Honestly, i'd like the Independent Party to become noticed, more.
Ditto! Have you heard about No Labels?
YES! I'm loking to become more involved with them. I think it is a great idea. You?
Oh, I'm a huge fan. I got really excited when I found out that my representative is a member. :)
Hmmmm...just had a thought...a unity ticket...a Democrat and a Republican...your thoughts? I agree with the sentiments that the two most powerful parties need to re-calibrate but I don't know if the third parties have enough power to actually get legislation passed if we elected a third party POTUS.
It would depend on which Democrat and which Republican. Also, the two major parties would never let it fly- the GOP isn't about to fund a ticket with a Democrat on it and the Dems would never fund a conservative.
I totally agree that Independents should be more popular. To me, at least, it makes a lot more sense, since it combines aspects of both and is less extreme than some of the Republican/Democrats have been lately. I suppose the hard part would be agreeing on a stance to nominate for different issues, since there are so many different ways an Independent politician could stand, but I suppose every party has that issue, really.
Just looked up No Labels, and it sounds so cool.
you're right @NewsJunkie, the election is not far away, time goes by really fast. I can't wait to see how the 2016 election plays out. I would love to see a woman president!!!!!!!
Due to the fact you were all talking about it, I looked up No Labels and yes it sounds great but we live in a current political climate of polarization and many of the politicians on that website are the culprits. I think that we all must realize what we're dealing with and, yes we must work together but seriously are we in kindergarten? And it's not just one party or the other it's both and yes I am a Republican but we're all not perfect.
"Proponents of a welfare state"
Congratulations, you lost all my respect in five words.
For those of you complaining about the democrats being too liberal, or the republicans not being conservative enough... try moving to just about any other developed country, and their democrats will make ours look conservative. "The pendulum swings," as they say, and right now I'm just glad it seems to have hit its limit going right and started to swing back towards the middle.
Why is calling someone a proponent of a welfare state so despicable?
Because the implications of calling this country a "welfare state," and all of the zealotry and baggage that comes dragging along with it, is profoundly despicable.
I thought he meant that some people want to make America into a welfare state, not that it already is one. I mean you may not like the term, but I've heard a lot of liberals self-describe their ideal government as a welfare state. It's not a demeaning term, or at least not to me.
Not to you because you are not the one it's intended to demean.
I don't think it's demeaning to anyone. Welfare state is a definition, not an insult. A welfare state is, according to my home encyclopedia, "a country in which the government provides for the essential needs and economic security of its citizens." It's in the dictionary as "A social system based on the assumption by a political state of primary responsibility for the individual and social welfare of its citizens." If you support a government like that, you are a proponent of a welfare state, and there's nothing offensive about that. If someone wanted to make fun of a government they thought was too liberal, I would think that they would say it is a "nanny state" or maybe (wrongly) call it "socialist". "Welfare state" may be overused by the far right to demean European countries, but that's what economies that "have basically capitalistic economic systems but also maintain government programs to reduce poverty" are called. I've never heard of anyone taking offense to that. Out of curiousity, what other names would you prefer governments of those types to be called?
It's demeaning because it is intended to demean, not because of its definition. Sorry to break your bubble, but in language, context matters.
Specifically because it makes it out to be a derogatory term, which as you've pointed out, it shouldn't be.
I don't say it as an insult, but you have a point in that some people do intend to it to demean. Since you don't like the term and I assume you aren't the only one, what would you rather Colin have said?