Talk Elections

go

No.  I think he purposely moves all over the place because he doesn't know what he really believes in.

I don't "move all over the place".

Do you have proof I move all over the place?

I suppose so?

Seems to be so.

I don't know about specific policies, but I've always seen him as a bit of a libertarian and that doesn't seem to have changed. I guess he's consistent/coherent.

Not sure.

yes

No.

Yes.

Proof?

In a way.

No.

no. I believe everyone changes ALL the time.

No.

Yes.

Yes.

Coherent?  Good grief, no.

I wish I knew more. All I know is he is against the death penalty and seems to dislike libertarianism.

Yes.

Yes.

Jawohl.

yes

To an extent.

Sort of. His ideology is whatever the Democratic Party's is.

no

I don't recall him having an ideology.

Yes

No

yes

Yes

sure

Yup, Snowguy is a solid moderate-lib, and a great guy.

Yes

Meh.

Yes.

Huh?

And Yes.

I do not see how any one with a positive economic score could ever tolerate voting for FDR.

I see. I would have voted for FDR because he seemed to have better ideas and was fresher then Hoover was. In 1936, I probably would have remembered the last recession happened during a Republican administration, and liked that FDR had began to inspire the nation and help lift it from its woes. In 1940 and 1944, I would have voted for Willkie and Dewey.

When I make those lists I make them as if I was an actual voter at the time, without a window into future events.

I suppose so.

Personally, I think that it's alright for people with positive economic scores to vote for FDR in 1932 (without retrospect) because FDR's platform was actually pretty fiscally conservative. I mean, FDR campaigned for "immediate and drastic reductions of all public expenditures," "abolishing useless commissions and offices, consolidating bureaus and eliminating extravagances reductions in bureaucracy," and for a "sound currency to be maintained at all hazards." He even attacked Hoover as a fiscal liberal, not to mention that John Garner said that The Republicans were "leading the country down the path of socialism." Now contrast that with Hoover, who raised taxes, signed the disastrous Smoot-Hawley Tariff, increased deficit spending, etc., and FDR looks like a great candidate. Even Rexford Tuxwell would say that "practically the whole New Deal was extrapolated from programs that Hoover started." Now 1936, 1940, and 1944 are different stories.

He actually ran to the right of Hoover in 1932, but yeah voting for him in 1936, 1940, or 1944 would be strange. It'd probably be as bad as voting Mondale over Reagan. Right NiK? :P

Yes

No.

yes

No

Yes.

Elaborate.

No

I'm not sure.

I'm not so sure about FDR running to the right of Hoover on economic policy...


(skip)

I'd disagree. I don't think Roosevelt had thought up his New Deal during the election. His main criticisms of Hoover were:

FDR pledged himself to the New Deal at the convention when he was nominated for the presidency. Criticizing Hoover's deficits didn't make him fiscally conservative any more than Obama criticizing Bush's deficits did so for him.

Yes

Hard to tell.

Seems so, but probably hasn't posted enough to say so for sure.

Yeah, sure.

By the rules "Conservative Libertarians" can not be coherent.

Yes

It's not a very good ideology, but he sticks to it.

No

No.

Yes, consistently.

Yes.

Yes.

yes

Yes

No

No

Yes, Spamism.

Of course not.

Btw, I don't think you people understand what 'ideology' means.

A set of aims and ideas that directs one's goals, expectations, and actions?

Really? I think I do; well perhaps not an "ideology" but certainly an ideology of sorts.

As for Sewer Socialist, he seems to as far as this forum defines "ideology" anyway (which seems to be "Does (s)he fit into a series of generically predictable and definiable 'positions' on 'issues'?"

Yes, though I'm not sure what it is ;)

For the most part, though there are some things he says that I wouldn't expect.

Yes.

Yes, hard-die moderate hero (on European standards) ;)

Oh yes.......die hard commie pinko, with trollish tendencies ;)

Yes. Militant Silly Americanist.

As much as anyone here, yeah.

He's more logical than ideological, but still yes.

Not really sure what his ideology is but hes a smart guy so I would give him the benefit of the doubt on this one.

Yes

I think I described my political ideology as having more colors than a box of Trix cereal.  It all depends on the issue.

And for Jew Con - Yes.....he's consistent.

So you're a Log Cabin Republican.. :P

yeah, generally. He lives up to it.

Sort of, I guess.

Yes

Pretty much so. It's an interesting ideology, but coherent. :)

I'd say so.

A guess, but yes.

Totally. He is basically of the center left, with the occasional gesture towards Opeboism, but in a more modest form.

Yup, classic RINO :P

Yes, Reaganite

I don't get his wievs sometimes, but he's pretty conseequential

F you grumps. :P Neither of us are subject to such simplistic categorizations, and anyone who tries, is well, simplistic. I hate ideology. Write that down!  :)

Yes, Rockefeller Republican

That symp for the public employee unions, and huge construction projects to dress up government buildings in Albany? I think not.  

Skip me. All efforts to categorize me are futile, so why bother? :)

F**k you all for skipping me :P

Yes, silliness...

Yes

It's consistent, but not coherent.

no

Only one person has tried to simplistically categorize us......we're unique my friend.  Cheers!!   ;)

*****************

Oh, and for xyz, I don't know but I'm certainly willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

No.  I have no idea what he is.

Yes. Sexism. ;)

Yes

Yes. Silly.