Recurring theme we see a lot from frustrated voters is that we're now stuck with picking from the lesser of two evils. Curious how people would vote if there were thematically and logically consistent choices. So here's a poll: Option 1 ("The Cowboy"): Small government, cut taxes, stay out of my fellow citizens' town hall and bedroom, because we all have guns. Option 2 ("The Evangelist"): Big government, strong military, domestic and foreign evangelism of "American values", big taxes (these things all cost money), gun control (what's the point of the Second Amendment if you're going to arm the government to the teeth?) Edit: Curious how many moderates are forced to go Democrat, which at least has a largely coherent, internally-consistent message, because the alternative is just a hodgepodge of frequently conflicting ideas.
I would love a Rand Paul vs Bernie Sanders general election. It would force Americans to vote for someone who isn't taking advantage of fear rhetoric and focus on domestic issues. This nation will go bankrupt fighting the boogyman. Nuanced domestic policy discussion has taken a backseat to foreign boogymen. I would love to see those two in a debate just discussing domestic policy.
Yes, because free college and healthcare along with removing money from politics will turn the United States cities into communist blocs.
As a moderate, it appears I have no choice but to vote for Hillary. Hillary is definitely conservative for a democrat, while the leading Republicans are extreme.
Moderate here. Only candidates that are even worth more than a courtesy glance on the right are Kasich, Paul and Rubio. But when you look closer, they all have the same warts. Like Sanders, because I generally think he is a good sincere person, who will mold his policies to what he thinks will work, but he goes to extreme too quickly. Clinton is just kind of whats left. Not overly thrilled with her, but the fact that she is not one of the trainwrecks from the right, is really all she needs to be the logical choice.
The only candidate worth even considering voting for is Rand Paul, the rest are garbage and that's for both parties.
Moderate is a liberal, so liberal here. Don't like any candidates on both side. So, status quo, meaning Obama for another 8 years.
Whatever happened to crazy hippie with the boot on his head and the rents too damn high guy .. they could have had a shot in this one
I wouldn't pick either. Number two gets us Vietnam and unsustainable debt, even though I accept high taxes as inevitable after the '30s and '40s, and number one is disingenuous about social and race issues, which were initially regulated by state and local governments on behalf of majority views and mores until the federal government, activist judges and the liberal media stepped in. If there's a northeastern mayor or governor option where they anticipate and address racial, social, educational and infrastructure needs before the south and rural midwest can put their ******* pants on, I'll take that.
How about having an adequate size government, a military strong enough to protect our people, limits on people only where they have a negative impact on others, limiting civilian firepower to those of legitimate hunting and sport needs and using taxation and benefits to promote the overall economic well being of the people. That's moderate. actually that's democratic socialism, vote Bernie!
I think making college free would be stupid. It is already free for so many, they just fail to live within their means or choose overly expensive schools.
You know that statement is patently stupid right? In its most recent survey of college pricing, the College Board reports that a "moderate" college budget for an in-state public college for the 2015–2016 academic year averaged $24,061. A moderate budget at a private college averaged $47,831.... According to the College Board, the average cost of tuition and fees for the 2015–2016 school year was $32,405 at private colleges, $9,410 for state residents at public colleges, and $23,893 for out-of-state residents attending public universities. http://www.collegedata.com/cs/content/content_payarticle_tmpl.jhtml?articleId=10064 If the US can subsidize the fossil fuel industry at $37 billion dollars annually (http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/) shouldn't we be able to invest something like that amount to grow the security of the middle class? Better paying jobs and innovation growth are what makes the money supply grow, more income more sales more taxes collected.
I just want someone who: is actually SANE isn't named Hillary Clinton You wouldn't think that would be too much to ask, but apparently it is...
Why aren't there any fiscally conservative(meaning cutting defense spending also) and socially liberal candidates? Do these candidates not exist? Bill Clinton was the closest in my lifetime and I didn't even vote for him.
Any government with the Democrats in the white house when combined with the structural hurdles in Congress that tilt it to the right, even when they don't control both houses, is by definition a moderate government.
I actually like Bernie for the most part. I think he takes it a little far on the social side like expanding social security. Social Security is one of the reasons were are in so much debt as a country. I personally don't like the idea to incent healthy people to stop working if they can still work and I don't think it should be a retirement plan for people.
Social Security is solvent, and the govt. has borrowed money from Social Security before. The money for Social Security comes from money paid into out of every paycheck. Of course the govt. has to pay back what it borrowed from Social Security. But for now it's okay. I'm not saying you should definitely be all for the idea of expanding it or anything like that. I'm also fine if you have other issues with Bernard.
