If it's Desantis or Biden, who you picking?

fka ftc said:

---

Always wrong and seldom on point.

Socially liberal is not your fantasy land of gay marriage and monkey suit wearing swinging personal massage devices.

Socially liberal is supporting those issues and either directly or consequentially supporting one single issue regardless of the outcome of other policy decisions.

Yo in particular would be wise to support moderate Rs to avoid a swing back on all progress "gay rights" made over the past 20 years.

Also, you continue to have the worst takes on why Dems have counted more votes than Rs lately.

---

Believing in civil liberties and freedoms in the past defined most of liberal politics. It is possible to be considered a classic liberal on these issues and still be fiscally conservative.

You are correct in the stance that socially liberal also includes the often irrational spending on social issues at the expense of being a fiscal conservative.

aggiebq03+ said:

---

To the OP, why did you vote for the most divisive and racist president in the last 100 years?

You stated you voted for Obama, so I'm just curious why.

---

Because I thought he was a better presidential candidate than McCain. I was also younger (21), and I think I enjoyed the thought of not having someone that wasn't 70+ years old as president. I believed that some of the changes he was proposing would be positive.

In 2008, he was charismatic, and well-liked by almost everyone I knew (my age, of course) when it came to how he articulated his opinions. He wasn't divisive or racist.

In 2012, I didn't vote for him after seeing his first term. I voted for Gary Johnson.

aggiebq03+ said:

---

If it's Desantis or Biden, who you picking?

---

He said Biden was a bridge builder.

People like the OP are who is allowing the destruction of our country. How can people be so blind?

aggiebq03+ said:

---

If it's Desantis or Biden, who you picking?

---

Desantis vs Biden - 90% chance I go with Desantis. 10% chance I go with the Libertarian. Depends how everything plays out.

Trump vs Biden - 99% chance I go with Biden.


Nope, the second part doesn't make sense with most of my stances, but I honestly think Trump would be the worst possible choice for President of this country and I will actively vote against him regardless of the other candidate.

You'll have to ask the creators of the greatest comedy in tv history.

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

If it's Desantis or Biden, who you picking?

---

Desantis vs Biden - 90% chance I go with Desantis. 10% chance I go with the Libertarian. Depends how everything plays out.

Trump vs Biden - 99% chance I go with Biden.


Nope, the second part doesn't make sense with most of my stances, but I honestly think Trump would be the worst possible choice for President of this country and I will actively vote against him regardless of the other candidate.

---

Why not go Libertarian if it's Trump v Biden?

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

Rodney Ruxin said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

The Porkchop Express said:

---

Kudos to you for coming in and asking for honest debate and exchange of opinions. Going through 20 pages of this thread is a great look at who can engage in an actual conversation with another human and who feels the need to mock and demean people who have a different opinion. Really nicely done, hope for F16 after all.

---

Really appreciate it. I've said it before, but I have mostly stayed away from this forum because of the lack of decorum for differing opinions.

I believe that I am just on the right side of the middle, maybe 55/45 leaning towards the right... but that puts me to the left of 95% of this board which leads to name-calling and people trying to make me defend Biden when I don't want to.

I truly believe that (1) almost everyone on the "other side" isn't evil, they just have a different opinion of how to make the country better than you do and (2) there are good (and bad) ideas on both sides. The extreme-ism that is prevalent in this country and on this board is exhausting and doesn't help anyone.

---

The most tiring thing on earth is every single leftist hollering "extremism" and claiming intellectual superiority over everyone they disagree with.

---

Yeah, in the spirit of "decorum" and "honest debate", I'd like to hear from this individual the wide-spread "extremist" takes held by this board. Honestly. The whole "55/45 right making him left of 95% of this board" thing is quite an extreme claim to make in itself, without any evidence. You can cloak it with general "let's all get a long and respect each other" talk, which is all well and good, but it doesn't change the fact it came with absolutely zero specifics. Without that, the conclusions drawn from it don't really mean much of anything.

---

I mean, how can I prove that with empirical data?

Do you disagree that this board is 95% to the right? If you want to say it's 90% that's fine. It's a guess and we'll never know, but the vast majority of this board is to the right.

If I consider myself in the middle, that means that 90-95% of this board sees me to the left of them. How am I supposed to get more specific than that? What are you looking for?

---

I should have been more clear. The majority of this Board is on the right, that is clear. The statement I take issue with is "The extreme-ism that is prevalent in this country and on this board is exhausting and doesn't help anyone." Now whether or not "being 55/45 right" makes you left of "95%" of the board..... that's probably a little more questionable. I mean those are numbers you pulled out of nowhere and they are quite a claim in itself, much different than the simple claim that this board is obviously majority right (or right-libertarian), which it is. But I'll leave that aside for now.

There is extremism on this board, as there is every political Board. Just visit Reddit if you need a reminder of that. But if you are implying the amount of extremism on this board is somehow worse than typical, then yes, that is a statement that would certainly need something backing it up. Something more than you just saying it.

If you aren't claiming there's more extremism on this board than your "average" political forum, then I really don't have an issue.

Frederick Palowaski said:

---

barbacoa taco said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

Admiral Adama said:

---

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Admiral Adama said:

---

What do gay marriage and abortion have to do with what the top marginal tax rate should be? Explain it like I'm five

---

So I have to dumb myself down to a kindergartner to get you to understand things? Not only should there be no reason for me to do that but even if I did I have low confidence in your ability to understand it.

---

They're drawing the line of "socially liberal" to allow SSM, trans girls in your daughter's locker room and wife's gym and post-delivery abortions, but not including the socialism we also have. Convenient to draw the line there, and still has some pretty objectionable inclusions.

---

No, you're drawing that line. If trans men in women's locker room and literally killing babies is now a socially liberal position I'm now awkwardly in the position of being a 'social conservative.'

Government is ultimately a monopoly on force. Where to use that force is discretionary. I see no reason to use force to prevent marriage between two consenting adults, and plenty of reasons to use it to protect women and children.

---

Yes I am drawing that line, because it's the only way to square "fiscal conservative" and "social liberal". The socialism is not fiscally conservative and not Constitutional for that matter. We spend more on socialism than we do constitutionally mandated defense and the three of the together are more than the revenue we bring in.

I guess you need to check mainstream Dem positions. They are the ones pushing these radical positions. And not the fringe rando on Twitter or state legislator like TXAGFAN likes to reference on the right, they are and have been pushing it from the very top for at least 10 years. Biden on day 1 EO'ed that we will go back to the Hussein-era policy of paying for abortions in foreign countries with tax-payer dollars.

---

1. The Libertarian party is essentially " fiscally conservative, socially liberal". I understand it is more nuanced than that, but at a high level, the government should stay out of my business, whether it's about my money or what I do in my personal life. Are you saying that the Libertarian party stances can't be squared? I think it's much easier than you are letting on.

2. Calling Barack Obama "Hussein" makes it hard to take you seriously. It reeks of childishness and veiled racism. I'm sure that's not how you mean it, but that's how it can be taken. Just trying to promote positive conversation.

---

The trifecta.

Congrats you have won

---

Am I wrong?

---

No. I dont totally agree on the characterization of the Libertarians but it's not far off.

Calling Obama Hussein is both childish and racist. As were the accusations of him being born in Kenya. As were the accusations of him being Muslim. Straight up racism, and I wont apologize to anyone who is offended by me saying that.

---

Old Larry Culpepper crying racism again.

Shocker

---

This is culpepper??? Makes SOOO much sense now.

Frederick Palowaski said:

---

barbacoa taco said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

Admiral Adama said:

---

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Admiral Adama said:

---

What do gay marriage and abortion have to do with what the top marginal tax rate should be? Explain it like I'm five

---

So I have to dumb myself down to a kindergartner to get you to understand things? Not only should there be no reason for me to do that but even if I did I have low confidence in your ability to understand it.

---

They're drawing the line of "socially liberal" to allow SSM, trans girls in your daughter's locker room and wife's gym and post-delivery abortions, but not including the socialism we also have. Convenient to draw the line there, and still has some pretty objectionable inclusions.

---

No, you're drawing that line. If trans men in women's locker room and literally killing babies is now a socially liberal position I'm now awkwardly in the position of being a 'social conservative.'

Government is ultimately a monopoly on force. Where to use that force is discretionary. I see no reason to use force to prevent marriage between two consenting adults, and plenty of reasons to use it to protect women and children.

---

Yes I am drawing that line, because it's the only way to square "fiscal conservative" and "social liberal". The socialism is not fiscally conservative and not Constitutional for that matter. We spend more on socialism than we do constitutionally mandated defense and the three of the together are more than the revenue we bring in.

I guess you need to check mainstream Dem positions. They are the ones pushing these radical positions. And not the fringe rando on Twitter or state legislator like TXAGFAN likes to reference on the right, they are and have been pushing it from the very top for at least 10 years. Biden on day 1 EO'ed that we will go back to the Hussein-era policy of paying for abortions in foreign countries with tax-payer dollars.

---

1. The Libertarian party is essentially " fiscally conservative, socially liberal". I understand it is more nuanced than that, but at a high level, the government should stay out of my business, whether it's about my money or what I do in my personal life. Are you saying that the Libertarian party stances can't be squared? I think it's much easier than you are letting on.

2. Calling Barack Obama "Hussein" makes it hard to take you seriously. It reeks of childishness and veiled racism. I'm sure that's not how you mean it, but that's how it can be taken. Just trying to promote positive conversation.

---

The trifecta.

Congrats you have won

---

Am I wrong?

---

No. I dont totally agree on the characterization of the Libertarians but it's not far off.

Calling Obama Hussein is both childish and racist. As were the accusations of him being born in Kenya. As were the accusations of him being Muslim. Straight up racism, and I wont apologize to anyone who is offended by me saying that.

---

Old Larry Culpepper crying racism again.

Shocker

---

Beast of Burden said:

---

Frederick Palowaski said:

---

barbacoa taco said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

Admiral Adama said:

---

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Admiral Adama said:

---

What do gay marriage and abortion have to do with what the top marginal tax rate should be? Explain it like I'm five

---

So I have to dumb myself down to a kindergartner to get you to understand things? Not only should there be no reason for me to do that but even if I did I have low confidence in your ability to understand it.

---

They're drawing the line of "socially liberal" to allow SSM, trans girls in your daughter's locker room and wife's gym and post-delivery abortions, but not including the socialism we also have. Convenient to draw the line there, and still has some pretty objectionable inclusions.

---

No, you're drawing that line. If trans men in women's locker room and literally killing babies is now a socially liberal position I'm now awkwardly in the position of being a 'social conservative.'

Government is ultimately a monopoly on force. Where to use that force is discretionary. I see no reason to use force to prevent marriage between two consenting adults, and plenty of reasons to use it to protect women and children.

---

Yes I am drawing that line, because it's the only way to square "fiscal conservative" and "social liberal". The socialism is not fiscally conservative and not Constitutional for that matter. We spend more on socialism than we do constitutionally mandated defense and the three of the together are more than the revenue we bring in.

I guess you need to check mainstream Dem positions. They are the ones pushing these radical positions. And not the fringe rando on Twitter or state legislator like TXAGFAN likes to reference on the right, they are and have been pushing it from the very top for at least 10 years. Biden on day 1 EO'ed that we will go back to the Hussein-era policy of paying for abortions in foreign countries with tax-payer dollars.

---

1. The Libertarian party is essentially " fiscally conservative, socially liberal". I understand it is more nuanced than that, but at a high level, the government should stay out of my business, whether it's about my money or what I do in my personal life. Are you saying that the Libertarian party stances can't be squared? I think it's much easier than you are letting on.

2. Calling Barack Obama "Hussein" makes it hard to take you seriously. It reeks of childishness and veiled racism. I'm sure that's not how you mean it, but that's how it can be taken. Just trying to promote positive conversation.

---

The trifecta.

Congrats you have won

---

Am I wrong?

---

No. I dont totally agree on the characterization of the Libertarians but it's not far off.

Calling Obama Hussein is both childish and racist. As were the accusations of him being born in Kenya. As were the accusations of him being Muslim. Straight up racism, and I wont apologize to anyone who is offended by me saying that.

---

Old Larry Culpepper crying racism again.

Shocker

---

This is culpepper??? Makes SOOO much sense now.

---

Who are you?

barbacoa taco said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

TXAGFAN said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

TXAGFAN said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

TXAGFAN said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

TXAGFAN said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

TXAGFAN said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

Admiral Adama said:

---

What do gay marriage and abortion have to do with what the top marginal tax rate should be? Explain it like I'm five

---

Well you see, gay marriage is a carrot that democrats dangle out in front of gays who want to save on their taxes. Republicans don't give 2 ****s about a gay couple as long as they aren't forced to have awkward conversations with their children before they are mentally ready to do so as a result of their actions.

---

Gaslighting. You read this forum? Your platforms? Words of your last presidential candidate on this subject? Other party leaders?

If they don't care they're doing a damn good job of making it clear they do and removing a good 5-10% of voters from their side in the process. Winning!

---

What are they doing that is so detrimental to life of a gay person?

---

what world do you live in that you make this post? Did you read this thread and the countless others where gay people are discussed lol?

Unbelievable. Can say YOU don't care, but to say republicans don't care is bull*****

---

Should be easy to prove then

Why can't you?

---

Go read your platforms and get back to me. That's a good source still right? The GOP site.

---

Still no answer

---

You want me to educate you on your party's platforms? Ok, pop off uninformed voter.

---

LOL. You can't answer because it would make you look foolish. Sorry about your abnormal lifestyle and your inability to have gay sex books in elementary schools

---

You don't care I thought?

---

I told you Republicans don't care unless it forces us to have conversations with our children before they are ready.

---

So if Obergefell is overturned (which is not likely but still a distinct possibility), do you really think Texas and other red states wouldn't immediately move to ban SSM? Tennessee is already taking steps in that direction.

I can say with near certainty the TX Lege would introduce bills banning it and Abbott would sign it in a heartbeat.

The GOP definitely cares about this issue, they just dont talk about it that much because it's a losing issue.

---

There would be attempts by some of the radical evangelicals but any attempts to prevent SSM would fail.
You do understand that one of President Trumps most trusted advisors in his administration was gay.

Most conservatives and many Republicans would much prefer all government get the hell out of the marriage business.

TXAGFAN said:

---

Beast of Burden said:

---

Frederick Palowaski said:

---

barbacoa taco said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

Admiral Adama said:

---

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Admiral Adama said:

---

What do gay marriage and abortion have to do with what the top marginal tax rate should be? Explain it like I'm five

---

So I have to dumb myself down to a kindergartner to get you to understand things? Not only should there be no reason for me to do that but even if I did I have low confidence in your ability to understand it.

---

They're drawing the line of "socially liberal" to allow SSM, trans girls in your daughter's locker room and wife's gym and post-delivery abortions, but not including the socialism we also have. Convenient to draw the line there, and still has some pretty objectionable inclusions.

---

No, you're drawing that line. If trans men in women's locker room and literally killing babies is now a socially liberal position I'm now awkwardly in the position of being a 'social conservative.'

Government is ultimately a monopoly on force. Where to use that force is discretionary. I see no reason to use force to prevent marriage between two consenting adults, and plenty of reasons to use it to protect women and children.

---

Yes I am drawing that line, because it's the only way to square "fiscal conservative" and "social liberal". The socialism is not fiscally conservative and not Constitutional for that matter. We spend more on socialism than we do constitutionally mandated defense and the three of the together are more than the revenue we bring in.

I guess you need to check mainstream Dem positions. They are the ones pushing these radical positions. And not the fringe rando on Twitter or state legislator like TXAGFAN likes to reference on the right, they are and have been pushing it from the very top for at least 10 years. Biden on day 1 EO'ed that we will go back to the Hussein-era policy of paying for abortions in foreign countries with tax-payer dollars.

---

1. The Libertarian party is essentially " fiscally conservative, socially liberal". I understand it is more nuanced than that, but at a high level, the government should stay out of my business, whether it's about my money or what I do in my personal life. Are you saying that the Libertarian party stances can't be squared? I think it's much easier than you are letting on.

2. Calling Barack Obama "Hussein" makes it hard to take you seriously. It reeks of childishness and veiled racism. I'm sure that's not how you mean it, but that's how it can be taken. Just trying to promote positive conversation.

---

The trifecta.

Congrats you have won

---

Am I wrong?

---

No. I dont totally agree on the characterization of the Libertarians but it's not far off.

Calling Obama Hussein is both childish and racist. As were the accusations of him being born in Kenya. As were the accusations of him being Muslim. Straight up racism, and I wont apologize to anyone who is offended by me saying that.

---

Old Larry Culpepper crying racism again.

Shocker

---

This is culpepper??? Makes SOOO much sense now.

---

Who are you?

---

Your intellectual superior.

Sorry...I know that doesn't narrow it down much.

Sure you are. DonaldJTrump/TaxAgLawyer or whatever? I thought you got a perma for your last thread.

I see you caught the error that you thought he said you're when he really said your.

Truth is a possessive your probably is also incorrect. Just now how you thought.

barbacoa taco said:

---

AggieKeith15 said:

---

barbacoa taco said:

---

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

barbacoa taco said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

Admiral Adama said:

---

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Admiral Adama said:

---

What do gay marriage and abortion have to do with what the top marginal tax rate should be? Explain it like I'm five

---

So I have to dumb myself down to a kindergartner to get you to understand things? Not only should there be no reason for me to do that but even if I did I have low confidence in your ability to understand it.

---

They're drawing the line of "socially liberal" to allow SSM, trans girls in your daughter's locker room and wife's gym and post-delivery abortions, but not including the socialism we also have. Convenient to draw the line there, and still has some pretty objectionable inclusions.

---

No, you're drawing that line. If trans men in women's locker room and literally killing babies is now a socially liberal position I'm now awkwardly in the position of being a 'social conservative.'

Government is ultimately a monopoly on force. Where to use that force is discretionary. I see no reason to use force to prevent marriage between two consenting adults, and plenty of reasons to use it to protect women and children.

---

Yes I am drawing that line, because it's the only way to square "fiscal conservative" and "social liberal". The socialism is not fiscally conservative and not Constitutional for that matter. We spend more on socialism than we do constitutionally mandated defense and the three of the together are more than the revenue we bring in.

I guess you need to check mainstream Dem positions. They are the ones pushing these radical positions. And not the fringe rando on Twitter or state legislator like TXAGFAN likes to reference on the right, they are and have been pushing it from the very top for at least 10 years. Biden on day 1 EO'ed that we will go back to the Hussein-era policy of paying for abortions in foreign countries with tax-payer dollars.

---

1. The Libertarian party is essentially " fiscally conservative, socially liberal". I understand it is more nuanced than that, but at a high level, the government should stay out of my business, whether it's about my money or what I do in my personal life. Are you saying that the Libertarian party stances can't be squared? I think it's much easier than you are letting on.

2. Calling Barack Obama "Hussein" makes it hard to take you seriously. It reeks of childishness and veiled racism. I'm sure that's not how you mean it, but that's how it can be taken. Just trying to promote positive conversation.

---

The trifecta.

Congrats you have won

---

Am I wrong?

---

No. I dont totally agree on the characterization of the Libertarians but it's not far off.

Calling Obama Hussein is both childish and racist. As were the accusations of him being born in Kenya. As were the accusations of him being Muslim. Straight up racism, and I wont apologize to anyone who is offended by me saying that.

---

How is it racist? It's his name and it's indicative of his religion, not his race.

The race card is so over-played by people who think they can win any argument by throwing it down. Not everyone is that soft.

---

And in this case the race card is appropriate. Because it's always said in an insulting way and an obvious comparison to Saddam Hussein. It's never said in good faith because he does not go by Hussein. He goes by Barack. The birth certificate stuff was the same, once that theory was disproven. The Muslim stuff is no different, people just said that because of his skin color and heritage. I'm not buying any of the other BS excuses for a second.

I'm not a big Obama fan and never voted for him. Attack his policies all you want. But all of the aforementioned stuff I saw exactly for what it was. There's no defending it.

---

But his middle name is Hussein... so...?

---

Unless someone wants you to call them by their middle name, you don't do it. And the right constantly called him Hussein in a derogatory way, obviously in comparison to Saddam. It's NEVER done in good faith, so don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining. And that's the last i'll say on this topic.

---

And Trump wanted to be called orange man? That's blatantly "racist" is it not?

That is to say -- no one gets to decide what other people call you -- not everyone will view you in a good light or have good things to say about you. The fact that his own mother wanted him to be called Barack "Hussein" proves that there is plenty of merrit to call him as such.

And if an non-american name personifies the character of a person who acts anti-American, then perhaps there is some truth that he is, in fact, anti-American, and the question then becomes whether or not an anti-American person makes for a good President. For me, that answer is plainly no and it should be the same for anyone who actually wants good for this country.

Perhaps if you weren't so programmed to find offense from everything you see/hear then you would have thought the same as well.

aggiebq03+ said:

---

I see you caught the error that you thought he said you're when he really said your.

Truth is a possessive your probably is also incorrect. Just now how you thought.

---

I saved it.



Amazing how much confidence he has for being such a..... you know

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

If it's Desantis or Biden, who you picking?

---

Desantis vs Biden - 90% chance I go with Desantis. 10% chance I go with the Libertarian. Depends how everything plays out.

Trump vs Biden - 99% chance I go with Biden.


Nope, the second part doesn't make sense with most of my stances, but I honestly think Trump would be the worst possible choice for President of this country and I will actively vote against him regardless of the other candidate.

---

Why not go Libertarian if it's Trump v Biden?

---

Fair question, but it's because I actively want to vote Trump out.

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

If it's Desantis or Biden, who you picking?

---

Desantis vs Biden - 90% chance I go with Desantis. 10% chance I go with the Libertarian. Depends how everything plays out.

Trump vs Biden - 99% chance I go with Biden.


Nope, the second part doesn't make sense with most of my stances, but I honestly think Trump would be the worst possible choice for President of this country and I will actively vote against him regardless of the other candidate.

---

Why not go Libertarian if it's Trump v Biden?

---

Good idea. Let's change to ranked choice voting and maybe third parties will have a fighting chance for once. and we can stop electing awful leaders from awful establishment parties.

aggiebq03+ said:

---

I see you caught the error that you thought he said you're when he really said your.

Truth is a possessive your probably is also incorrect. Just now how you thought.

---

You got me, read it quickly and incorrectly. Ohhh what a gotcha!

TXAGFAN said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

I see you caught the error that you thought he said you're when he really said your.

Truth is a possessive your probably is also incorrect. Just now how you thought.

---

You got me, read it quickly and incorrectly. Ohhh what a gotcha!

---

It wouldn't be such a "gotcha" if you weren't so smarmy and condescending in general. Kind of on you, pal.

barbacoa taco said:

---

Frederick Palowaski said:

---

barbacoa taco said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

Admiral Adama said:

---

WHOOP!'91 said:

---

fka ftc said:

---

Admiral Adama said:

---

What do gay marriage and abortion have to do with what the top marginal tax rate should be? Explain it like I'm five

---

So I have to dumb myself down to a kindergartner to get you to understand things? Not only should there be no reason for me to do that but even if I did I have low confidence in your ability to understand it.

---

They're drawing the line of "socially liberal" to allow SSM, trans girls in your daughter's locker room and wife's gym and post-delivery abortions, but not including the socialism we also have. Convenient to draw the line there, and still has some pretty objectionable inclusions.

---

No, you're drawing that line. If trans men in women's locker room and literally killing babies is now a socially liberal position I'm now awkwardly in the position of being a 'social conservative.'

Government is ultimately a monopoly on force. Where to use that force is discretionary. I see no reason to use force to prevent marriage between two consenting adults, and plenty of reasons to use it to protect women and children.

---

Yes I am drawing that line, because it's the only way to square "fiscal conservative" and "social liberal". The socialism is not fiscally conservative and not Constitutional for that matter. We spend more on socialism than we do constitutionally mandated defense and the three of the together are more than the revenue we bring in.

I guess you need to check mainstream Dem positions. They are the ones pushing these radical positions. And not the fringe rando on Twitter or state legislator like TXAGFAN likes to reference on the right, they are and have been pushing it from the very top for at least 10 years. Biden on day 1 EO'ed that we will go back to the Hussein-era policy of paying for abortions in foreign countries with tax-payer dollars.

---

1. The Libertarian party is essentially " fiscally conservative, socially liberal". I understand it is more nuanced than that, but at a high level, the government should stay out of my business, whether it's about my money or what I do in my personal life. Are you saying that the Libertarian party stances can't be squared? I think it's much easier than you are letting on.

2. Calling Barack Obama "Hussein" makes it hard to take you seriously. It reeks of childishness and veiled racism. I'm sure that's not how you mean it, but that's how it can be taken. Just trying to promote positive conversation.

---

The trifecta.

Congrats you have won

---

Am I wrong?

---

No. I dont totally agree on the characterization of the Libertarians but it's not far off.

Calling Obama Hussein is both childish and racist. As were the accusations of him being born in Kenya. As were the accusations of him being Muslim. Straight up racism, and I wont apologize to anyone who is offended by me saying that.

---

Old Larry Culpepper crying racism again.

Shocker

---

---

Oh, little man, you could never hurt my feelings. Guess you had to change your handle for that reason.

Rodney Ruxin said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

I see you caught the error that you thought he said you're when he really said your.

Truth is a possessive your probably is also incorrect. Just now how you thought.

---

I saved it.



Amazing how much confidence he has for being such a..... you know

---

What?

Like I always say - Can **** on me all you want, I've done pretty well for being a "dumb liberal" according to posters here (let me know if you want to swap standardized test scores, tax returns, etc as a measure of that). I assure you I know the correct use of your/you're, which is why it was fixed a second after posting.

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

If it's Desantis or Biden, who you picking?

---

Desantis vs Biden - 90% chance I go with Desantis. 10% chance I go with the Libertarian. Depends how everything plays out.

Trump vs Biden - 99% chance I go with Biden.


Nope, the second part doesn't make sense with most of my stances, but I honestly think Trump would be the worst possible choice for President of this country and I will actively vote against him regardless of the other candidate.

---

Why not go Libertarian if it's Trump v Biden?

---

Fair question, but it's because I actively want to vote Trump out.

---

So you admit voting Libertarian is always a throw away vote? Glad someone admits it.

barbacoa taco said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

If it's Desantis or Biden, who you picking?

---

Desantis vs Biden - 90% chance I go with Desantis. 10% chance I go with the Libertarian. Depends how everything plays out.

Trump vs Biden - 99% chance I go with Biden.


Nope, the second part doesn't make sense with most of my stances, but I honestly think Trump would be the worst possible choice for President of this country and I will actively vote against him regardless of the other candidate.

---

Why not go Libertarian if it's Trump v Biden?

---

Good idea. Let's change to ranked choice voting and maybe third parties will have a fighting chance for once. and we can stop electing awful leaders from awful establishment parties.

---

LOL they can't let that happen, GOP's influence in presidential election is hanging on by thread as it is in electoral college.

Rodney Ruxin said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

Rodney Ruxin said:

---

cevans_40 said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

The Porkchop Express said:

---

Kudos to you for coming in and asking for honest debate and exchange of opinions. Going through 20 pages of this thread is a great look at who can engage in an actual conversation with another human and who feels the need to mock and demean people who have a different opinion. Really nicely done, hope for F16 after all.

---

Really appreciate it. I've said it before, but I have mostly stayed away from this forum because of the lack of decorum for differing opinions.

I believe that I am just on the right side of the middle, maybe 55/45 leaning towards the right... but that puts me to the left of 95% of this board which leads to name-calling and people trying to make me defend Biden when I don't want to.

I truly believe that (1) almost everyone on the "other side" isn't evil, they just have a different opinion of how to make the country better than you do and (2) there are good (and bad) ideas on both sides. The extreme-ism that is prevalent in this country and on this board is exhausting and doesn't help anyone.

---

The most tiring thing on earth is every single leftist hollering "extremism" and claiming intellectual superiority over everyone they disagree with.

---

Yeah, in the spirit of "decorum" and "honest debate", I'd like to hear from this individual the wide-spread "extremist" takes held by this board. Honestly. The whole "55/45 right making him left of 95% of this board" thing is quite an extreme claim to make in itself, without any evidence. You can cloak it with general "let's all get a long and respect each other" talk, which is all well and good, but it doesn't change the fact it came with absolutely zero specifics. Without that, the conclusions drawn from it don't really mean much of anything.

---

I mean, how can I prove that with empirical data?

Do you disagree that this board is 95% to the right? If you want to say it's 90% that's fine. It's a guess and we'll never know, but the vast majority of this board is to the right.

If I consider myself in the middle, that means that 90-95% of this board sees me to the left of them. How am I supposed to get more specific than that? What are you looking for?

---

I should have been more clear. The majority of this Board is on the right, that is clear. The statement I take issue with is "The extreme-ism that is prevalent in this country and on this board is exhausting and doesn't help anyone." Now whether or not "being 55/45 right" makes you left of "95%" of the board..... that's probably a little more questionable. I mean those are numbers you pulled out of nowhere and they are quite a claim in itself, much different than the simple claim that this board is obviously majority right (or right-libertarian), which it is. But I'll leave that aside for now.

There is extremism on this board, as there is every political Board. Just visit Reddit if you need a reminder of that. But if you are implying the amount of extremism on this board is somehow worse than typical, then yes, that is a statement that would certainly need something backing it up. Something more than you just saying it.

If you aren't claiming there's more extremism on this board than your "average" political forum, then I really don't have an issue.

---

I don't know how to prove it per-se, but I believe this board has more "extreme right" on it than most.

To put it in an image (and pardon the poor photoshop)

If I'm the black arrow (where I consider myself), I believe the vast majority (I said 95%, but I'll back down and say maybe it's closer to 85-90%) lives in the yellow area. I have no proof that it is true, and I don't know how I could ever investigate that without creating a poll or something, but that is what I have determined by reading the board.

I could be wrong, and it's not really that important in the grand scheme of things.

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

One of my core beliefs about the Presidency is that they need to try and unite the country

---

You said you voted for Obama though.

barbacoa taco said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

If it's Desantis or Biden, who you picking?

---

Desantis vs Biden - 90% chance I go with Desantis. 10% chance I go with the Libertarian. Depends how everything plays out.

Trump vs Biden - 99% chance I go with Biden.


Nope, the second part doesn't make sense with most of my stances, but I honestly think Trump would be the worst possible choice for President of this country and I will actively vote against him regardless of the other candidate.

---

Why not go Libertarian if it's Trump v Biden?

---

Good idea. Let's change to ranked choice voting and maybe third parties will have a fighting chance for once. and we can stop electing awful leaders from awful establishment parties.

---

I'd rather go back to first place gets President and second gets Vice President. More chance nothing gets done, gridlock in Washington DC would be better for most Americans.

Quote:

---

(let me know if you want to swap standardized test scores, tax returns, etc as a measure of that)

---

proudaggie02 said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

One of my core beliefs about the Presidency is that they need to try and unite the country

---

You said you voted for Obama though.

---

And even with what's going on with inflation he'd still vote for Biden. Either this is the best troll ever or he's dumb as ****.

proudaggie02 said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

One of my core beliefs about the Presidency is that they need to try and unite the country

---

You said you voted for Obama though.

---

If we're going to take pot shots at voting histories, how many folks on this board voted for W and want a mulligan? Invading Iraq on false intel was one the largest strategic blunders in our nations history that wasted money and lives for no practical gain.

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

aggiebq03+ said:

---

If it's Desantis or Biden, who you picking?

---

Desantis vs Biden - 90% chance I go with Desantis. 10% chance I go with the Libertarian. Depends how everything plays out.

Trump vs Biden - 99% chance I go with Biden.


Nope, the second part doesn't make sense with most of my stances, but I honestly think Trump would be the worst possible choice for President of this country and I will actively vote against him regardless of the other candidate.

---

Why not go Libertarian if it's Trump v Biden?

---

Fair question, but it's because I actively want to vote Trump out.

---

So you admit voting Libertarian is always a throw away vote? Glad someone admits it.

---

I admit that the Libertarian will never win the Presidency given the political landscape of today.

I do believe in voting for Libertarians where I can. Moving from 1.5% to 4.0% over time may mean that more of the stances I care about get adopted by other candidates who want to capture our (however small) voting block.

If you think that is throwing away my vote, ok.

Admiral Adama said:

---

proudaggie02 said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

One of my core beliefs about the Presidency is that they need to try and unite the country

---

You said you voted for Obama though.

---

If we're going to take pot shots at voting histories, how many folks on this board voted for W and want a mulligan? Invading Iraq on false intel was one the largest strategic blunders in our nations history that wasted money and lives for no practical gain.

---

100% true. To that point however, I wonder if Wrec would admit now with hindsight that O had little interest in "uniting" the country? Which is clearly just as true.

proudaggie02 said:

---

Wrec86 Ag said:

---

One of my core beliefs about the Presidency is that they need to try and unite the country

---

You said you voted for Obama though.

---

His first election, yes.
His second election, no.