If you could, what political party would you join?

[Drew]

Presuming your vote wasn't thrown away if you voted for a third party (via proportional representation or a run-off or something similar) would you stay in the current party you are in or would you join a different one? I'll list the current two major US parties and the three major third parties and try to summarize their views very briefly in very broad terms.


Constitution Party (very socially conservative, religious, small government/low taxes, economically and militarily isolationist)

Democratic Party (Morderately socially liberal, economically conservative, large central government, higher taxes for social welfare and healthcare programs, moderately isolationist)

Green Party (Socially liberal, economically socialist, strong wealth redistribution programs w/ universal healthcare, strict enviromental protections, strong local government, disarmament policy)

Libertarian Party (Economically liberal, socially liberal (individualism), small government, very low taxes, non-interventionist)

Republican Party (Socially conservative, economically moderately liberal, traditional values platform, moderate government size, moderate/low taxes, interventionist)

[Alfster]

I don't vote, so I guess I enjoy my late night parties.

[Drew]

I don't vote, so I guess I enjoy my late night parties.


Yes, but which Party? Har.

[Drew]

Haha and our first Brit voter goes for the Green party.

[Alfster]

Yes, but which Party? Har.

To be perfectly honest, I haven't even bothered to find out the difference between "moderately socially liberal" and "socially liberal" is, nor do I really give a shit.

[TheEschaton]

Eh, I'd either stay with the Dems, or be a more fiscally moderate Libertarian.

I disagree with your synopsis of the green party, they seem to only have one plank in their platform, and it's saving the environment before other people. If I really believed they had a formulated platform with those other things you mentioned, I'd be Green.

[Stanley Burrell]

Independent party isn't an option?

[DeV]

Something along the lines of a radical Independent, but I choose Libertarian for the sake of the poll.

[Gan]

My Party:

Socially moderately liberal. Protect the children, otherwise stay out of running the daily lives of Americans.
Economically moderately conservative. Encourage market participation without retarding it through overbearing policy activity.
Values program? See #1. Who's values? Your values arent necessarily my values... GTFO out of my daily life - quit being my nanny.
Moderate government size - keep whats needed and trim the fat from the pork programs. Croni-ism has got to go.
Low taxes. Best way to trim the fat. (see #4)
Fiscally responsibile. (added one) Ties in with 4 and 5.
Direct interventionist (only if attacked). If and only if it would be a non-political engagement - otherwise make those in the region step up and deal with it... direct aggressors face immediate, overwhelming, and devistating response).
Indirect interventionist. Our ambassadors should be everywhere learning about the other cultures, keeping a tab on the pulse of other nation-states without direct attempts at manipulation. If action is required then (as mentioned in 7) neighboring states who have a direct interest in stability should step in. Being the world's police isnt working out, and I'm tired of wearing the target.
We need to buy Mexico - immigration problem solved!

[Warriorbird]

Why would we want Mexico?

[ElanthianSiren]

Libertarian Party (Economically liberal, socially liberal (individualism), small government, very low taxes, non-interventionist)

:yeahthat:

[Khariz]

LIbertarian all the way.

[Warriorbird]

Seriously? Even if it really was socially liberal too?

[ElanthianSiren]

The only issue I really have with it is the non involvement clause. I don't believe a national enterprise can be successful without the ability to pick and choose its conflicts (wisely).

[Latrinsorm]

My Party:Here's what I don't get about the "GOV != NANNY" thing: you clearly include personal values in your platform (children deserve protection, cronyism is bad, no responsibility to intervene in a Darfur-like situation). Doesn't that make your brain hurt?

It's a matter of public record that isolationism is a Bad Thing for a superpower, so I'd probably have to go with the Republican party as listed. I'd probably go with one of the big two anyway because unlike in Soviet Texas, here in the Arsenal State we have to be a member of the party in whose primaries we'd like to vote.

[Ilvane]

More Green party for me. Libertarian is a bit too far out for me. Green at least is closer to what I stand for. Would have been Democrat a year or two or go, but the ones in power now are idiots.

Angela

[Warriorbird]

The only issue I really have with it is the non involvement clause. I don't believe a national enterprise can be successful without the ability to pick and choose its conflicts (wisely).
-ES

Oh...I didn't think you'd have philosophical quandries. I was referring to Khariz.

[TheSmooth1]

Why buy Mexico?

Just conquer it, it's not like they can do anything about it.

[Khariz]

Oh...I didn't think you'd have philosophical quandries. I was referring to Khariz.

Eh I dunno, you might mis-pegged me.

I really don't give a crap what people do in the privacy of their own homes. You wanna hump your dog? Smoke some crack?

That's cool, just do it in your basement, and not in my yard, or at the movie theatre.

I'm all about letting everyone do whatever they want to do, as long as it doesn't involve other people who don't want to be involved.

Edit: I realize this by no means reflects the actual libertarian parties objectives, I'm just talking about me.

[ViridianAsp]

I'm actually registered as an independent. But I tend to lean towards the more conservative.

[Gan]

Here's what I don't get about the "GOV != NANNY" thing: you clearly include personal values in your platform (children deserve protection, cronyism is bad, no responsibility to intervene in a Darfur-like situation). Doesn't that make your brain hurt?
Explain how protecting children is only a personal value? I consider it something else (so much more) entirely. Cronyism is about efficiency, not about personal values. And while intervention is fine and dandy, lets focus on getting other neighboring states involved before we commit ourselves. Providing aid is one thing, but as proven in the past, America does not have the stomach for political wars. Call it what it is.


It's a matter of public record that isolationism is a Bad Thing for a superpower, so I'd probably have to go with the Republican party as listed. I'd probably go with one of the big two anyway because unlike in Soviet Texas, here in the Arsenal State we have to be a member of the party in whose primaries we'd like to vote.
LOL at soviet Texas. we're anything but. Someday maybe your state will figure it out and let folks vote for the better person, not the lesser of two evils.

[Gan]

Why would we want Mexico?

If you have to ask then you wont understand the answer.

[Warriorbird]

Even if I don't somebody else might. Seems like a dodge and it might make for interesting discussion.

[Gan]

Even if I don't somebody else might. Seems like a dodge and it might make for interesting discussion.

Allright, I'll bite.


Lets look at Mexico:


Landmass: Its roughly 3x the size of Texas at 1,972,550 sq. km. Of that 9,330 sq. km. is beachfront/coastline.
Climate: Tropical to desert
Terrain: high, rugged mountains; low coastal plains; high plateaus; desert
Natural resources: petroleum, silver, copper, gold, lead, zinc, natural gas, timber .
Arable land: 12.6%
Population: 108 millionFirst thing is that every Mexican citizen becomes a US citizen. The short run costs heavily outweigh any profitability because of 108 milliion people being added to government benefit rosters. Long run benefit is that eventually you're going to add 108 million people to a tax roster in one form or another. I'd recommend treating it like Texas and going with a sales tax, no state income tax, and a federal income tax.

Next is you start correcting ailing public support infrastructures. Transportation, utilities (water, electricity), law enforcement, healthcare, public administration, education, and real estate regulation, and industry regulation (environmental/pollutant, etc.).

Then you start encouraging investment through land ownership. Make it safe and low risk to own and develop property. Give the people a reason to want to own land.

Next would be encouragement of industry development in order to bring more investment which in turns brings more capital to the area which benefits owners as well as workers. Yes, institute the federal minimum wage there as it is elsewhere in the US.

So now you have a stable safe and regulated place to live and work, thus attacting more people to move up and move in. No more grass is greener syndrome with people heading north in order to sustain their family income.

Mexico would be the 51st state. Or divide it up into several states... makes no difference in my opinion.

I know I'm leaving out a huge issue, one of culture. And thats where I'm not that versed in blending the cultures of America and Mexico and how it will work.

And on an IR scale, I can think of several nation states that would have a huge issue with this and just see it as more American imperialism/colonization. Thats why I suggested a purcahse rather than just conquering it.

I'll add more thoughts to this later. Perhaps even request to move this over to a new thread if this line of thought takes off.

[Warriorbird]

What do you do about their intense societal issues and crime?

[Gan]

What do you do about their intense societal issues and crime?

...

Next is you start correcting ailing public support infrastructures. Transportation, utilities (water, electricity), law enforcement, healthcare, public administration, education, and real estate regulation, and industry regulation (environmental/pollutant, etc.).

[The Ponzzz]

Where is Socialist?

[Artha]

...
But what would you actually do? Just saying "fix it" is pretty vague.

[Gan]

Implement a justice system (courts, judges, etc.) same as here in the US along with the different branches of law enforcement (same has here in the US).

Start training the locals who are interested in law enforcement in methods and introduce technology thats on par with what most states have and that which matches the infrastructure currently around that area.

None of this would be an overnight thing. But with the reverse immigration of those who want to move to Mexico I think there will be more than enough resources to start up the same infrastructure as what we see at the state level. One would also mirror the federal law enforcement infrastructure as well.

Again, you're creating another state, set it up the same way. Same infrastructures, etc.

If you want greater detail than that, then I suggest you go buy a SIMS game and have fun. The goal of my post was not to break out into great detail the idiosyncracies of each region/area/township/etc. that you would run into in setting this up. Nor am I saying that it could happen overnight, but I see it as something that could happen none the less.

Additionaly I would see the only thing interferring would be the cultural thing. Thats where I'm not well versed on is cultural adaptability between the two and if money/income will or will not be the bridge between the two.

:shrug:

[Latrinsorm]

I'm all about letting everyone do whatever they want to do, as long as it doesn't involve other people who don't want to be involved.Everything anyone ever does involves other people. Rocks in a pond, man.
Explain how protecting children is only a personal value?As I understand it, you disagree with the referenced "values platform" per se; that is, "stay out of my life" rather than "I disagree with your position on taxes, stay out of my life insofar as that is concerned". As such, quoting from the other post: "Your values arent necessarily my values" applies to everything. There will always be disagreement in a country the size of America.

In essence, I'm saying that there's no difference in kind in saying a) "children abuse should be illegal" versus b) "recreational drugs should be illegal". They're each value judgments.
Someday maybe your state will figure it out and let folks vote for the better person, not the lesser of two evils.I'm surprised that the parties haven't used your system to mess up the other party's primaries, to be honest. Find the person who's doing lousy, vote like crazy for him or her and stick the other guys with a loser candidate.

[Drew]

Where is Socialist?


Green party is the current most popular US flavour of socialism IMO.