your views VS your political party

Nope.

You just look at where a candidate stands on the issue(s) that matter most and hopefully, throw your support behind him.

I am deeply troubled that Kerry gave Bush carte blanche to invade Iraq.

But when I compare Kerry and Bush on social issues, there's no question in my mind that Kerry is the preferable leader.

Very few of my views are supported by either party, which is troubling.

What are your views?

Well, ...

-The environment should get more attention, on large scale and small scale. I recycle everything I possibly can.

-Animals that we eat should not be abused in any way, or given sterroids/antibiotics... and killed humanely.

-More money for elementary schools! rather than money for scholarships for people who won't pass because they didn't learn the basics in elementary schools.

-Affordable health insurance, rather than socialized medicine.

-The ability for any citizen to see exactly where every penny the government spends goes.

-Legalize drugs, all of them... let the druggies weed themselves out of society--if they need to. Have less tax money paying to clothe, feed, and house drug criminals.

-Take the government out of our lives. Separate church and state.

-The INS needs to be cleaned up, and we need better border patrol.

I could go on, but I need to leave soon. That's the gist of it, though.

Makes much sense to me.

This could be an interesting thread.

I agree that the environment needs attention. I don't have a firm opinion on whether it needs more attention than it's getting. I do think that the bogus warnings of danger from "global warming" are diverting attention from more important areas that could use some attention. (I remember hearing one scientist talk about her frustration when she found that elevated pollutant levels in one particular stream were killing off fish, and she couldn't get anyone to listen).

Agree that animals raised to be eaten shouldn't be abused, and should be killed humanely. Don't have much opinion on steroids. But what's wrong with antibiotics?

Etc. Drat, I'm out of time. I'll continue later.

I would say that on social issues, Kerry's views are far more consonant with my own than are Bush's. Saying that, I believe that I based my decision on whom to vote, by prioritizing.

IMO national security trumps social issues, in terms of importance. I believe that Bush is far more steadfast in terms of the country's security than is Kerry.

No existing political party fits me like a glove. I usually vote Republican--I sometimes have to hold my nose to do so--as the party that supports the most policies I can support at least among the parties that can actually win. IMO, there is a tremendous amount of specious rhetoric and hypocrisy in all of them.

I tend to lean libertarian on some issues and democrat on others,

I think charities and private organizations sometimes do a far better job than the government. But I'm wary of the claim that charities would automatically get more funding if we cut welfare and reduced costs.

So i would be in favor of a proposal like this, but then again, just about anyone would...

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=23148

I strongly favor cutting bueracratic govt. programs in favor of privately launched ones that compete with each other to do the job efficently. I strongly favor using this money saved to pay off the national debt and cut taxes.

I do believe that sometimes we have far too many stupid regulations that stifle businesses.

I believe that free trade and free competition works as long as the govt. oversees it to stop unscrupulous practices and monopolies.

And most importantly, I believe that republicans are morons when it comes interventing into social issues be it gay marriage, medical marijuana and a host of other situations. But I do agree with some gun regulations such as the assault weapons ban, background check, and a database to track down guns used in a murder back to their owners.

And I support caps on lawusits. I think that large lawsuit settlements over idiotic stuff really hurt and destroy businesses.

I agree with MORE of the Republican philosophies than any other. Therefore, I tend to vote Republican.

That is not to say I agree with ALL the philosophies of the Republican party.

Antibiotics are something that our doctors and patients have been using way too much already. I don't want to eat it in my every day food, too. I already have intestinal problems resulting from antibiotics, and I don't want to make it worse.

My political party (the Social Democrats) more and more doesn't share my view.

However, I try to convince "them" to change this, to find compromisses, to take another approach etc.
This can, IMHO, only be done from insite the party.
Thus, I'm a member and go (more or less) regularily to the local meetingd, have been and am a delegatee on town and county level.

I think that's the key Walter. Too much of American politics has been one of scorched earth policies; i.e. let's see if we can't make the other guy look bad enough nobody will vote for him. Often this includes attacking a political party as well.

There was a time when people actually studied the issues and understood the implications of a policy in order to decide on where to cast their vote.

If I ever get elected benevolent dictator, one of my decrees will be every citizen will have to pass a test proving they understand all sides of the issues before they will be allowed to cast their vote. (And yes, I realize there wouldn't be votes in a dictatorship but it's a fantasy; therefore it can be illogical.)

It would defy the law of averages for anyone of any party to agree 100% with what the party stands for (even the chairpersons of the platform committees.) This has probably always been true, but today more than ever as the parties go father and farther afield in their interests.

I think the Democrat and Republican parties are moving closer together, not farther apart. The political debate these days is not black and white, but shades of gray. The administration should have spent more in this area and less in that area. The days of Ronald Reagan advocating much smaller government and fewer regulations seem to be gone forever. Now the question is, will we be regulated by a large Nanny State or a small Nanny State?

Tarantulas, I completely agree.