Stunning 44% of voters consider themselves to have libertarian ideals

N

NewsBoy

News Delivery
(Scroll down) One more bit from our post-election Zogby poll: We asked voters if they considered themselves “fiscally conservative and socially liberal.” A whopping 59% said they did. When we added to the question “also known as libertarian,” 44% still claimed that description. That’s too many voters for any party to ignore.

More at link...
 
Duh... I've been saying this one for a long, long time. How many people constantly say silly junk like, "A libertarian is just an embarrassed republican" and crap like that? It simply isn't true. I've had libertarian ideals since before it was the "cool" new thing....
 
NewsBoy said:
(Scroll down) One more bit from our post-election Zogby poll: We asked voters if they considered themselves “fiscally conservative and socially liberal.” A whopping 59% said they did. When we added to the question “also known as libertarian,” 44% still claimed that description. That’s too many voters for any party to ignore.

More at link...
Click to expand...


We asked voters if they considered themselves “fiscally conservative and socially liberal.” A whopping 59% said they did.

LOL. Well of course they did. These are just buzzwords. Who's going to claim they're "fiscally liberal"? No one even uses that word..

"Fiscally conservative" and "socially liberal" are just buzzwords, with no measurable meaning, or metrics to define it. Hell, even Dixie claims he is "socially moderate", yet he personally believes any woman who gets an abortion should be stoned to death. Ergo, "fiscally conservative and socially liberal" are just the cool buzzwords most people like to associate themselves with.

In reality, those words don't really mean much, or tell us much about how people really feel. Check out the dixie example.
 
I'd bet that most who said they are socially liberal support some sort of homosexual union... Honestly... You are desperate to support your assertion that all those people must be embarrassed republicans. All 44%... Right....
 
Damocles said:
I'd bet that most who said they are socially liberal support some sort of homosexual union... Honestly... You are desperate to support your assertion that all those people must be embarrassed republicans. All 44%... Right....
Click to expand...


Historically, they are embarrased republicans. Newsboys own link proves it:

In the past, our research shows, most libertarians voted Republican—72% for George W. Bush in 2000, for instance, with only 20 percent for Al Gore, and 70% for Republican congressional candidates in 2002. But in 2004, presumably turned off by war, wiretapping, and welfare-state spending sprees, they shifted sharply toward the Democrats. John F. Kerry got 38% of the libertarian vote.


I'll give you that Bush's war and his spending have turned off a lot of libertarians, and made them give the Dems a second look.
 
Which is my point. They aren't "embarrassed republicans" they are people who support limited government and freedom of the individual. They believe themselves to be libertarian and know enough about it to claim it and actually follow it. They didn't vote for Bush a second time....

Yet all you give is credit to "embarrassed republicans"... Silly really, there are far more people that consider themselves to have libertarian ideals and ignoring them can be bad for a party. Ask Bush.
 
Damo, with all due respect, you're an embarrassed republican posing as a libertarian.

Don't you remember we went round and round on fullpolitics, with you defending bush's warrantless wiretapping? You did a better job of defending bush's warrantless wiretapping than Rush Limbaugh could. And that wasn't very libertarian of you

:pke:
 
Cypress said:
I'll give you that Bush's war and his spending have turned off a lot of libertarians, and made them give the Dems a second look.
Click to expand...

Well, I did vote for W in 2000. At the time I was a litmus test voter with a limited understanding of the importance of anything besides taxes. Tax cuts were the issue, and I remember foolishly joking with my friend that "whoever cuts taxes has my vote, I don't care if he paves Yosemite". Obviously this is a joke revealing ignorance of other issues.

The spending, the domestic spying, the absolutely disgusting growth on the Federal Government, the blind ambition no matter how much blood is lost in foreign wars, the arrogance and stupidity, incompetence, shortsightedness, the rubber stamp.......

I wouldn't say this has made me appreciate the D any more, but it has certainly made me appreciate gridlock and opposition to the monolithic mismanagement team the Republicans have become.
 
Cypress said:
We asked voters if they considered themselves “fiscally conservative and socially liberal.” A whopping 59% said they did.

LOL. Well of course they did. These are just buzzwords. Who's going to claim they're "fiscally liberal"? No one even uses that word..

"Fiscally conservative" and "socially liberal" are just buzzwords, with no measurable meaning, or metrics to define it. Hell, even Dixie claims he is "socially moderate", yet he personally believes any woman who gets an abortion should be stoned to death. Ergo, "fiscally conservative and socially liberal" are just the cool buzzwords most people like to associate themselves with.

In reality, those words don't really mean much, or tell us much about how people really feel. Check out the dixie example.
Click to expand...

Well let's use 'me' as an example. I'm for reforming social security, if I had my druthers it would be phased out. I'm for making all earmarks known, though publication to the representatives concerned local and regional news sources.

I'm against term limits, but for widespread information of representatives votes on all issues.

My bottom line: I think the federal government should be limited to only those things that cannot be handled by the states.

I think the states should be limited to only those issues given to the fed and the remainder that cannot be addressed at a local level.

Between those that have to do with the fed and those that cannot be handled locally, there are few things for the state legislatures, they should get those things right.
 
Cypress said:
Damo, with all due respect, you're an embarrassed republican posing as a libertarian.

Don't you remember we went round and round on fullpolitics, with you defending bush's warrantless wiretapping? You did a better job of defending bush's warrantless wiretapping than Rush Limbaugh could. And that wasn't very libertarian of you

:pke:
Click to expand...
Rubbish. I have been a libertarian long before now. That I register republican and am unashamed about it means little to my actual views. So, we can go "round and round" with me discussing the legality of something that I don't support without giving up on what I believe. I constantly said, right from the beginning that I was more than uncomfortable with it and when I worked at the NSA ANY US stuff, even with warrants was right out. There was nothing ever done in the US while I was there....
 
"Fiscally conservative and socially liberal." LMAO! What a marvelously undefined crock of crap.

This particular statistic means nothing, because the question means nothing.

:bleh:
 
However, if you actually read past the first question where they actually ask if they are Libertarian they clearly understand and answer the question. Once again, you delve too shallowly and express contempt for these voters. Ignore them at your peril, Bush did.
 
Its a ridiculous notion that Libertarians would align themselves with Democrats...the party who's ruling wing begs the Federal Governments involvemnt in just about every facet of life... aside from religion and Sex ...., but even then it is the party's (DEM) advocation that religion become publicly censored and sex is to have no public boundaries.... a libertarian would disagree in that all expressions have free and open flow.
That said, why would a libertarian align themselves with Republicans ... the party who's loud mouth wing feels it is their duty to dictate the rules of physical expression? There was a time when Republicans expressed a desire for fiscal restraint ..... it was the center piece of their platform.... in this case it was a no brainer for a libertarian to swing over and pull the lever.. It is the priority of a libertarian to shrink the size of Federal Government... of the two major party's ...Republicans offered the quicker path to this goal.
The past 6 years wiped out this notion that Republicans are the party of smaller Federal Government.... in fact....the Dems now can be viewed as the Party of fiscal responsibility... not by much... and not enough to satisfy a libertarian....
So whom or where should a libertairan turn to? The answer should be themselves...or ..should a candidate from one of the two major party's step forward and express the ideals of Libertarianism ...it then should be individual rather than party.
 
AnyOldIron said:
freedom of the individual.

Ambigiuous term. What is the 'freedom of the individual'?
Click to expand...
It is a simplified version of a far larger concept. When speaking on such boards using the shorter version is often helpful rather than consistently pretending we haven't spoken on this topic repeatedly in the past years we have known each other.

The individual is the ultimate minority, protecting their personal rights is the central theme of the Libertarian... On this theme whole books have been written, reams of paper can be taken up, but pretending that you simply are in the dark and lost on the subject is a bit beneath you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top