Pew Political Typology 2014 -- where do you fit?

I don't think it's wise to make any expectations more than twenty or so years out. The entire world can change in that amount of time.
 
I don't think it's wise to make any expectations more than twenty or so years out. The entire world can change in that amount of time.

Well, we have a Republican Party that is openly against universal health care, and a Democratic Party that is not-so-openly against it, and an electorate that votes for one or the other 98% of the time, so I'm not too hopeful I'll ever see true UHC.
 
In reality there are two basic political groups: libertarians and fascists. That is, we either wanna be left the fuck alone or we wanna march with the mob behind our fearless leader.
 
Very limited, I'm afraid, to the American model. Liberal seems to be as far left as it goes - what about social democrat, socialist, Communist, Trotskyist, anarchist - or, at the other end, Fascist?


The U.S. is all they are trying to measure. Though there are millions of Americans who are either social democrats or fascists in all but name.
 
Well, we have a Republican Party that is openly against universal health care, and a Democratic Party that is not-so-openly against it, and an electorate that votes for one or the other 98% of the time, so I'm not too hopeful I'll ever see true UHC.

I don't think the Democrats are so much against it as they are hesitant to do anything that will get them labeled as Marxist, Communist, Socialists. Over come the stigma, which seems to be happening, and that could happen. I have no doubt that it will happen. It's just that eventually is a very long time.
 
In reality there are two basic political groups: libertarians and fascists. That is, we either wanna be left the fuck alone or we wanna march with the mob behind our fearless leader.

"There are two kinds of people in the world: those who say, 'There are two kinds of people in the world: those who say there are two kinds of people in the world, and the other kind,' and those who don't say. Well, and then there's me."

-- J.R. "Bob" Dobbs during his mail fraud trial, 1978
 
I don't think the Democrats are so much against it as they are hesitant to do anything that will get them labeled as Marxist, Communist, Socialists. Over come the stigma, which seems to be happening, and that could happen. I have no doubt that it will happen. It's just that eventually is a very long time.

I think a significant percentage of Democrats in DC are in the pocket of the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries, and other controlling interests, just like most of the Republicans.
 
Young Outsider - whatever that means. I am 45.

That quiz could have been reduced to one question "Are you willing to engage and think through the complexity of modern public policy, or do you need your thinking to be done by others and reduced to a bumper sticker?".

That is a good first sifting of the electorate.
 
I think a significant percentage of Democrats in DC are in the pocket of the health insurance and pharmaceutical industries, and other controlling interests, just like most of the Republicans.

I don't doubt that there are some of them in the pockets of Big Pharma. I think the number is lower than you'd think though and that's true of both parties. The reality is closer to we are at our heart a capitalist society and will side with the person with the most money because our culture suggests that he ho has the most money is clearly the good guy, if he wasn't he'd be poor wouldn't he?
 
[shrug] Basic principle of survey-design. Neither option might adequately represent how you actually feel, but which you finally pick over the other does say something important about you.

Not so sure about that assertion.
 
I don't doubt that there are some of them in the pockets of Big Pharma. I think the number is lower than you'd think though and that's true of both parties. The reality is closer to we are at our heart a capitalist society and will side with the person with the most money because our culture suggests that he ho has the most money is clearly the good guy, if he wasn't he'd be poor wouldn't he?

That's what I meant by other controlling interests.
 
I don't doubt that there are some of them in the pockets of Big Pharma. I think the number is lower than you'd think though and that's true of both parties. The reality is closer to we are at our heart a capitalist society and will side with the person with the most money because our culture suggests that he ho has the most money is clearly the good guy, if he wasn't he'd be poor wouldn't he?

^^ THIS
http://37.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l87aeaU8rr1qzp5buo1_400.jpg


BTW I found a pic of us hanging with Dave that time we went out pimpin' through time.
http://www.imfdb.org/images/thumb/6/6a/CS_P08_1.jpg/500px-CS_P08_1.jpg
 
Looks like if Republicans weren't such vile people, I would be one too.

Most of their policies we agree on, most of the hate, we don't.

Your best fit is...
Young Outsider
along with 13% of the public.
Share your results:
Read more in the full report: Beyond Red vs. Blue: The Political Typology

SOLID LIBERALSFAITH AND FAMILY LEFTNEXT GENERATION LEFTHARD-PRESSED SKEPTICSYOUNG OUTSIDERSBUSINESS CONSERVATIVESSTEADFAST CONSERVATIVESBYSTANDERS
2012 vote: 37% for Obama | 48% for Romney
This relatively young, largely independent group holds a mix of conservative and liberal views. And while more lean toward the Republican Party than the Democratic Party, Young Outsiders generally express unfavorable opinions of both major parties. They are largely skeptical of activist government, as a substantial majority views government as wasteful and inefficient. Yet many diverge from the two conservative typology groups – Steadfast Conservatives and Business Conservatives – in their strong support for the environment and many liberal social policies.
 
That's what I meant by other controlling interests.

I think you being much too broad. I would be willing to bet that the people who are "controlled" by Big Oil side with Big Pharma. The 1% aren't controlled by a bunch of little groups. They are the 1% united by virtue of being rich. There are no other controlling interests other than they are American Royalty in all but name. and maintaining that control is their primary goal. You've got a bunch of moving peices in your plan that aren't necessary and should work against each other at some points but rarely do, because their actual primary goal is much, much simpler.
 
I think you being much too broad. I would be willing to bet that the people who are "controlled" by Big Oil side with Big Pharma. The 1% aren't controlled by a bunch of little groups. They are the 1% united by virtue of being rich. There are no other controlling interests other than they are American Royalty in all but name. and maintaining that control is their primary goal. You've got a bunch of moving peices in your plan that aren't necessary and should work against each other at some points but rarely do, because their actual primary goal is much, much simpler.

Of course the people who are controlled by Big Oil side with Big Pharma. They also side with Big Insurance, and Big This, and Big That. Money talks.
 
It's not just on the authoritarian/liberal axis that Obama is less Democrat than some would like to think. Economically, he is extraordinarily right-wing frmo a historical, or modern European, perspective. The pendulum has swung so far from Dukakis, or even Clinton, that were a new FDR to come along he would be seen as a dangerous Communist. That's what happens when the media presents the fringes of far-right lunacy as mainstream politics, and when the Democratic party lies utterly supine in response.
 
Back
Top