Conquer Club

what would any other democrat elected to the presidency be?

Simon Viavant wrote:would would any other democrat elected to the presidency be?

No.

what?

Simon Viavant wrote:what?

I said "no" to the question If Obama's a rabid liberal extremist would any other demoract elected to the presidency be.

I feel like President Zell Miller would have a rough time dropping the "socialist" tag, but he might be able to shake it.

oops, typo in the first post

Oh, okay. That makes more sense now. I would say it depends on a lot of factors, the biggest of which is who the candidate is and what his or her particular views are. I would say President Clinton and Hillary Clinton are more conservative than President Obama, as examples. Another factor would include whether the term liberal is applied on a general basis or on a more directed basis (i.e. liberal socially or liberal fiscally).

Presumably you're looking to get an answer from some semi-whacko Republican here, so maybe I should just stop posting. Additionally, note that I'm operating under your assumption that Obama is a rabid liberal extremist.

I'd just seen a lot of posts here from people about how Obama is a far left liberal extremist. You're one of the more reasonable ones. On the other hand, I've seen a couple liberal people here saying he's center-right, which also isn't true. He's center-left.

thegreekdog wrote:Oh, okay. That makes more sense now. I would say it depends on a lot of factors, the biggest of which is who the candidate is and what his or her particular views are. I would say President Clinton and Hillary Clinton are more conservative than President Obama, as examples. Another factor would include whether the term liberal is applied on a general basis or on a more directed basis (i.e. liberal socially or liberal fiscally).

Presumably you're looking to get an answer from some semi-whacko Republican here, so maybe I should just stop posting. Additionally, note that I'm operating under your assumption that Obama is a rabid liberal extremist.

Obama is so far left he makes hillary look like a republican.

At this point, the pendulum for the so-called "center" is really so far to the left that anyone but an arch conservative would be called "liberal".

And, somehow, that has gone from meaning someone who cares about other people more than corporations to someone who wants to do nothing increase taxes and rape corporations.

Simon Viavant wrote:I'd just seen a lot of posts here from people about how Obama is a far left liberal extremist. You're one of the more reasonable ones. On the other hand, I've seen a couple liberal people here saying he's center-right, which also isn't true. He's center-left.

It's all comparative. Compared to me, he's center-right on social issues and left-left on fiscal issues. On the social side, he seems to be trying to stay away from the gay marriage issue (which makes him a social conservative). On the fiscal side, he seems to think that the federal government is the solution to our problems (which makes him a fiscal liberal). Is he a far left liberal extremist in toto? Nah... Compared to Josef Stalin, he's liberal on social issues and conservative on fiscal issues.

thegreekdog wrote:

Simon Viavant wrote:I'd just seen a lot of posts here from people about how Obama is a far left liberal extremist. You're one of the more reasonable ones. On the other hand, I've seen a couple liberal people here saying he's center-right, which also isn't true. He's center-left.

It's all comparative. Compared to me, he's center-right on social issues and left-left on fiscal issues. On the social side, he seems to be trying to stay away from the gay marriage issue (which makes him a social conservative). On the fiscal side, he seems to think that the federal government is the solution to our problems (which makes him a fiscal liberal). Is he a far left liberal extremist in toto? Nah... Compared to Josef Stalin, he's liberal on social issues and conservative on fiscal issues.

You also have to take current affairs into account. Right now, I think pretty much everyone, even staunch conservatives, recognize that the only entity that CAN really fix things is the government. The argument is over how much involvement and the form, not "if" the government needs to be involved.

Two years ago... you would have seen something very different, I believe.

Actually I think he's what's left after the leadership of a self proclaimed religious conservative
who let his bulls graze in the china shop for the previous eight years.

You Americans are cute. You think the Dem's on the far left?! You should look at Canada. On average, we're quite a centrist population, but even our Prime Minister (the right-end of our political spectrum), is further to the left than most democrats.

PLAYER57832 wrote:You also have to take current affairs into account. Right now, I think pretty much everyone, even staunch conservatives, recognize that the only entity that CAN really fix things is the government. The argument is over how much involvement and the form, not "if" the government needs to be involved.

Yeah, that's part of my issue with the Republicans. Call my an arch-conservative (for fiscal purposes), but I'm against virtually all of this stuff (whether it works or not, we'll see). For my purposes, the government does not need to be involved except on a very basic level.

bedub1 wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:Oh, okay. That makes more sense now. I would say it depends on a lot of factors, the biggest of which is who the candidate is and what his or her particular views are. I would say President Clinton and Hillary Clinton are more conservative than President Obama, as examples. Another factor would include whether the term liberal is applied on a general basis or on a more directed basis (i.e. liberal socially or liberal fiscally).

Presumably you're looking to get an answer from some semi-whacko Republican here, so maybe I should just stop posting. Additionally, note that I'm operating under your assumption that Obama is a rabid liberal extremist.

Obama is so far left he makes hillary look like a republican.

This is what I'm talking about.

oVo wrote:Actually I think he's what's left after the leadership of a self proclaimed religious conservative
who let his bulls graze in the china shop for the previous eight years.

Meh... President Bush wasn't really a fiscal conservative, although he pretended to be.

Serious threadz deserves seriouz answer.

I dunno... the Reps pushed the right so far over
that even the center feels liberal now.

Thing is, I do not think LIBERAL is a dirty word.

oVo wrote:

Thing is, I do not think LIBERAL is a dirty word.

Exactly.

And conservative shouldn't be either, except it does seem now that what's called conservative is too often very far right conservative and often in the social and corporation -friendly spectrum (only), which I do find distasteful. I think this is a miscaracterization of conservative.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

oVo wrote:

Thing is, I do not think LIBERAL is a dirty word.

Exactly.

And conservative shouldn't be either, except it does seem now that what's called conservative is too often very far right conservative and often in the social and corporation -friendly spectrum (only), which I do find distasteful. I think this is a miscaracterization of conservative.

... A 51% government stake in America's largest automotive manufacturer is extremely "rabid" liberal, sorry.

...

bedub1 wrote:

thegreekdog wrote:Oh, okay. That makes more sense now. I would say it depends on a lot of factors, the biggest of which is who the candidate is and what his or her particular views are. I would say President Clinton and Hillary Clinton are more conservative than President Obama, as examples. Another factor would include whether the term liberal is applied on a general basis or on a more directed basis (i.e. liberal socially or liberal fiscally).

Presumably you're looking to get an answer from some semi-whacko Republican here, so maybe I should just stop posting. Additionally, note that I'm operating under your assumption that Obama is a rabid liberal extremist.

Obama is so far left he makes hillary look like a republican.

Well yes if you consider Genghis Khan and Hitler to be only moderately centre right,otherwise you are talking nonsense.

Nobunaga wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

oVo wrote:

Thing is, I do not think LIBERAL is a dirty word.

Exactly.

And conservative shouldn't be either, except it does seem now that what's called conservative is too often very far right conservative and often in the social and corporation -friendly spectrum (only), which I do find distasteful. I think this is a miscaracterization of conservative.

... A 51% government stake in America's largest automotive manufacturer is extremely "rabid" liberal, sorry.

...

Wrong, its actually supporting the companies.

but allowing the companies to dictate the terms of loans, not regulating the securities industries is definitely rightist.

PLAYER57832 wrote:

Nobunaga wrote:

PLAYER57832 wrote:

oVo wrote:

Thing is, I do not think LIBERAL is a dirty word.

Exactly.

And conservative shouldn't be either, except it does seem now that what's called conservative is too often very far right conservative and often in the social and corporation -friendly spectrum (only), which I do find distasteful. I think this is a miscaracterization of conservative.

... A 51% government stake in America's largest automotive manufacturer is extremely "rabid" liberal, sorry.

...

Wrong, its actually supporting the companies.

but allowing the companies to dictate the terms of loans, not regulating the securities industries is definitely rightist.

... Yeah, so long as the Fed can run it. It's like Venezufreakinwela.

... Let's see... Obama has unveiled his plan for the most radical growth of government (Liberal goal) in the nations's history. Government now has the power to seize companies that are considered "too big to fail". It's not just banks, it's any company deemed so.

...It started with his executive compensation limitations (if that's not Liberal, what is?) last week and have evolved quickly. Obama and his czars aren't using the phrase, "too big to fail", as it's too obvious, even to the stupid masses. They are saying things such as, "Companies whose failure is determined to jeopardize the financial system", and such. Determined by whom?! Well, by Obama, obviously, and his tax-cheat Treasury Secretary.

... Nationalizing any business determined by our glorious leader too big to fail... (My hunch is most of those have large unions)... If you don't see this as hardcore leftist rabid liberal socialist, you are simply blind.

... No, blind is inappropriate here, too stubborn and too proud to admit that the great hope seen in Obama, and the change he campaigned on during the runup to the November election isn't working out quite the way you had hoped. You're reaching, and walking around with selective tunnel vision.

...

Timminz wrote:You Americans are cute. You think the Dem's on the far left?! You should look at Canada. On average, we're quite a centrist population, but even our Prime Minister (the right-end of our political spectrum), is further to the left than most democrats.

I seriously doubt that. Stephen Harper is considerably more right socially, and even fiscally, in my opinion, than most of the Democrats (I'm Canadian too).