu of in-kind assistance, not necessarily a basic income guarantee, although they are similar.  So I think the EITC is a form of negative taxation but it wouldn't be a kind of basic income guarantee.
 
2013-07-22 11:46:09 AM

Abacus9: sn82: make me some tea: sn82: I was a democrat until I met my ex several years ago. Then he told me more about republican and it made sense. I'm still kind of in the middle of the two parties but am more to the right than in the past. I still mostly vote for the right candidate versus voting for which party they're affiliated with.

As an ex-conservatve, what "made sense" to you specifically?

The theory of small government and not spending as much as democrats do.

If you think conservatives care about small government and less spending, perhaps you don't remember GWB? Starting unnecessary wars, greatly expanding the power of government under the Patriot USAPATRIOT Act, Defense of Marriage and all that?

syrynxx: The US government has no more right to force me to buy 3rd-party health insurance than it does to force me to buy ketchup or soup or footwear. It certainly doesn't have the authority to penalize me for not buying a commercial product.

You have to purchase auto insurance if you own a car. How is that different?


FTFY.  It's an acronym.
 
2013-07-22 11:47:23 AM

monty666: No, I can't be conservative because I actually care about other human beings.


This. I'm not sure that that's something that can be beaten out of me, short of a disease or ailment that causes a massive personality change.
 
2013-07-22 11:48:28 AM

Abacus9: Same here, both sides are ultra-conservative, and they consider me the libbiest lib that ever libbed (which isn't completely true). They also consider me the smartest in the family, go figure.


I have this exact line listed in my Facebook About Me: "Political Views."
 
2013-07-22 11:52:02 AM

Abacus9: If you think conservatives care about small government and less spending, perhaps you don't remember GWB? Starting unnecessary wars, greatly expanding the power of government under the Patriot Act, Defense of Marriage and all that?


Ahem, DOMA was signed by Bill Clinton.
 
2013-07-22 11:52:14 AM

Tyee: Good hard working people really do better when they can take care of themselves than they do when they have to give so much of the money they earned instead to the government(s) first, and then wait for it to come to them, the people who earned it in the first place.


Stop acting like such a victim. You don't pay THAT much in taxes. And what you do pay goes out to help not only other people, but yourself. You know that infrastructure you use for your business and employees?

You're welcome.
 
2013-07-22 11:56:54 AM

SunsetLament: Serious Black: SunsetLament: Wendy's Chili: Hayek and Friedman weren't as batshiat as their modern disciples would lead you to believe. They even supported guaranteed minimum incomes.

Friedman did not support minimum wage laws.

This is what Wendy's Chili was talking about. It's not a minimum wage. It's a basic income guarantee that comes directly from the government in exchange for absolutely nothing.

Friedman considered the Negative Income Tax to be a preferable replacement to all welfare and entitlements.  Friedman did not support the Negative Income Tax unless it meant the end of welfare as we know it.  And he advocated no income tax at all as the best option.  In no way, whatsoever, did Friedman advocate or support minimum wage laws.


Friedman grew up and largely developed his theories in an era of relatively strong unions within the labor market. Unions are largely extinct today. If we did what you believe Friedman supported, which is absolutely no government support of the indigent and abolishing labor laws like the minimum wage...well, I'm not certain what the outcome would be, but widespread food riots would be the most likely IMO.
 
2013-07-22 11:57:03 AM
feckingmorons:

They have access to it. We have a right to access to health care, we don't have a right to free healthcare.

And this is why you are a terrible person.

Healthcare isn't a optional luxury.  Once you realize this we'll stop calling you a selfish miser.
 
2013-07-22 11:57:26 AM
I started as a conservative capitalist type as a teenager. Then I grew up. There wasn't any particular person that "convinced" me of anything, but going from dead poverty to upper-middle class the way you're "supposed" to do it showed me exactly how much of a scam and a disaster the capitalist system really is.
 
2013-07-22 11:58:30 AM
I was already drifting leftward, decribing myself as a "-" conservative  (usually  "fiscal" or "Libertarian") to distinguish myself from the Moral Majority crowd,  but in law school while discussing Tort law (at the time "tort reform" was a huge hot-button for conservatives)  I basically learned how the law actually worked, and some economic concepts like "the Marginal cost of money"   that made me realize the conservative positon on tort reform was full of shiat and based on misinformation and lies, and really amounted to corporations attempting to cost-shift some of thier business costs onto consumers.   That caused a re-examination of a lot core conservative beliefs, and most of them proved to be equally unfounded in reality.   The nail inthe coffin came when I watched Congressgive the FBI, in the USA Patriot Act, the exact same powers that they had violently blocked during the Clinton Administration as being far too dangerous to American Liberty to ever be allowed of a US law enforcement agency.
 
2013-07-22 11:59:33 AM

GoldSpider: Abacus9: If you think conservatives care about small government and less spending, perhaps you don't remember GWB? Starting unnecessary wars, greatly expanding the power of government under the Patriot Act, Defense of Marriage and all that?

Ahem, DOMA was signed by Bill Clinton.


Wasn't that a compromise in some way to prevent the Republicans from trying to get a "Same-Sex Marriage Ban" Amendment into the Constitution?

/ Please note I didn't say that it was good compromise.
 
2013-07-22 12:00:15 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: You don't pay THAT much in taxes.


You really, really have no idea what I pay.

And if taxes weren't automatically taken out of your paycheck ( I'm assuming you get one) and you had to write out a check to the government(s) periodically you wouldn't be happy when you realize how much you do pay.  Pull out a few months of stubs and add up how much you earned but you didn't get.
 
2013-07-22 12:01:10 PM
George Bush and Dick Cheney did an amazing job of converting me to being a liberal.
 
2013-07-22 12:02:17 PM
I don't think anyone could convince me to join a political party with which I disagree on many levels. And I doubt I could convince anyone of the same. Politics are too much of a Big Thing for some people.
 
2013-07-22 12:03:07 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: Stop acting like such a victim. You don't pay THAT much in taxes.


How much have you decided is the acceptable amount of taxes? 10%? 50%? 80%? Exactly how much of every dollar we earn should be confiscated and re-allocated for the benefit of others?

And nearly half of every AFTER-Tax dollar I spend on gas goes to roads and infrastructure, as well as the After-Tax dollars that go top pay for the toll roads, and the additional After-Tax dollars that go to Sales Taxes and property taxes to pay for public transportation, public schools and public colleges. Tell me again how federal income tax benefits us as well as those who do not pay into the system.

So how much of every dollar we earn should be given to our fellow man?
 
2013-07-22 12:07:15 PM

Tyee: The My Little Pony Killer: You don't pay THAT much in taxes.

You really, really have no idea what I pay.

And if taxes weren't automatically taken out of your paycheck ( I'm assuming you get one) and you had to write out a check to the government(s) periodically you wouldn't be happy when you realize how much you do pay.  Pull out a few months of stubs and add up how much you earned but you didn't get.


When I was deployed, I got danger pay and post differential pay, and neither of those was exempted from federal or state taxation. That money did not start immediately, so I got a huge chunk of retroactive money once I had been in the country for a long enough time. The federal withholding on my first paycheck with the retroactive pay was bigger than I normally gross. And I was more than happy to pay it.
 
2013-07-22 12:07:21 PM
To me, conservatism, as it is now, is just a childish, selfish attitude of "I know better than you and I'm going to throw a temper tantrum until you agree."
 
2013-07-22 12:07:33 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: monty666: No, I can't be conservative because I actually care about other human beings.

This. I'm not sure that that's something that can be beaten out of me, short of a disease or ailment that causes a massive personality change.


Which is an odd feature for Conservatives, but it is something that is being fostered by the radical wing. Those on the Religious Right, who subscribe to the Prosperity Gospel, and the NeoCons who have taken to Games Theory and a selfishness philosophy to justify looking at citizens not as equals, but as resources. It isn't particularly Conservative, but then again, the party has had the reins taken over by those least capable and least qualified to make decisions for the good of the nation and its citizens.

What is called Conservative today, is the distillation of the most radical thoughts of the last 40 years, married with dreams of glory who long for the days of simplicity when we were always at war with the dirty Commies. And sh*t ain't like that, but the leadership remembers, and cannot divorce itself from that mode of thought. And it's not really ideologically or intellectually prepared for this new age, and the "young" Conservatives who are coming up, don't have the perspective to understand this shift, and are being brought up into this brand of radicalism and learn to call it "Conservative" thought.

Not everyone holds to that, but the leadership isn't courting saner alternatives, because discourse gets in the way of narrative. And that is the real jam that we find ourselves in, with Rove and his proteges, having won races for folks, and not really seeing that the price of those victories has been to bankrupt the system, to the point where discussion and compromise is seen as weakness, and slicing off vast swathes of the populace for not being seen as having any real value. It is a scorched earth approach to politics that gets in the way of actual governance, but then again, these are folks who only see governance as furthering their patrons' end of things, and without any respect for that system. And it works for some, because they imagine that so long as they tout the party line, that they'll be on the right side of the fence when it goes up, and have very little understanding of civics in any real form.

Civics education has long been a bugbear for these folks. Civics education gets in the way of narrative, which is why we don't see it taught in our high schools in any substantive form. Anything that gets in the way of narrative is seen as an enemy. Be that science. Be that language. Be that history. The perversion of the very concept of subjective reality is the "strength" that the NeoCons have given the party, and that willful ignorance of the concept, and the pushing of it in a neigh religious tone, as if will can be made manifest simply by believing strongly enough, that has been seductive to many who know that if you just change perspective, you can get rubes to believe damn near anything, so long as you wave a flag in front of it. And those in the GOP who realize that this is the operating procedure, and who disagree with it, vehemently, have been cut off from funding, starved off the vine, much like the NeoCons want to starve off regulation of basic industries, because they believe that if they wish it strongly enough, it will be, and damn the real consequences, because when things go pear shaped, you can simply spin the situation, as opposed to dealing with it. It is a rabidly Ivory Tower idea of governance that requires being totally divorced from your own citizens in order to work.
 
2013-07-22 12:07:45 PM

MadHatter500: Healthcare isn't a optional luxury.


Nor is it a right.

Nothing that requires the labor of another person can be a right. You have a right not to be poisoned, you have a right to exercise, you have a right to clean air and water, you have a right to take whatever steps for yourself you deem fit to stay healthy. But you do not have a RIGHT to have a doctor tend to your health. No human right can ever require the unwilling participation of another person.

Once you realize this we'll stop calling you a naïve child.
 
2013-07-22 12:07:50 PM

sn82: make me some tea: sn82: I was a democrat until I met my ex several years ago. Then he told me more about republican and it made sense. I'm still kind of in the middle of the two parties but am more to the right than in the past. I still mostly vote for the right candidate versus voting for which party they're affiliated with.

As an ex-conservatve, what "made sense" to you specifically?

The theory of small government and not spending as much as democrats do.


Reality has a well-known liberal bias.
/You're welcome.
 
2013-07-22 12:08:19 PM
"Has anyone ever convinced you to change from being conservative to being liberal (or vice versa)?"

You mean like for sex?

A Dark Evil Omen: I started as a conservative capitalist type as a teenager. Then I grew up. There wasn't any particular person that "convinced" me of anything, but going from dead poverty to upper-middle class the way you're "supposed" to do it showed me exactly how much of a scam and a disaster the capitalist system really is.


I don't think many on Fark have ever seen how capitalist system works. For decades counterfeiting has allowed a stealth back door socialism to suck the life out of the capital capitalism needs to operate.
 
2013-07-22 12:08:50 PM

47 is the new 42: Wasn't that a compromise in some way to prevent the Republicans from trying to get a "Same-Sex Marriage Ban" Amendment into the Constitution?


I'd have to go back and see what Clinton himself said about gay marriage, but something tells me he wasn't on board (at the time) either.  If I recall correctly, he recently expressed remorse for signing DOMA.  Good on him now after the fact, I suppose.
 
2013-07-22 12:09:22 PM

BojanglesPaladin: Nothing that requires the labor of another person can be a right.


The right to an attorney?
 
2013-07-22 12:10:01 PM
A common thread here seems to be that people who change are more likely to feel pushed away from one side than drawn to the other. I think I'm the same way. It could explain why a lot of politics is so negative, though.

I used to consider myself "liberal" and still do, but I've changed issue-by-issue. I've gone even further left on foreign policy and economic issues, and more libertarian on social issues.

I also have a consistent anti-authority streak that has me leaning a little more left under Republicans (GW Bush was a big one) and more right under Democratic ones.
 
2013-07-22 12:10:32 PM

GoldSpider: Abacus9: If you think conservatives care about small government and less spending, perhaps you don't remember GWB? Starting unnecessary wars, greatly expanding the power of government under the Patriot Act, Defense of Marriage and all that?

Ahem, DOMA was signed by Bill Clinton.


Ahem. Only one Republican voted against it. All other Nay votes were from Democrats.
 
2013-07-22 12:11:29 PM

BojanglesPaladin: The My Little Pony Killer: Stop acting like such a victim. You don't pay THAT much in taxes.

How much have you decided is the acceptable amount of taxes? 10%? 50%? 80%? Exactly how much of every dollar we earn should be confiscated and re-allocated for the benefit of others?

And nearly half of every AFTER-Tax dollar I spend on gas goes to roads and infrastructure, as well as the After-Tax dollars that go top pay for the toll roads, and the additional After-Tax dollars that go to Sales Taxes and property taxes to pay for public transportation, public schools and public colleges. Tell me again how federal income tax benefits us as well as those who do not pay into the system.

So how much of every dollar we earn should be given to our fellow man?


Hurray for terrible metaphors involving taxation!

On another note, why must we specify for all eternity an exact percentage of money that we think should go to the government in the form of taxes?
 
2013-07-22 12:12:11 PM
I was an arch-conservative until I was in my mid 20's partially as a result of being raised Catholic, partially as a result of 9/11, which happened during my senior year in high school(The world is balck and white!  Let's go get all the bad guys!).  I voted R pretty consistently up to '08 but after Bush left, I was finally able to rationally examine what I was supporting without the emotional baggage of having to defend the guy I voted for because if he was wrong I was wrong.  Spent a little while as a Fark independent but after I left the conservative echo chamber of HotAir, Powrline, Townhall, Instapundit, RWN, (Embarrassed to say it but these were all bookmarked and regularly visited pages.  Oi, people do some dumb stuff when they're young) and talk radio, and having weighed my own life experiences, I left the GOP, libertarianism, and conservatism for good.

Still, the Dems aren't anything special.  I mean, there are a few good ones (Booker!  Warren!!) and once Crazy Eyes Bachmann finally leaves my home state's congressional delegation isn't terrible, but the Democrats really need to farkin grow a pair.
 
2013-07-22 12:12:38 PM

Skyrmion: A common thread here seems to be that people who change are more likely to feel pushed away from one side than drawn to the other. I think I'm the same way. It could explain why a lot of politics is so negative, though.

I used to consider myself "liberal" and still do, but I've changed issue-by-issue. I've gone even further left on foreign policy and economic issues, and more libertarian on social issues.

I also have a consistent anti-authority streak that has me leaning a little more left under Republicans (GW Bush was a big one) and more right under Democratic ones.


See, I guess I don't understand how an anti-authoritarian streak pushes one right. Everything rightists push is based in authoritarianism, from social policies to ultra-capitalist economics.
 
2013-07-22 12:13:18 PM

BojanglesPaladin: MadHatter500: Healthcare isn't a optional luxury.

Nor is it a right.

Nothing that requires the labor of another person can be a right. You have a right not to be poisoned, you have a right to exercise, you have a right to clean air and water, you have a right to take whatever steps for yourself you deem fit to stay healthy. But you do not have a RIGHT to have a doctor tend to your health. No human right can ever require the unwilling participation of another person.

Once you realize this we'll stop calling you a naïve child.


Have you read Gideon v. Wainwright? Or going back further, have you read the text of the Sixth Amendment?
 
2013-07-22 12:13:38 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: BojanglesPaladin: Nothing that requires the labor of another person can be a right.

The right to an attorney?


Not to mention that ER doctors are already required to treat anybody and everybody that shows up there, regardless of their ability to pay
 
2013-07-22 12:13:52 PM

Bendal: Stile4aly: It would be unfair to say that Bush convinced me to become a liberal.  It would be more accurate to say that the majority of the Republican party during the early 2000s convinced me.

I voted for Dole in 1996 (that's how conservative I was) and Bush in 2000.  Didn't vote in 2004.  Been the libbiest lib who ever libbed since.


Sounds like me. I registered in 1978 and voted Republican in state and Federal elections right up to 1992. I was disappointed in George Bush Sr after his first term and voted independent that election, then reluctantly voted for Clinton in 1996. After that, however, I'd say the Republican party left me; Gingrich's "Contract with America", the grandstanding with the Federal shutdown, and the impeachment of Clinton for trivial, personal reasons soured me on the Republicans, and they've only gotten worse since then.


Like everyone else, I experimented in college. I voted Republican for H.W. Bush and Deukmajian for CA governor. And then the Gulf War happened and the later Reagan scandals started coming into focus. So I started voting Democrat. And then Gingrich happened and I lost all interest in the (R) party. I have not voted Republican since. So I guess Newt convinced me.
 
2013-07-22 12:14:40 PM

Dusk-You-n-Me: The right to an attorney?


You have no "right to an attorney" outside of the state bringing you into the criminal justice system, which is a specific situation for which the state is responsible, and is therefore constitutionally required to equip you with an attorney if you are unable to get one of your own. But the key thing here is that no attorney can be compelled to provide counsel. They volunteer and are paid for their services. The STATE has the obligation to provide one for you when charging you with a crime. And, of course, you are free to get your own.

But outside of that specific circumstance where the legal system is required to provide one for you? No right at all. You have no "RIGHT" to an attorney to sue for you in civil court, for instance. And you have no "RIGHT" to an attorney if someone sues you.
 
2013-07-22 12:15:24 PM

jgbrowning: Weaver95: randomjsa: Few people will fundamentally change their political mind set on things.

I did/have.

I did as well - changed from conservative to liberal 'round about the Gingrich years.


I switched from conservative to liberal as well.  Bush helped turn me around.  When anybody questions me about it, I just tell them, "Well, I saw America go from a strong economy and a budget surplus under Clinton, to almost falling into another 'Great Depression' under Bush along with giving us two wars.  That was enough to open my eyes!"

Also, when I considered myself a conservative, I made it a point to not look at links people posted that had a liberal point of view.  I told myself that they were just skewing facts and I was afraid it would confuse me.

I now read most links on both side, then do my own research to find the truth.  I find on the whole, Democrats and liberals are much more truthful.
 
2013-07-22 12:17:28 PM
I'm still a registered Republican, but mostly because I like the idea of them thinking my vote is locked up when that's not necessarily the case.
 
2013-07-22 12:18:04 PM
I just watched the History Channel profile on Caligula: 1400 Days of Terror, and it showed how the young brilliant Caligula was exposed to all the vileness that comes with unbridled power and decided that would suit him to a tee, so he goes into the Senate and gets all humble and introspective regarding Rome's problems, impressing the pants off the whole Senate committee so much so that they give it to him, lock stock and barrel. So he immediately turns around and literally buys the loyalty of all around him by doubling their salaries, and dumping cash from the rooftops into the streets.

And it reminded me of how GWBush campaigned for the presidency in 2000, saying all the right things small government conservatives wanted to hear, how America shouldn't be the world's policemen and we should have a humble foreign policy, and trusting the American people with their own money. Man those conservative voters ate it up and swept him into office as their long globalist Clintonian nightmare was over. Then he turns around and gives everyone a tax refund out of the blue, hundreds of dollars to every person in the country under the guise of trying to reinvigorate the economy after the dotcom bust.

Hm. The jury's still out on whether the similarities ended there.
 
Displayed 50 of 737 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report