Time for another miscellaneous poll of the UrbanOhio population.  Rate yourself in the spectrum of American politics.  I know political ideology is not a one-dimensional thing, so I apologize to Libertarians and such, but I'm just going with the simple left-right scale here.  It seems obvious that the preponderance of this forum leans left, but let's see what the poll shows.

jackbooted, what a good word, i should use it tonight

I'm a compassionate theocratic feminist oligarchist.

"Commie Pinko Fag!" :whip:

 

That's how a former boss responded to my accusation that he was a misogynistic racist (he was). Archie Bunker was long gone from the local TV programming by then, but my boss still identified strongly with him.

 

No, it didn't get me fired. I got promoted out of his department shortly before he got shipped off to a dead-end job in the boondocks. :clap:

So many "Moderate-Liberal" responses... looks like we are in denial about being extremely liberal and out of touch with mainstream America. :wink:

I would define myself as a moderate liberal. I most definitely attended the Kerry rally in Zanesville, and the Edwards rally in Athens!

Aargh...pretty much impossible to do without checkboxes, at which point I'd check every box, from filthy commie hippie to jackbooted fascist, depending on the issue:

Super-far left on free speech, FCC regulations, gay rights, immigration

Moderate left on social security, welfare, social justice

Moderate right on the economy, tax cuts, free trade

Way right on the war in Iraq and the war on terror (though for highly lefty reasons...but that's a different discussion)

A jackbooted fascist on crime and punishment

 

Makes national elections arduous for me these days...

^What does it mean to be left on immigration?

Let 'em in...I'd like to see the borders defended, but a very open immigration policy.  If I were king, I'd seal the borders, grant a complete amnesty to all the illegals here today, and then make it much easier to come here.

I would define myself as a moderate liberal. I most definitely attended the Kerry rally in Zanesville, and the Edwards rally in Athens!

 

I was at the Kerry rally in Zanesville too....WAAAAAAAY in the back though.

^ Ya, I was also way in the back, and the stage light was so bright I could hardly see anything!!

.

I once was a moderate conservative, then middle of the road and now I am a proud moderate liberal. This administration has polarized me to the left, at some point I realized I was a moderate liberal all along.  It must have been all that brainwashing I received in the military that made me believe I was a moderate conservative once.  I was always socially liberal but once believed that "fiscally conservative" meant something.  There is nothing "fiscally conservative" about conservatives anymore.

 

I am pro death penalty though.  As a person raised Catholic, I would like to see Priests that molested kids fried in public.

I get more liberal every minute. There. I just burned a flag.

I just realized something...

I'm so liberal that I'm not even really a liberal.

I even take on conservative liberal views.

Like involving private gun ownership.

 

If I was in office I would definitely tax the $%^# out of rich people's income and their dividends, and use it to fund public schools and state universities more. I don't think I'd get voted in for a second term though. Economics are more important than your stance on moral issues. Believe that!

I'm a generic, middle-of-the-road liberal (not to be confused with a "moderate liberal"). The drug war is irrational and should be ended immediately, if it weren't for dogmatic religions there would be no suicide bombers, and urban sprawl is demonstrably immoral.

If I was in office I would definitely tax the $%^# out of rich people's income and their dividends, and use it to fund public schools and state universities more. I don't think I'd get voted in for a second term though. Economics are more important than your stance on moral issues. Believe that!

 

It's true, for conservatives (specifically republicans), it's all about $$$. They honestly couldn't care less if Blackwell passed all his kooky religious stuff like that total abortion ban. Women getting raped doesn't happen that often, so what? No seriously, that's what they say. As long as he follows through on his economic policies, they just don't give a shit.

My parents were democrats until my stepdad was forced into early retirement at P&G. He went on S.S. got an FMA account with almost 1M and started voting republican...

Things like that can change your stance quickly.

I am a progressive.  But I am not a Democrat.  I hate the status quo, and that is what the Democrats offer.  For a while, the Republicans offered some change and I would hold my nose and vote for them.  Now, I just really hate them all.

 

If Dems could figure out a way to effectively educate poor children I would vote for them forever.  But they constantly stick up for a union (which it gets kickbacks from) at the expense of children's lives.  Every time a bad teacher is not removed from a classroom, the higher the chances that child will never get a chance to catch up.  Then they will be doomed to a life of poverty........and the poor are a solid voting block for Dem's.

 

I honestly do not think it is a coincidence that the power of unions, organized crime and the Democratic party diminished at the same time.

 

I think I just joined the green party.  :drunk:  yeah, I am drunk

^Bad teachers are the least of a poor kid's problems, and I don't see Republican policy favoring the needs of poor families the way Democrats policy does. We do need more good teachers in the inner city and neglected rural areas, but holding a gun to their heads (metaphorically speaking) and forcing them to teach to a standardized test is no answer.

 

The unions went down due to concessions. The Democrats went down because they're Democrats. Organized crime never went away; it just got into the war business.

Bad teachers are the least of a poor kid's problems

 

This is a LAME excuse. While "bad" teachers may not be the most important issue facing poor children, that is no excuse for not giving them the best teachers possible.

 

I have to agree on standardized tests, but I haven't heard a better alternative yet.

Inner city schools get the worse teachers because the more qualified teachers don't want to deal with the discipline problems they face in the public system and it's easier to get hired wherever you want when you can make your prospective school look good by having a masters or a Ph.D. So what you get in P.S. is what's at the bottom of the barrel and these crappy charter schools that act like they're so prestigious, are able to get away with hiring highly underqualified teachers.

^Bad teachers are the least of a poor kid's problems....but holding a gun to their heads (metaphorically speaking) and forcing them to teach to a standardized test is no answer.

 

If you can't measure it, you can't manage it.  The reasons the Dems don't want standardized test is because it would expose how poorly the poor children of this nation are being held back.

Bad teachers are the least of a poor kid's problems

 

This is a LAME excuse. While "bad" teachers may not be the most important issue facing poor children, that is no excuse for not giving them the best teachers possible.

 

I have to agree on standardized tests, but I haven't heard a better alternative yet.

 

Look at the life of a poor kid and you tend to see 1) an unstable homelife 2) non-existent healthcare 3) poor diet 4) an environment of social entropy 5) exposure to environmental hazards (lead, asbestos, insect-borne asthsma, etc.). These are tough conditions to teach past. Poor kids deserve great teachers, but teachers AND students deserve conditions under which they can do their best. It's equally unfair to ask a great teacher to teach a hungry kid as it is to tell a motivated kid to learn on an empty stomach. I'd love to see an NFL Draft scheme for staffing inner-city schools, with the payscale to match. Short of that, it's fruitless to assume the only thing holding poor kids back is bad teachers. That's a huge fu*k you to kids and teachers alike.

 

^Bad teachers are the least of a poor kid's problems....but holding a gun to their heads (metaphorically speaking) and forcing them to teach to a standardized test is no answer.

 

If you can't measure it, you can't manage it. The reasons the Dems don't want standardized test is because it would expose how poorly the poor children of this nation are being held back.

 

And I would say that Republicans favor standardized tests because they help speed along the privatization of the public schools. Sorry, but I don't want the poor children of America being taught by Halliburton.

Aargh...pretty much impossible to do without checkboxes, at which point I'd check every box, from filthy commie hippie to jackbooted fascist, depending on the issue:

Super-far left on free speech, FCC regulations, gay rights, immigration

Moderate left on social security, welfare, social justice

Moderate right on the economy, tax cuts, free trade

Way right on the war in Iraq and the war on terror (though for highly lefty reasons...but that's a different discussion)

A jackbooted fascist on crime and punishment

 

Makes national elections arduous for me these days...

 

RV, Folks like you make it impossible for the media and others to corral the whole populace into either Blue or Red :shoot:

Oh wait -- maybe your exactly how it is... :?

I've slid around a lot on this scale, as I imagine a lot of Midwesterners have. I was raised hardcore Republican and didn't earn my liberal stripes until late in high school. By college, I was about as left as you can get before Indiana deports you. So I went up to Canada and worked for the New Democratic Party. That's when I realized that a political party could be uber-liberal without being soft and while being considerably concerned about government finances. Graduate school maybe brought me back to the center of the spectrum a little ... or at least made me a little more analytical of problems, rather than emotional.

 

For me, Tamara Draut summed it up best when she came to Levin (paraphrased): "We need to get away from the constant bickering about small government versus big government. The discussion should be about good government. I don't think people are inherently opposed to big government ... they just want to see a return on their investment. And I don't think our society is getting that right now."

Fiscally conservative.....but socially EXTREMELY liberal!!!!

Fiscally somewhat conservative (but not with educational funding!). Socially liberal.

 

I don't mind paying the taxes, but I don't like when businesses leave because of them.

Fiscal moderate, and any like any proper gay person, socially liberal.

A lot of people have identified themselves as "fiscally conservative". I hear this term used frequently, but I'm not sure if we're applying a universal meaning to it. What does everyone mean?

 

I, for one, believe in reducing administrative overhead, collecting taxes in equitable ways and in having evaluation measures tied to public expenditures. At the same time, I believe that considerable public investments in education, as well as workforce, community and economic development, particularly among the urban poor and in struggling neighborhoods, will have a higher social return than underinvestments in these areas and corresponding lower taxes. Does that make me a long-term fiscal conservative?

I was embarrassingly conservative into my thirties; it started out as teenage rebellion against the views of my Democrat parents and the entrenched Democrat dominance in my home community and got reinforced during a corporate management-oriented apprenticeship at GE and four years in the USAF during the Vietnam era. After military service, I worked in skilled-labor jobs in small towns where liberal views were so unknown that the term, "Liberal" was unheard. I voted for Barry Goldwater against Lyndon Johnson, and my vote helped put Richard Nixon into office.

 

As much as anything, my coming to terms with my sexual orientation brought me into face-to-face confrontation with social justice issues that hadn't even been on my radar, and I started to pay attention to ideas and opinions that I had ignored or dismissed previously. The recovery has been slow and arduous, but I'm glad I chose it. I haven't been tempted to relapse in a long time, and I no longer even harbor a desire to associate with the old crowd.

 

If a nasty right-winger like me could change, there's hope for other conservatives. I've contemplated starting a Conservatives Anonymous group in order to spread the benefit of my experience and help others seeking to break free.  :-)

^Hello. My name is Mike. (Hello Mike). It's been three weeks since I've listened to Rush Limbaugh.

I'm convinced that the smurfs were communists.

^Clearly.

A lot of people have identified themselves as "fiscally conservative". I hear this term used frequently, but I'm not sure if we're applying a universal meaning to it. What does everyone mean?

 

I believe in operating the government as if it were a business.  I'm not saying that it should be for profit, but rather that it should have more fiscal accountability.  But, where my financial stance comes in liberal is that instead of giving out incentives/credits to companies (to hope for their investment in the community) should rather stay with the government.  I will trust government to spend money for the public good more so than I trust capitalistic companies to.  I am a proponent of Big Government.  Let the powers at be do the work of society.....they MUST be well selected leaders though (obviously)...not the schluffs we have in office now!  I wouldn't trust them with my laptop!

A lot of people have identified themselves as "fiscally conservative". I hear this term used frequently, but I'm not sure if we're applying a universal meaning to it. What does everyone mean?

But, where my financial stance comes in liberal is that instead of giving out incentives/credits to companies (to hope for their investment in the community) should rather stay with the government.  I will trust government to spend money for the public good more so than I trust capitalistic companies to. 

 

Co-signed.

 

That's basically how I feel about Reaganomics/tax cuts. It seems like all it does is enable a few people to benefit much more than everyone else in society.

bump

I am liberal, but laugh b/c in the "spectrum of American politics" I am probably considered a communist hippie. By the way Kingfish hit the nail on the head about poverty and schooling. You must have some actual knowledge in that area (as opposed to everyone who is a know it all in this area). And to any one issue (gay) liberals- don't forget there are other persecuted populations out there...strait libs fight the fight for you, don't forget the others.

 

Ps. folks-liberals are more "fiscally conservative" than conservatives with all their welfare and kickbacks for Halliburton and other wasteful endeavors. 

 

I tend to vote--like I'm sure most of y'all do--for the best candidate.  And in my eyes and experiences, 9 times out of 10 I find the Democratic candidate to be the best choice.  My vote is also influenced by my surroundings and upbringing.

 

My dad's side of the family (from the Sandusky area) are generally all registered as Democrats.  Something about Erie County and our tendency to lean center-left amazes me, since most surrounding counties often tend to lean center-right.  Then again, we're right in the middle of a swing-area in a swing-state (if that makes any sense).

 

My mom's side of the family (from eastern Indiana) typically vote more conservatively; mainly for fiscal reasons I believe--although there are quite a few registered D's too.  My mother is a hard-core liberal.

 

As for being socially liberal, I am just that.  I kind of have to be ;) ; equal rights are a must in a free society!

 

-- ------------------------------------------------

 

Totally off topic..............but.....................I am glad we don't have a food tax in Ohio as they do in other states such as Illinois (where I go to school); if I order a $0.99 Baked Potato from Wendy's, goddamnit, I don't want to pay $1.08! LOL

^There is a food tax in Ohio...but you must dine in for it to take effect.  Even then the retailer can use their discretion and ring you up to-go.  When I'm at work I rind everyone up for Here...just trying to boost the HamCo sales tax and help out The Banks development!  :wink: :laugh:

^Where do you work?? I'll remember that if I ever eat there. I'll make sure to order "To-Go" and bitch you out when there is a tax on it. lol

...By the way Kingfish hit the nail on the head about poverty and schooling. You must have some actual knowledge in that area (as opposed to everyone who is a know it all in this area)...

 

Public education is the big "Inconvenient Truth" for the urbanist movement. It takes children of one's own and a desire to raise them in the city in order to realize this.

 

 

The problem is that whether or not people move into the city or live out in the suburbs, they want their kids to have a better quality of life than they did. I went to some public schools where I ended up getting suspended all the time. I think 7th grade I was suspended a total of 20 days for fights I didn't even provoke. You can't learn sh!t when the teacher's job is more about disciplining teenagers than actually teaching. Teachers don't want to work in that kind of environment either, so the most qualified ones teach in suburban schools. The whole integration, mixed income, diversity thing sounds nice in theory but the fact is, people are going to put themselves and especially their kids in the best position possible. Its funny to see how parents will send their kids to public inner city elementary schools because they only draw from the neighborhood but its a private catholic education for highschool because it draws from nearby worse-off neighborhoods.

 

Theres a great book I'm reading called The Hidden Injuries of Class. The author is a genius. He explains how our culture is centered around upward mobility and kids have so little in common with their parents because of it. After going to college, changing my interests, hanging around educated people from better backgrounds, it's changed me a lot as a person and when I go home and visit my family or my old friends I realize Its harder to connect with 'em. I kinda regret that. Im not sure what I'm going to do as a father, I mean, you want the best for your children but you don't want them to be sheltered and not have a damn clue about what other parts of society are like. It has to be a really hard decision.