# Presidential "mold" poll



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

I think just about everyone I know describes themself as "economically/fiscally conservative and socially moderate/liberal/libertarian".

Let's just see what percentage can accept that label and would want a President from the same mold.


----------



## hopkins_student (Jun 25, 2004)

I voted yes because I can accept it, and would accept it 9/10 rather than taking the risk of ending up with someone really bad, but it isn't always ideal.


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

I'd prefer somebody who was conservative all the way around...


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

The Gabba Goul said:


> I'd prefer somebody who was conservative all the way around...


Thanks. Very interesting. I like someone like that in local positions. I like my Congressman that way, but in a President I have a different agenda and set of requirements.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

The Gabba Goul said:


> I'd prefer somebody who was conservative all the way around...


LOL, after your thread on women, I have to doubt that.


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

Wayfarer said:


> LOL, after your thread on women, I have to doubt that.


I dont mean a bible thumper who wants to bend my ear about "morality"...I mean somebody who'd be willing to actually deport illegals, privatize education, reduce welfare to a trickle, and secure our borders...I could be wrong, but that's what I would call socially conservative...Conservative and Holy Roller are not one in the same...


----------



## jpeirpont (Mar 16, 2004)

I voted no, I'd rather a Rockefeller Republican or someone along the lines of GHWB.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

You guys support GWB and claim to be fiscal conservatives? Bush is a HUGE spender.


----------



## Wayfarer (Mar 19, 2006)

Laxplayer said:


> You guys support GWB and claim to be fiscal conservatives? Bush is a HUGE spender.


He is. I have been against all of his huge spending spree. Medicare Part D will cost us billions. Steel tariffs? WTF? The sad thing is, I still firmly believe he was a better choice than Gore or Kerry. That is not saying a helluva lot about US POTUS candidates.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Laxplayer said:


> You guys support GWB and claim to be fiscal conservatives? Bush is a HUGE spender.


Who is "you guys"?

Congress does most of the spending.

I'm mostly p-d off about lack of SS reform.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

ksinc said:


> Who is "you guys"?
> 
> Congress does the spending.


The GWB supporters who voted yes on this poll.

The President still has veto power does he not?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Laxplayer said:


> The GWB supporters who voted yes on this poll.


GWB wasn't mentioned in this poll.

Perhaps we should see if the Mods can put some kind of asterisk by the GWB supporters names so we can tell who they are whenever they post?


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

ksinc said:


> GWB wasn't mentioned in this poll.


Thank you, ksinc. I hadn't noticed.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Laxplayer said:


> Thank you, ksinc. I hadn't noticed.


YW


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Laxplayer said:


> The President still has veto power does he not?


not line-item.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Interesting that the dissent runs in the direction it does. Very interesting. I like this thread ... so far


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Are you seriously claiming George W. Bush has absolutely no control over spending? Or do you just like to disagree?


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Laxplayer said:


> Are you seriously claiming George W. Bush has absolutely no control over spending? Or do you just like to disagree?


neither.

Congress does most of the spending. The President does not have line-item veto. He could not veto in whole bills out of his own party's committees. Now that he has Dems in charge he vetoed something. Good for him.

No where did I say W had absolutely no control.

So, what's your problem now?


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

You're absolutely right, ksinc. President Bush is very frugal with money. President George "Thrifty" Bush is how he will be known. I'm not one of the Bush-haters. I disagree with many of his views, but he is our President after all, and I have respect for the office. I do think he is better than Kerry would have been, but a careful spender he is not. 
I just thought it interesting that those who adamantly support Bush on this board would say a fiscally conservative/social moderate President is ideal. 

I really don't feel like arguing about something so obvious. It's very nice outside, and I just bought a new box of cigars. G'night.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Laxplayer said:


> *You're absolutely right, ksinc. President Bush is very frugal with money. *President George "Thrifty" Bush is how he will be known. I'm not one of the Bush-haters. I disagree with many of his views, but he is our President after all, and I have respect for the office. I do think he is better than Kerry would have been, but a careful spender he is not.
> I just thought it interesting that those who adamantly support Bush on this board would say a fiscally conservative/social moderate President is ideal.
> 
> I really don't feel like arguing about something so obvious. It's very nice outside, and I just bought a new box of cigars. G'night.


That's the 2nd time you've accused me of saying something I didn't. Don't let the door hit you in @$$.

Cigars are probably fake! 

I think you should have the courtesy and courage to address specific people by name and not make rude insinuations and mischaracterizations.

Myself, I have no idea who adamantly supports Bush to which you are referring. I don't believe anyone adamantly supports Bush on every issue.


----------



## Kav (Jun 19, 2005)

The mold as metaphor sadly covers only form and not substance. Pour jello into it, and even after setting up will tend to wobble.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

_Don't let the door hit you in the a$$. _
You're a real pr!ck. 

_Cigars are probably fake!  _

Romeo y Julieta. I also have some Cuban cigars. btw, what is a fake cigar?

Fine, ksinc. I'll be courageous. Not that you would even know the meaning of the word. hopkins student claims GWB is the 2nd greatest President, and he voted YES in your poll. I thought it strange that someone who considers "fiscal conservative" to be an important quality of a President would choose GWB as his 2nd favorite President.

I said Bush was a HUGE spender. You said Congress does the spending.

I said the President has veto power. You said he doesn't have line item veto power.

Now what do your responses imply? To me they imply that Bush is not the one spending money, it's Congress, and Bush cannot do anything about it because he does not have line item veto power. 
Oh wait, I almost forgot...


----------



## hopkins_student (Jun 25, 2004)

Laxplayer said:


> Fine, ksinc. I'll be courageous. Not that you would even know the meaning of the word. hopkins student claims GWB is the 2nd greatest President, and he voted YES in your poll. I thought it strange that someone who considers "fiscal conservative" to be an important quality of a President would choose GWB as his 2nd favorite President.


Second greatest of my lifetime. My fourth or fifth favorite of all time. And I'm not pleased by his domestic policy. I think the War on Terror is vital to our future and I admire his dedication to it despite it's unpopularity. He will never be appreciated because most people will never consider what the alternative would have been like had he not pursued the WoT.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

hopkins_student said:


> *Second greatest of my lifetime. My fourth or fifth favorite of all time. *And I'm not pleased by his domestic policy. I think the War on Terror is vital to our future and I admire his dedication to it despite it's unpopularity. He will never be appreciated because most people will never consider what the alternative would have been like had he not pursued the WoT.


My mistake. 
I do agree with you as far as the need for the WoT. Clinton should have taken action after the 1st WTC attack. I really don't think that democracy will work in Iraq though. Personally, I'd like to see the U.S. focus on ways to become less dependent on the Arab nations, since I don't believe we can really solve all of the problems there. The less contact we have with them, the better.


----------



## whomewhat (Nov 11, 2006)

This is like one of those fixed MSNBC polls! Come on, those are not choices. I am with The Gabba Goul on this one, at least I agree with what he said even if I might disagree with the final meaning. I, too, want a conservative all the way around. I mean, your poll would fit the Governator in California and I disagree with him on just about every social issue one could think of. Reagan was about the best ideal for President I have seen in my life time, but even he was too soft for my taste in a few, small areas. That said, what I would give for another Ronald Reagan right now!


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

whomewhat said:


> This is like one of those fixed MSNBC polls! Come on, those are not choices. I am with The Gabba Goul on this one, at least I agree with what he said even if I might disagree with the final meaning. I, too, want a conservative all the way around. I mean, your poll would fit the Governator in California and I disagree with him on just about every social issue one could think of. Reagan was about the best ideal for President I have seen in my life time, but even he was too soft for my taste in a few, small areas. That said, what I would give for another Ronald Reagan right now!


Of course it's a choice - Y or N! You either like a econ cons / social mod or you like something else. All else goes in the other category doesn't matter why. You sound like a N, that's fine. I'm actually finding it really interesting that the No's want conservative both ways. Good for the 100%ers! Nothing wrong with that at all.

This isn't an election, or meant to cover a broad gambit of who do you like. I am just specifically interested in the economic conservative / social moderate category - more from a philisophical point of view than any one candidate.

Once you put in a person, then I agree with Kav. The individual matters most.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

Laxplayer said:


> _Don't let the door hit you in the a$$. _
> You're a real pr!ck.
> 
> _Cigars are probably fake!  _
> ...


Ok, that's now four insults in one thread. You looking for a free nose job? 

You would have done far better IMHO to lay off the "you guys", the untrue attacks, and address Hopkins Student directly. Are you drunk? What's your problem?


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Lax, I'm not a Bush supporter, but I would like a Fiscally Conservative socially moderate president (although I would not mind if he was a pit bull about illegal immigrants and illegal immigration.)


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> Lax, I'm not a Bush supporter, but I would like a Fiscally Conservative socially moderate president (although I would not mind if he was a pit bull about illegal immigrants and illegal immigration.)


I'm in agreement with you there. Is immigration an economic or a social issue (both)?


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I agree that immigration is both and economic and social issue. Short term, especially, it is more an economic issue. 

Long term, I think it is more of a social issue. (Although there are short and long term consequences in both the economic and social arenas.)


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

oops wrong thread


----------



## yachtie (May 11, 2006)

I agree, pretty bogus poll question. Social conservative/ economic reactionary.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

yachtie said:


> I agree, pretty bogus poll question.


Well, "tra la la! Cry me a river!"

You seemed to be able to figure out the correct answer was no without too much difficulty.


----------



## android (Dec 8, 2004)

If we had a President that would get the budget, debt, trade deficit and illegal immigration under control, I wouldn't care if he showed La Cage aux Faux on the roof of the Whitehouse every weekend. 

The government needs to get its nose out of my personal life and I am willing to reciprocate.


----------



## yachtie (May 11, 2006)

ksinc said:


> Well, "tra la la! Cry me a river!"
> 
> You seemed to be able to figure out the correct answer was no without too much difficulty.


Thank you, my pleasure. :icon_smile_wink:


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

yachtie said:


> Thank you, my pleasure. :icon_smile_wink:


Yachtie, you are such a good sport! Cheers!


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

In some ways Clinton ran the war on terror better- Not a huge bunch of money wasted.

Economics is important, but so are morals. It used to be morals were preached in most churches, now half the churches, or more, are on the other side. If there were no abortions we wouldn't need so many people south of the border up here.


----------



## crazyquik (Jun 8, 2005)

The President is sworn to uphold the Constitution and enforce the laws, right? Can we just have someone who will do that? 

He or she can start here:
Don't break the law as soon as you step in the country.
Deport people who are criminal immigrants.
Don't hire criminal immigrants. 

It seems the last several administrations have instead looked the other way and are now saying "well the problem is too big to actually solve by enforcing the law, so we're going to change the law"


----------



## android (Dec 8, 2004)

WA said:


> If there were no abortions we wouldn't need so many people south of the border up here.


OMG! I think I'm going to have to add this to my top ten list of stupidest things ever said!


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

android said:


> OMG! I think I'm going to have to add this to my top ten list of stupidest things ever said!


Why? Aren't the best estimates 10mil abortions and 12.5mil illegals?


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

ksinc said:


> Why? Aren't the best estimates 10mil abortions and 12.5mil illegals?


The problem...who do you think is having the abortions???

I accompanied a friend of mine (who happens to be a lady) to a planned parenthood clinic one time because the dude who got her knocked up was I guess too chicken to go with her or something...any-who...sitting aroudn the waiting room...no exageration, the majority of these girls were probably in the 15-18 age bracket and they were almost all exclusively Mexican...now arent those places free clinics??? I suspect that the legal status of alot of these girls (or at least their familys) could be drawn into question...

and for the record, I dont really have a problem with abortions...I do have a problem with any kind of free healthcare for illegal aliens...


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

The Gabba Goul said:


> The problem...who do you think is having the abortions???


Your co-workers probably hate you for answering questions with questions. 

I've yet to see why it's a problem or stupid comment. On pure logic and raw math it seems like common sense that 10mil more people = less jobs for illegals. Who has them doesn't matter, U.S. born babies are U.S. Citizens.


----------



## The Gabba Goul (Feb 11, 2005)

Well...you make a good point...I couldnt caompletely say that I'm 100% against abortions, as they've saved the backside of many a young woman and young man (myself included)...so I wont be a hypocrite (sp?)...but I can deffinately smell what youre cookin...

I dunno...for a long time I've maintained that if we eliminate welfare and other social programs that lure all this dead weight across the border, they'd high-tail it back where they came from in short order...then with all the money we save here in America, the govt could afford to give employers incentives to keep from out-sourcing, thus keeping jobs stateside and keeping the economy strong...


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

There is a better alternative than murder- it's called adoption.

Sometimes what goes around comes around.


----------



## ksinc (May 30, 2005)

The Gabba Goul said:


> I dunno...for a long time I've maintained that if we eliminate welfare and other social programs that lure all this dead weight across the border, they'd high-tail it back where they came from in short order...then with all the money we save here in America, the govt could afford to give employers incentives to keep from out-sourcing, thus keeping jobs stateside and keeping the economy strong...


I can't necessarily argue with any of that.


----------

