Why is this board so blue?

Yeah, yeah, red state blue/blue state is overly simplistic.* But it does get the point across.

Perhaps it's just my fluke take of this message board.* But let's get real.* Don't, say, 75% of the posters promote viewpoints that would be considered "liberal" under the current lexicon?*

Isn't this counter-intuitive, given the investment focus of most of the content here?

[laurence]

Weeeeeellll, one could really run with this one. But as a moderate Republican who has only donated to one campaign, McCain, I would say this board is not really "blue" but filled with free thinkers/independents. It takes that kind of mentality to think of doing something other than working until you die or are as good as dead. So right now you see a lot of people picking apart the actions of the administration that is currently in power, because, frankly, a lot of them don't make sense. For example, WTF's up with running half trillion dollar deficits, I thought Repub's were fiscally responsible?

I have every confidence you will see plenty of posts ripping dems when they get back into power. Frankly, there is not enough questioning of authority in the world at large to suit me. Too many people are sheep that drink the kool-aid.

Tozz, your posts seem to be quite thoughtful and non-confrontational, I'm not sure where you fit in on the spectrum, but I find most on this board are quite respectful of others opinions. As a right of center guy, I've had plenty here disagree with me but never in a way that left me singed (maybe because I'm only slightly right of center).

[yakers]

tozz, I think that is a valid observation in a way. I am a conservative Democrat (social liberal, fiscal conservative) there used to be Republicans like me and that I have comfortably voted for. The right asserted for many years that the media was liberal dominated and I think it was somewhat true. But I feel the opposite now. Major political events take place with out the questions that should be asked (IMHO) like where were the WMD? And what about the deficits? I think it is critical to have two parties and questioning the party in power is a forgotten duty, now folks are trying to paint it as unpatriotic.

The more interesting part of your question is to ponder why it may not be counter intuitive for independent people, like the FIRE folks, to take positions more associated with the non luny parts of "blue" positions.

[MRGALT2U]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Laurence Weeeeeellll, one could really run with this one.* But as a moderate Republican who has only donated to one campaign, McCain, I would say this board is not really "blue" but filled with free thinkers/independents.* It takes that kind of mentality to think of doing something other than working until you die or are as good as dead.* So right now you see a lot of people picking apart the actions of the administration that is currently in power, because, frankly, a lot of them don't make sense.* For example, WTF's up with running half trillion dollar deficits, I thought Repub's were fiscally responsible?* I have every confidence you will see plenty of posts ripping dems when they get back into power.* Frankly, there is not enough questioning of authority in the world at large to suit me.* Too many people are sheep that drink the kool-aid.* Tozz, your posts seem to be quite thoughtful and non-confrontational, I'm not sure where you fit in on the spectrum, but I find most on this board are quite respectful of others opinions.* As a right of center guy, I've had plenty here disagree with me but never in a way that left me singed (maybe because I'm only slightly right of center).

Hi Laurence. I think I am protecting you as I am so far right that
people can more easily attack my positions. Kind of the ER Forum
punching bag for left of center types. Happy to help.

JG

[moghopper]

Quote:

Originally Posted by yakers ...I am a conservative Democrat (social liberal, fiscal conservative) there used to be Republicans like me and that I have comfortably voted for.

I'm a big fan of the "Blue Dogs".

It does seem like both parties used to have more room for different opinions, but not anymore.

I can't see Truman being nominated by the Democrats today, and I definitely can't see Teddy Roosevelt nominated by the republicans.

[kayelem]

Just my observation and not trying to say this is true for all because it is not.* Of the people that I know, those that are Democrats are more "loud" in their opinions and actively try to convince others that they are wrong if they are not so inclined.* Friends that are Republicans stay more quiet about their politics and seem to acknowledge that there is another point of view but they just don't agree with it.* *This pattern stayed the same regardless of who was President (Clinton or Bush)

I'm a cop out independent...lean Republican except on some critical social issues.* Voting is always very difficult for me.

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Gee, I thought this thread was going to be about naughty language...

For starters, as far as I'm concerned democrat no longer equals liberal, and republican sure as shootin' doesnt equal conservative anymore. Its all about the hot button plank issues that motivate voters either positively or negatively.

Traditional conservative values involve smaller government, support for businesses, reduced taxes, fewer social ineffective social programs, keeping our nose out of other countries business, keeping government out of individual peoples business and so forth.

We're not firing on too many of those cylinders right now.

Its also a problem that anyone that criticizes the current administration and/or its policies is labeled a liberal and/or unpatriotic.

So maybe the frequency of 'liberal' thinking/expression is simply people tired of the bullpuckey. As a conservative thats voted 100% republican but decided to not vote in the last election, I'd like to see the government get smaller, stop trying to 'bring democracy' to oil bearing countries, stay out of peoples healthcare decisions, and quit saying one thing on video tape and then a month or a year later saying they never said that. That would make me happy.

[riskadverse]

I too was surprised by what I perceive as a liberal bias here. *I also was surprised by a number of tolerant conservative posters. *I was expecting an overwhelming number of ultra right conservatives and the usual venomous retoric that accompanies that group. * I think my preconceived notion was that retired persons would be pissed off about not getting enough money and services out of the government. *I think my generalizations failed to take into account that these were "early" retirees (and those that aspire to be), and they differ from what I would call for lack of a better label "forced" retirees. *My guess is that early retirees (generally) have a different outlook on politics (or substitute the word money, job, goals, investing, credit, etc.) than the mainstream population. *That different outlook probably is instrumental in achieving the ER. * *

What's sad is that you will probably be able to read anybody's post in this thread and immediately catagorize them in one camp or the other. *It's too bad that our politics has become is so polarized. * * *

[cute fuzzy bunny]

I think you've identified my biggest disappointment with politics as of late. Divide the nation, polarize a slim majority group, and capitalize. What the hell happened to leaders that tried to unite the people?

[riskadverse]

What's with this choise of colors - why aren't the commie pinko liberals red and the blue blood wealthy blue? *Very counter intuitive - is this to be non-offensively politically correct.

"If you like Mr. Pink so much, you be Mr. Pink" *paraphrased from Resevoir Dogs. *

[REWahoo]

Red, blue - heck, what ever happened to some shade of maroon? (For those of you pigmentally impaired, that's what you get when you mix the two colors.) I agree we need leaders who can unify rather than whip a narrow majority into a "my way or the highway", "winner take all" mentality.

The real question is who in their right mind would aspire to political office with the treatment we have come to expect from the media? Look under every rock, reveal every flaw, magnify every past discretion, no matter how minor. Would you want your children running for office in today's political atmosphere?

Not me. Better they study music and seek legitimate employment playing piano in a house of ill repute.

REW

[Martha]

I was surprised at how often the ideas of the conservatives and the liberals overlap on this board.

Webster's dictionary defintion of liberal:
Liberal
(lib'er el, lib'rel), adj 1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs. 2. (often cap.) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform. 3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism. 4. Favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties 5. favoring of permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers. 6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies. 7. Free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners. 8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc. 9. characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts: A liberal donor 10. given freely or abundantly; generous: a liberal donation. 11. not strict or rigorous; free; not literal: a liberal interpretation of a rule. 12. of, pertaining to, or based on the liberal arts. 13. of, or pertaining to, or befitting a freeman. -n 14. a person of liberal principles or views, esp. in politics or religion. 15. (often cap.) a member of a liberal party in politics, esp. of the Liberal party in Great Britain. [1325-75; ME < L liberalis of freedom, befitting the free, equiv. to liber free + -alis -al] –lib'er-al-ly, adv –lib'er›al›ness, n

I am a liberal.

[grumpy]

Martha,

Seems we'll need a lot of us liberals on the board to counterbalance MR. JG.

grumpy

[laurence]

The country needs all kinds, differing views posed in a respectful manner furthers everyone involved. There is not enough tolerance right now, we are in need of more "liberal" influence at this point.

What I find interesting is "my" party keeps reffering to heros of their party in history to refer to themselves, even though anyone who knows, knows Lincoln, Teddy etc. were the liberal loose cannons of their day. The very people who celebrate them today would have reviled them at the time, because it wasn't the status quo. Just like a lot of Christians would have tossed Jesus out on his ear for shaking things up...ooops, probably ticked off everyone at this point.

[Caroline]

Quote:

Martha, Seems we'll need a lot of us liberals on the board to counterbalance MR. JG. grumpy

Count me in, please.

I would like to think that there's a Venn diagram of liberal and conservative views, and that many on this board fall somwhere in this "maroon" area, as it was so aptly called.

Perhaps the "bottom line" focus one needs for early retirement and the resultant rejection of 'what doesn't work' in favor of 'what works' blurs the lines between ideologies here.

My opinions and voting choices clearly place me in the liberal camp, but when it comes to labels I've always considered myself a pragmatist.

I don't care what you call your plan, Mr. Politician -- tell me whether it works or not.

Caroline

[Nords]

Quote:

Originally Posted by REWahoo! Red, blue - heck, what ever happened to some shade of maroon?* (For those of you pigmentally impaired, that's what you get when you mix the two colors.)

Ya know, when Barney the Dinosaur mixes red & blue he gets purple...

[moghopper]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caroline I would like to think that there's a Venn diagram of liberal and conservative views, and that many on this board fall somwhere in this "maroon" area, as it was so aptly called. Perhaps the "bottom line" focus one needs for early retirement and the resultant rejection of 'what doesn't work' in favor of 'what works' blurs the lines between ideologies here.

I'm sure there is some truth to that. But, I think that in general, people are more complex than labels or a 30 second sound bite. Calling someone a "pinko" or a "neocon" can't really describe who someone is.

[unclemick]

What color is a curmudgeon - in the Mark Twain mold - unfortunately I can't remember a joke or humorous story if my soul depended on it.

Now - if one is truly FI - then the freedom to be crusty opens up a vast new field of endevor.

Colors - the SO likes purple - the color of royalty AND insanity - her words not mine.

Are Templeton, Bogle, Buffett - curmudgeonesque or just old phart investors.

Can one be a broad based curmudgeon - or does one stake out a turf - politics, religion, investment, humor, living style, etc., etc.

[Eagle43]

I refuse to be pegged. If I must, then libertarian. What color is that??

I also think that the older you get, you start to change your way of thinking. When the next prez election come around, I'll be 65! Who knows what I might be for then. Of course, if spending must be cut, then please cut yours, not mine. If taxes must be raised, then please raise yours, not mine. And if kids/grandkids must be sent off to war, then . . ., . .! I suspect most people think along these lines.

Speaking of that war issue, went to see David Mccullough, the historian, the other night. He claims that during the American Revolution 1/3 of the colonialists were for the war (seceding), 1/3 were pro-Tory, and 1/3 were waiting to see how the revolution turned out. He also scoffed at the red/blue state idea. He calls that a media concoction; also said that politics has been dirtier than it is now and that we have always been divided about most things.

[wildcat]

I am a patriot