Socially Conservative Democrats Unite!

[Kingpoleon]

This thread is so 2007-Atlas feeling. All it needs is someone raving about how strongly they favor civil unions but regardless believe marriage is only between one man and one woman.

Cultural appropriation!

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

This thread is so 2007-Atlas feeling.

Welcome to the future. We're taking our country back.

[Derpist]

This thread is so 2007-Atlas feeling.

Welcome to the future. We're taking our country back.

MAGA.

[beaver2.0]

How many of you are also pro-protectionism and supported Jim Webb?

[This account no longer in use.]

All it needs is someone raving about how strongly they favor civil unions but regardless believe marriage is only between one man and one woman.

We have to COMPROMISE.

[Hifly]

holla beautiful people

[Santander]

How many of you are also pro-protectionism and supported Jim Webb?

I supported Webb, but I'm sort of a free trader. I support NAFTA and a comprehensive FTA with the EU, but I oppose free trade with non-Western countries. I also support limited trade agreements with Asian countries to protect intellectual property and counterbalance China's economic and political influence, but not comprehensive free trade.

[Adam Griffin]

I ended up concluding it's easier pushing the GOP to move to the center on economic issues than to pushing the Democrats to move to the center on social issues.

Look at what the core philosophies of each party have been since their respective foundings and you'll find that it is precisely the opposite of what you've concluded*.

*Except for that socialist fling the GOP had in the 1860s; paging Yankee's anger!

[beaver2.0]

How many of you are also pro-protectionism and supported Jim Webb?

I supported Webb, but I'm sort of a free trader. I support NAFTA and a comprehensive FTA with the EU, but I oppose free trade with non-Western countries. I also support limited trade agreements with Asian countries to protect intellectual property and counterbalance China's economic and political influence, but not comprehensive free trade.

I got to say, I'm pretty protectionist, and don't support NAFTA.

I was just wondering if protectionism came hand in hand with social conservatism in Democrats.

[Derpist]

How many of you are also pro-protectionism and supported Jim Webb?

I supported Webb, but I'm sort of a free trader. I support NAFTA and a comprehensive FTA with the EU, but I oppose free trade with non-Western countries. I also support limited trade agreements with Asian countries to protect intellectual property and counterbalance China's economic and political influence, but not comprehensive free trade.

I got to say, I'm pretty protectionist, and don't support NAFTA.

I was just wondering if protectionism came hand in hand with social conservatism in Democrats.

I think caring more about economic issues than which college student was fat-shamed for zher otherkin lifestyle often comes hand-in-hand with social conservatism in Democrats.

I actually have a very traditional liberal stance on trade. They're often good, but we need to make sure trade is linked with workers rights, environmental rights, human rights, etc. There is no reason why for example, the US should be making an FTA with Vietnam (as it will in the TPP).

[beaver2.0]

How many of you are also pro-protectionism and supported Jim Webb?

I supported Webb, but I'm sort of a free trader. I support NAFTA and a comprehensive FTA with the EU, but I oppose free trade with non-Western countries. I also support limited trade agreements with Asian countries to protect intellectual property and counterbalance China's economic and political influence, but not comprehensive free trade.

I got to say, I'm pretty protectionist, and don't support NAFTA.

I was just wondering if protectionism came hand in hand with social conservatism in Democrats.

I think caring more about economic issues than which college student was fat-shamed for zher otherkin lifestyle often comes hand-in-hand with social conservatism in Democrats.

I actually have a very traditional liberal stance on trade. They're often good, but we need to make sure trade is linked with workers rights, environmental rights, human rights, etc. There is no reason why for example, the US should be making an FTA with Vietnam (as it will in the TPP).

Yes.  I think that's what sets us apart from many Republicans.  We are in a party that is economically better for us, but possibly not socially in line with us.

[Derpist]

How many of you are also pro-protectionism and supported Jim Webb?

I supported Webb, but I'm sort of a free trader. I support NAFTA and a comprehensive FTA with the EU, but I oppose free trade with non-Western countries. I also support limited trade agreements with Asian countries to protect intellectual property and counterbalance China's economic and political influence, but not comprehensive free trade.

I got to say, I'm pretty protectionist, and don't support NAFTA.

I was just wondering if protectionism came hand in hand with social conservatism in Democrats.

I think caring more about economic issues than which college student was fat-shamed for zher otherkin lifestyle often comes hand-in-hand with social conservatism in Democrats.

I actually have a very traditional liberal stance on trade. They're often good, but we need to make sure trade is linked with workers rights, environmental rights, human rights, etc. There is no reason why for example, the US should be making an FTA with Vietnam (as it will in the TPP).

Yes.  I think that's what sets us apart from many Republicans.  We are in a party that is economically better for us, but possibly not socially in line with us.

...and many Democrats, like the man who worked with a GOP Congress to get TPA for the TPP and the woman who negotiated it.

It's why I have such contempt for Hillary Clinton - she is not on line on any issue with me.

[RINO Tom]

How many of you are also pro-protectionism and supported Jim Webb?

I supported Webb, but I'm sort of a free trader. I support NAFTA and a comprehensive FTA with the EU, but I oppose free trade with non-Western countries. I also support limited trade agreements with Asian countries to protect intellectual property and counterbalance China's economic and political influence, but not comprehensive free trade.

I got to say, I'm pretty protectionist, and don't support NAFTA.

I was just wondering if protectionism came hand in hand with social conservatism in Democrats.

I think caring more about economic issues than which college student was fat-shamed for zher otherkin lifestyle often comes hand-in-hand with social conservatism in Democrats.

I actually have a very traditional liberal stance on trade. They're often good, but we need to make sure trade is linked with workers rights, environmental rights, human rights, etc. There is no reason why for example, the US should be making an FTA with Vietnam (as it will in the TPP).

Yes.  I think that's what sets us apart from many Republicans.  We are in a party that is economically better for us, but possibly not socially in line with us.

...and many Democrats, like the man who worked with a GOP Congress to get TPA for the TPP and the woman who negotiated it.

It's why I have such contempt for Hillary Clinton - she is not on line on any issue with me.

She's a run-of-the-mill tax and spend liberal proposing more regulation of business; seems like you'd be right in line with her economically.

[Goldwater]

How many of you are also pro-protectionism and supported Jim Webb?

I supported Webb, but I'm sort of a free trader. I support NAFTA and a comprehensive FTA with the EU, but I oppose free trade with non-Western countries. I also support limited trade agreements with Asian countries to protect intellectual property and counterbalance China's economic and political influence, but not comprehensive free trade.

I got to say, I'm pretty protectionist, and don't support NAFTA.

I was just wondering if protectionism came hand in hand with social conservatism in Democrats.

I think caring more about economic issues than which college student was fat-shamed for zher otherkin lifestyle often comes hand-in-hand with social conservatism in Democrats.

I actually have a very traditional liberal stance on trade. They're often good, but we need to make sure trade is linked with workers rights, environmental rights, human rights, etc. There is no reason why for example, the US should be making an FTA with Vietnam (as it will in the TPP).

Yes.  I think that's what sets us apart from many Republicans.  We are in a party that is economically better for us, but possibly not socially in line with us.

...and many Democrats, like the man who worked with a GOP Congress to get TPA for the TPP and the woman who negotiated it.

It's why I have such contempt for Hillary Clinton - she is not on line on any issue with me.

She's a run-of-the-mill tax and spend liberal proposing more regulation of business; seems like you'd be right in line with her economically.

Er, Tom, isn't that view just a little bit simplistic?

[beaver2.0]

How many of you are also pro-protectionism and supported Jim Webb?

I supported Webb, but I'm sort of a free trader. I support NAFTA and a comprehensive FTA with the EU, but I oppose free trade with non-Western countries. I also support limited trade agreements with Asian countries to protect intellectual property and counterbalance China's economic and political influence, but not comprehensive free trade.

I got to say, I'm pretty protectionist, and don't support NAFTA.

I was just wondering if protectionism came hand in hand with social conservatism in Democrats.

I think caring more about economic issues than which college student was fat-shamed for zher otherkin lifestyle often comes hand-in-hand with social conservatism in Democrats.

I actually have a very traditional liberal stance on trade. They're often good, but we need to make sure trade is linked with workers rights, environmental rights, human rights, etc. There is no reason why for example, the US should be making an FTA with Vietnam (as it will in the TPP).

Yes.  I think that's what sets us apart from many Republicans.  We are in a party that is economically better for us, but possibly not socially in line with us.

...and many Democrats, like the man who worked with a GOP Congress to get TPA for the TPP and the woman who negotiated it.

It's why I have such contempt for Hillary Clinton - she is not on line on any issue with me.

She's a run-of-the-mill tax and spend liberal proposing more regulation of business; seems like you'd be right in line with her economically.

Er, Tom, isn't that view just a little bit simplistic?

For me, she's too aligned with Wall Street and Big Business.

[Illiniwek]

As a pro-life Dem, I feel I should check in. I am far from the most socially conservative Democrat though.

[Derpist]

How many of you are also pro-protectionism and supported Jim Webb?

I supported Webb, but I'm sort of a free trader. I support NAFTA and a comprehensive FTA with the EU, but I oppose free trade with non-Western countries. I also support limited trade agreements with Asian countries to protect intellectual property and counterbalance China's economic and political influence, but not comprehensive free trade.

I got to say, I'm pretty protectionist, and don't support NAFTA.

I was just wondering if protectionism came hand in hand with social conservatism in Democrats.

I think caring more about economic issues than which college student was fat-shamed for zher otherkin lifestyle often comes hand-in-hand with social conservatism in Democrats.

I actually have a very traditional liberal stance on trade. They're often good, but we need to make sure trade is linked with workers rights, environmental rights, human rights, etc. There is no reason why for example, the US should be making an FTA with Vietnam (as it will in the TPP).

Yes.  I think that's what sets us apart from many Republicans.  We are in a party that is economically better for us, but possibly not socially in line with us.

...and many Democrats, like the man who worked with a GOP Congress to get TPA for the TPP and the woman who negotiated it.

It's why I have such contempt for Hillary Clinton - she is not on line on any issue with me.

She's a run-of-the-mill tax and spend liberal proposing more regulation of business; seems like you'd be right in line with her economically.

I have some problems with the generic Democrat stance on these issues. First, more regulation is not always the answer because most business regulation is written by the corporations anyways (regulatory capture). A lot of corporations love using regulation to wipe out their small business competitors. So I'd rather hike taxes on Wall Street than more strenuously regulate them.

Second, tax and spend doesn't work unless you're convinced people you are spending the money well. In the world of public sector unions and crony capitalism, I do not think people are convinced yet. New government programs should be supported by a cross-cultural, cross-region, cross-race coalition or else it just seems like taking from one people and giving to another and it's divisive and awful. One of my greatest political heroes is Huey Long, because he united both blacks and whites, in the era of Jim Crow no less, in pursuit of a common economic cause. So I do want more public healthcare, public education, public infrastructure, but we need to spend the money we're already spending more efficiently. The stimulus was really the antithesis of this.

Also, I think we need to pay for these programs and this is not what the corporate Keynesian establishment believes in, on either side.

[RINO Tom]

How many of you are also pro-protectionism and supported Jim Webb?

I supported Webb, but I'm sort of a free trader. I support NAFTA and a comprehensive FTA with the EU, but I oppose free trade with non-Western countries. I also support limited trade agreements with Asian countries to protect intellectual property and counterbalance China's economic and political influence, but not comprehensive free trade.

I got to say, I'm pretty protectionist, and don't support NAFTA.

I was just wondering if protectionism came hand in hand with social conservatism in Democrats.

I think caring more about economic issues than which college student was fat-shamed for zher otherkin lifestyle often comes hand-in-hand with social conservatism in Democrats.

I actually have a very traditional liberal stance on trade. They're often good, but we need to make sure trade is linked with workers rights, environmental rights, human rights, etc. There is no reason why for example, the US should be making an FTA with Vietnam (as it will in the TPP).

Yes.  I think that's what sets us apart from many Republicans.  We are in a party that is economically better for us, but possibly not socially in line with us.

...and many Democrats, like the man who worked with a GOP Congress to get TPA for the TPP and the woman who negotiated it.

It's why I have such contempt for Hillary Clinton - she is not on line on any issue with me.

She's a run-of-the-mill tax and spend liberal proposing more regulation of business; seems like you'd be right in line with her economically.

Er, Tom, isn't that view just a little bit simplistic?

Of course, haha.  And also somewhat snarky, as the poster I quoted is more or less in direct competition with me as to what direction this party should be pushed.

[TJ in Oregon]

I'm not a Democrat (though I was registered as one for a while for local reasons in Ohio) but I'd be interested if this was a thing.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

I'm not a Democrat (though I was registered as one for a while for local reasons in Ohio) but I'd be interested if this was a thing.

Woah! When did your econ score move to the left of me!? I had assumed it was like a 4, no?

[White Trash]

This thread is so 2007-Atlas feeling. All it needs is someone raving about how strongly they favor civil unions but regardless believe marriage is only between one man and one woman.

Why not?

[Mr. Illini]

yuck

[Miles]

+1, as I've been in this category for a while.

[TJ in Oregon]

I'm not a Democrat (though I was registered as one for a while for local reasons in Ohio) but I'd be interested if this was a thing.

Woah! When did your econ score move to the left of me!? I had assumed it was like a 4, no?

Lol it's never been a 4. I was sporting the +2 ish for a while but retook the test. I don't think any of my econ views have really changed, I just answered the questions in a way I felt was a bit more honest.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I ended up concluding it's easier pushing the GOP to move to the center on economic issues than to pushing the Democrats to move to the center on social issues.

Look at what the core philosophies of each party have been since their respective foundings and you'll find that it is precisely the opposite of what you've concluded*.

*Except for that socialist fling the GOP had in the 1860s; paging Yankee's anger!

The core philosophy economically of the GOP, has been what its allied business interests want. When that was protectionism and infrastructure, it wasn't hard to find socialists to take along for the ride on such a nationalist program. Keep in mind the politics of Germany following its unification as well and remember that the GOP had significant intellectual influence from German economists. Conservative elements allying with Socialism or at least coopting it to keep radicals from tearing the old systems and aristocrats limb from limb, was present in many places.