How have your politics changed over the years?

[TheHuckster]

I agree that voters share a lot of the blame for the system we have. I really wish the public would just get off of the mainstream media and actually think for themselves rather than serving as some person resembling a Price is Right contestant trying to make a decision with a huge crowd of people from all directions yelling at them to pick one over the other. Because that's really what it feels like to watch these news programs during an election year.

The corporate interests, however, are making it hard to convince the average voter to do this, thanks to their hooks into the media... which is why I also think this is a "corporate" thing.

[HYHYBT]

The difference is that the vast majority of Price is Right audience members neither know more than you do nor are trying to decieve you.

[TheHuckster]

This is true, although among all the yelling and screaming pundits and puppets are the other clueless voters who think they know it all because they saw it on TV.

[Jarlaxle]

Was pretty conservative when I was younger...then libertarian. Now...I'd have to say a conservative-leaning libertarian.

[Estil]

Was pretty conservative when I was younger...then libertarian. Now...I'd have to say a conservative-leaning libertarian.

Me too. But I'm pro-life first. And as strange as this sounds I can't stand either the far political left (they'd insist I must be "anti-woman" or "ignorant/uneducated"...surely no one would seriously think I'm a racist though...) OR the far religious right (you don't believe we're the "one true faith?!" you, you are in cahoots with LGBT's!? You gonna BURN boy!! You gonna burn in HELL!!!!). No I don't mean the cliched "I don't like either D's or R's, I'm an independent/moderate/centrist" Which might explain why in 2004 I voted for Bush/Bunning/Guthrie (Pres/Sen/Rep) but voted against the "marriage is only between a man and a woman" amendment being proposed then for the KY constitution. But then again, Obama felt the same, same way until he saw it was politically fashionable to support same sex marriage...

[Gravekeeper]

But then again, Obama felt the same, same way until he saw it was politically fashionable to support same sex marriage...

Yes, no one's beliefs or opinions ever evolve over time when presented with new information. I mean, its not like he's supported either same sex marriage or civil unions with all of the equal rights as marriage his entire political career for last 21 years or anything.

Do you see why everyone gets snippy with you yet?

[Rageaholic]

Short version, from FOX News watching Republican to Democrat who thinks Capitalism needs to change or die.

I was an ignorant teenager post 9/11 and swallowed what ever was on FOX news. Looking back, I wasn't a tenth as smart as I thought I was. I was just surrounded by people who identified as Republicans and took those views to fit in to appear as if I was well informed. Kind of like those 'smart' kids who use big words to impress everybody. Most of the talking points and debate tactics that I DESPISE now seemed brilliant at the time.

But then stuff happened. First, Bush turned out to have lied about the WMD. This made me start to think of Bush as less of a hero and more of a traitor. Then I started questioning my religious beliefs. I came to the conclusion that no one really had any idea what God wanted. I also came to resent the authoritarian nature of religion and realized that people should be free to do what they want as long as it doesn't hurt anyone (which is why I think people against Gay Marriage are ridiculous). This lead to me to think libertarians were the right way (even though I voted Obama in 2008).

So I hated the republicans due to Bushes lies and their religious agenda, I bought into the idea of less government being the best idea. In reality, I had no fucking idea where I stood other than hating authoritarian policies (unless they were made to combat a threat in which case I could go either way).

What THEN happened was that I started to realize how hard it was to actually 'pull yourself up by the bootstraps'. The Republicans ideas of cutting off programs, which for many people are the only thing keeping them from starving to death, is absolutely despicable. We are no longer hunter/gatherers and many jobs are no longer done by humans. On the plus side, that also means that there's less work needed to be done. So why should work be the only way to make income when a lot of it is not even needed?

[Rageaholic]

I still lean left and am rather weary of the right, but I'm getting fed up with all this pc crap. It's gotten to where the most innocuous things can offend people. I think Bill Maher said it best

I get that Bill Maher can be an asshole and I don't always agree with him, but I think he's on the money here. In a lot of these examples, just saying the wrong thing once can result in disproportionate backlash, regardless of how supportive they are otherwise.

[Gravekeeper]

I still lean left and am rather weary of the right, but I'm getting fed up with all this pc crap. It's gotten to where the most innocuous things can offend people. I think Bill Maher said it best

Could of stopped at Maher is an asshole. ( Cus he is. A rather amazing one. Also a bigot, a sexist and a racist. ).

As for what he's taking about; Calling someone's children "synthetic" from a "rented womb" picked from a "sperm catalog" is honestly pretty insulting. Its a weird hill to die on for the point he's trying to make. Its not like there aren't legitimate examples of what he's attempting to say out there. And regardless of his attempt to joke otherwise, he is making a false equivalency.

Plus if he doesn't grasp the problem with All Lives Matter vs Black Lives Matter I'm not sure what to tell him.

TLDR: Maher is an racist bigot sexist asshole ( racegothsexhole? ). Any point he might have had is lost under his swarmy assholeness and general awfulness.

[Greenday]

But then stuff happened. First, Bush turned out to have lied about the WMD. This made me start to think of Bush as less of a hero and more of a traitor.

And now that it turns out he WASN'T a liar, how do you feel?

[Gravekeeper]

And now that it turns out he WASN'T a liar, how do you feel?

<sigh>

Really, man? Really? Please tell me you're smarter than that.

[Greenday]

<sigh>

Really, man? Really? Please tell me you're smarter than that.

Are you denying the fact that countless chemical weapons have been found in Iraq?

[Gravekeeper]

Are you denying the fact that countless chemical weapons have been found in Iraq?

Are you really going to make this argument?

Yes, old rotting inactive chemical weapons from the Iran-Iraq war in the farking 80s have been found buried here and there. Its no secret Iraq had old mustard gas laying round. The ISG report said as such but concluded they posed no significant military threat. Iraq had no active WMD programs and no stockpiles. What has been found is not even lethal as its long since decayed.

"Old canisters of expired mustard gas in a hole somewhere" was not the rationale for the invasion of Iraq. Bush clearly put forward that Iraq had active WMD programs developing weapons and everything from nukes to anthrax was suggested. Even the CIA discredited the "evidence" the Bush administration put forth. Invading Iraq and disposing Saddam was the GOP's farking platform in 2000. They had that shit drawn up and ready to go the moment they could find an excuse.

So yes, he lied, and you sitting here claiming otherwise makes as much rational sense as claiming Bush did 9/11.

[s_stabeler]

a) as has been said, the reason the US gave was that Saddam had ACTIVE WMD programs- there is a VAST difference between storing WMD that is beyond it's use-by date and actively producing WMD.
b) Saddam was toppled in 2003. Even IF they discovered what they said was evidence of an active WMD program under Saddam now, I would be suspicious, since there has been ample time for such evidence to be faked. The US even said, at the time, following the invasion, when they had gone over iraq with a fine-toothed comb looking for the WMD, that Saddam had clearly stopped his WMD programs.
c) IIRC, there was a single day between the UN passing a resolution that Saddam had to allow weapons inspectors access or he would face sanctions- including the POSSIBILITY of military force- and the US asking for a resolution declaring Saddam in breach of the previous resolution. That suggests that the US didn't actually care if there was a WMD program anyway. That means that even IF Saddam had WMD, it does not necessarily mean the war was for moral reasons. (They later made the argument that toppling Saddam was itself sufficient justification for the war, however, regime change is at best a dubious casus belli morally)

[Gravekeeper]

(They later made the argument that toppling Saddam was itself sufficient justification for the war, however, regime change is at best a dubious casus belli morally)

I'll just straight up quote the GOP platform from 2000:

A new Republican president will renew America's faltering fight against the contagious spread of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons, as well as their means of delivery. The weak leadership and neglect of the administration have allowed America's intelligence capabilities, including space based systems, to atrophy, resulting in repeated proliferation surprises such as Iraq's renewed chemical and biological weapons programs

We support the full implementation of the Iraq Liberation Act, which should be regarded as a starting point in a comprehensive plan for the removal of Saddam Hussein and the restoration of international inspections in collaboration with his successor. Republicans recognize that peace and stability in the Persian Gulf is impossible as long as Saddam Hussein rules Iraq.

They've been after this long before 9/11 gave them an excuse.