Which Political Label Fits You Best?

I voted Independent, no affiliation. This could be a good thread. I hope you didn't start it to trap anyone.

I'm an anarcho-syndicalist, myself.

I note that there isn't a category for the Monster Raving Loony Party, or MRLP, as we like to be called.

MRLP-- They don't get many votes, but their conventions are to DIE for!

I have often times been called a Fascist.


Not surprisingly I went with Conservative although I am registered as a Democrat and often vote Republican.

More people have cast a vote than have dropped in to comment. Makes you wonder if people are unwilling to describe themselves publicly as a Democrat or a Republican. Sturgis, i've not seen a state in the last fifteen years that requires anyone to register as a member of either party in order to be a registered voter. When did you register to vote?

According to my voter registration card it was back in 1980 (even during the brief times I left, this was my legal residence).

There are places (quite a few in fact) where in order to vote in the primary elections you need to be registered in the party which is having the primary. Think about it: If a person is not registered one way or the other then they could cast a vote in both the Democratic and Republican Primary elections. Now, keep in mind it may not be a requirement to register in any particular party; but, why give up the opportunity to vote in a primary?

There are many states which will allow you to vote in either primary, but not both. In Ohio, you sign your name next to a facsimile of your signature. If you vote in one primary, your name would not appear on the voter role when the next primary came along.

I was just surprised because i had thought (for no particular reason other than talking to other people) that no states any longer required that one state a political affiliation when registering, or that it had at least become uncommon.

So why do you vote in Democratic primaries? Do you hope to screw things up?

I am a Centrist.

Honestly, they stand for a lot of what I stand for. I couldn't believe it.

i settled for liberal because liberal malcontent wasn't listed.

A distinct possibility. Politics has changed since I was a young whipperschnapper.


Mainly to assure the votes being brought in are for the most conservative candidate that the Democrats put out there. She or he may not be a Conservative in the usual sense of the word; however, they are more towards center than some of the slate and that works for me. Odds are that if I were registered as a Republican or voting in a Republican primary, I'd go for the least conservative candidate. To be honest I prefer candidates further towards the middle of the road in their political beliefs (although leaning right).

I chose "Liberal," could've easily chosen "Democrat," and have an affinity with Independents, Greens, and Libertarians.

i'm canadian, so i guess that makes me a socialist

i usually support the party with the social agenda

embittered defeated revolutionary troll.

Apparently I'm the only communist.

another liberal malcontent here...

Green liberal with some socialist leanings........

I still haven't voted I am either a Dem or a liberal, I wanted to add even more choices like White Supremist, neo-con, progressive etc but a2k wouldn't let me.

Acceptance of the New York Liberal Party Nomination (by John F. Kennedy, proud Liberal)
September 14, 1960

Why I am a Liberal


"What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."

"But first, I would like to say what I understand the word "Liberal" to mean and explain in the process why I consider myself to be a "Liberal," and what it means in the presidential election of 1960.

.....

"This is my political credo:

"I believe in human dignity as the source of national purpose, in human liberty as the source of national action, in the human heart as the source of national compassion, and in the human mind as the source of our invention and our ideas. It is, I believe, the faith in our fellow citizens as individuals and as people that lies at the heart of the liberal faith. For liberalism is not so much a party creed or set of fixed platform promises as it is an attitude of mind and heart, a faith in man's ability through the experiences of his reason and judgment to increase for himself and his fellow men the amount of justice and freedom and brotherhood which all human life deserves.

"I believe also in the United States of America, in the promise that it contains and has contained throughout our history of producing a society so abundant and creative and so free and responsible that it cannot only fulfill the aspirations of its citizens, but serve equally well as a beacon for all mankind. I do not believe in a superstate. I see no magic in tax dollars which are sent to Washington and then returned. I abhor the waste and incompetence of large-scale federal bureaucracies in this administration as well as in others. I do not favor state compulsion when voluntary individual effort can do the job and do it well. But I believe in a government which acts, which exercises its full powers and full responsibilities. Government is an art and a precious obligation; and when it has a job to do, I believe it should do it. And this requires not only great ends but that we propose concrete means of achieving them."

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/presidents/35_kennedy/psou...

What seems to confuse many conservatives about liberals is that they're accustomed to thinking of liberalism and conservatism as parallel ideologies with conservatives preferring less government and liberals preferring more. The equivalency breaks down, because liberals never claim that increasing the size of government is an end in itself. Liberals only support larger government if they have some reason to believe that it will lead to material improvement in people's lives. Conservatives claim to also want material improvement in people's lives, but proving that their policies can produce such an outcome is a luxury, not a necessity.