How My Political Views Have Shifted Since I Started Transition.

[Reagan]

So this last year has been a whirlwind of change for me. I have become to deal with who I truly am. It's been pretty interesting to see the changes progress and the new me transform and become a new more enlightened person. As much as I have changed physically and emotionally I have also changed politically too.  For instance I was a die hard Republican before my transition started. I mean in my eyes there wasn't a doubt in my mind. I came from a heavily leaning Conservative family and throughout my childhood those values where instilled into me. Lately though I have seriously been disagreeing with the political system. I'm not one that can be put into a box or party. I have been awakened to make decisions that effect my own life and my own issues. This has caused me to take inventory of what is really at stake. I'm definitely not Republican anymore. I have really no desire to support any group of people that are so admittedly seeking to destroy what me and my family are.

It has been so frustrating to see this party for the first time as the enemy. I hear and see the things that these people believe in and how they feel toward the LBGT, women and minorities and it is very disturbing. I know that not all of them feel this way, but the ones that don't the are not very interested in changing the opinions of those who do. This doesn't put me into the democrat box by default either! I'm strongly against a lot of values that make up this party's platform as well. I'm at a point where I'm in the middle. So taking a greater consideration of those willing to represent me has become a bit of a challenge. It seems that one party has the guts to say that they support equal rights, but it also seems that some will say this only in return for votes. When the rubber meets the road is where there is disconnect. Granted The Democrat party has done much more for the rights of LGBT people. I would have to say they also use us as political pawns too.

So this is what I have decided to do this political season with my vote. I'm going to vote for the first time with my heart and mind. I will make the decision on the best qualified to represent my needs and not the needs of a political party. So I may vote someone for one party and another from the other. Letting their record and their values speak for themselves. This seems like the only logical choice.

How do you decide?  Is it strange that I feel this way or is it that I'm finally just more open minded that I see the truth for what it is? And did anybody else go through this kinda like a awaking?

[Medusa]

In my point of view problem is that there is two sides of evil
I don't know who is who in you republican vs democrat, but there is
*)capitalists, free market, but want classical values of family and are again LGBT
and
*)socialist, who want to regulate, take money from working people and give them to lazy one, but are open minded and support LGBT

But I want capitalistic, minimal state, with low taxes, where everyone is responsible for themselves and are fine with LGBT

[tekla]

Definition of SOCIALISM

1
: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

I don't see either major US party advocating collective ownership, the abolition of private property, and/or state control over the means of production.  Things don't become something else just because you mislabel them.  Though I'm pretty sure it provides endless amusement to people who really do know (because they live in such a system).


And are not 'classical values of family' antithetical to LGBT rights?  Are not the biggest supporters of the 'classic values' (so classic they even have a Latin based name, Patriarchal), exactly those who are the most hostile to the LGBT arguments?

[Medusa]

Definition of SOCIALISM

Is difference between pure socialism and socilists
With their regulations over everything (if you can touch donut with hand or not  ) and generous social system and phrase that they don't have to pay debts 

[tekla]

For better or worse it's harder to do that in the States because the two parties are (or at least were) not all of the same cloth.  That the Republican/Democratic party of Alabama were not the same thing (nor did they advocate the same positions) as the Republican/Democratic party of California.  Add to that an increasing marginalization of the Republicans to a rural, Southern rump party, one that does not have a national following and does not command a national presence.  It become pretty obvious that the 'Pubs have all but abandoned the urban vote and urban areas, and with that - the majority of the population, and there are now many areas of the country where the Republican brand is non-existent, or when someone does run on it, has little to no meaning to the national positions.  That's allowed the Dems to move to a center-right position (the last Democratic Convention sounded pretty much like Republican Conventions sounded in the old days, though it didn't look nearly as 'all-white'), as the 'Pubs move ever further to an extreme right, and leaves the way open for some group to reclaim the progressive left, and advocate for those positions.  But I don't see that happening soon.

And I'm not even sure what you are asking - but if you are bitching about the regulation of business and the development of the modern welfare state rest assured that both were the direct result of the Industrial Capitalistic system, and not the Socialist system.  The biggest proponents of regulation are, in fact, the biggest players in that niche.  The initial bout of American governmental regulation of business (the railroads) was undertaken with the complete support of the biggest railroads who saw it as a way to rationalize their operations, lessen competition and drive marginal operators out of the business entirely.  Which is exactly what happened.  Make no mistake about it, the end result of unfettered free market capitalism is not increased competition, but no competition.  (Because competition is wasteful, and the best way always wins out over all the other ways.)

[Stephe]

I vote mainly on their social platform.

I don't like being over taxed but I do realize -reasonable- taxes are required (by everyone and right now the ultra wealthy pay the lest they ever have in taxes) to cover what we expect a government to do. Without road, police etc no one would succeed. The thing I have a hard time with is the party that proclaims they want smaller government and less regulations are also the same people who want to limit my rights and put more regulation on my personal choices. Given a choice of things like removing inheritance tax exemption (right now up to 5 million has no tax, one party wants to totally remove this so people inheriting over 5 million still pay nothing) or support of same sex marriage, the former isn't high on my list of priorities. 

I don't support what either party represents as a whole but I have to choose between what will improve my life and what will make it worse. As long as one party basically hates me and how I choose to live my life, I have a hard time thinking it will somehow improve my life to support them.

[tekla]

I would hope that people's political positions are always changing because the landscape is constantly shifting, new problems emerge, old ones shrink away and very little stays the same.  The right answers for one time may not necessarily be enough for another, or may even be wrong.  I've always favored progressive political positions, but what's progressive in one era is the next generations conservative stance, so you have to look at everything with fresh eyes understanding what is needed now, and how future developments can alter that.

[peky]

I am eagerly awaiting the for the morning of the 7th of November. In a very personal level who gets elected will have a profound effect in my life -in more than one way.

Regardless of who get elected, the sequestration or how we deal with the sequestration is going to have a tremendous impact throughout most of the country. Just the DoD is supposedly to cut 200,000 civilian jobs to attain the expected DoD budget reduction. Numbers for the other departments also range bet 7% and 9 %. Add to that the jobs lost by Fed contractors!

You may say, so what this does not affect me, I do not work for the Feds. Well, every community and their associated businesses depends on those civilian and contractor jobs for their financial well being.

Also, remember of all the services you get from Uncle Sam, and think how a reduction in force thus of service is going to impact your life.

Anyway, Regan dear, congratulations on your epiphany. "The force is strong with you"

[Stephe]

I find it interesting that many of the things Regan said then, would now be called liberal thinking..

"We in the United States, above all, must remember that lesson, for we were founded as a nation of openness to people of all beliefs. And so we must remain. Our very unity has been strengthened by our pluralism. We establish no religion in this country, we command no worship, we mandate no belief, nor will we ever. Church and state are, and must remain, separate. All are free to believe or not believe, all are free to practice a faith or not, and those who believe are free, and should be free, to speak of and act on their belief."

Another was his belief the super rich should pay more tax. Today they pay less even under Obama than they did in Regan's time yet some feel they need more relief?

[cindianna_jones]

I also used to be a die hard Republican. But then I got smart and decided to change affiliation in 2008. I'll not have a productive and happy life if that life is illegal. How can my life be illegal? I encourage everyone to vote for their own interests. It will change things for the better. I do take responsibility for my life and my actions. I pay my own way. I vote my own interests.

[justmeinoz]

This all sounds very familiar.  It seems that I have done a total 180 in more ways than one.  For 40 years I was a rusted on Liberal voter, and even joined the National Party at one stage (sort of rural Republicans with a strongly Democat social welfare tinge).

Unfortunately once John Howard became PM the Liberal Party shifted more to the Right and went from being close to the UK Conservative Party, and more closely aligned itself with the US Republicans.
Under Tony Abbott and Joe hockey it has also become a lot more populist, with little remaining of real principle.  They are the best thing PM Julia Gillard has going for her, as the response she has received to some really stupidly misogynist statements Abbott has made lately.

Given that the Labor Party here in Tasmania is led by a woman, Lara Giddings, and the Liberal leader Will Hodgman is following the same populist, power at any price approach as Abbott, I can't see myself voting for anyone but Labor in the next State and Federal elections.

Karen.

[suzifrommd]

Well, I haven't transitioned yet, but I hope I can have a ticket into this discussion anyway.

It's frustrating.

My politics have become more conservative over the years, especially over economic matters. I'm still on the moderate side but more and more I'm of the opinion that there is a lot of stuff that government is doing that it doesn't need to do or that private investment and competitive enterprise will do better. My observations tell me runaway debt is more of a threat to the economy than government cutbacks.

Unfortunately, just as I start thinking this, the conservative elements in my country have gone completely wacko, embracing misogyny and backing away from human rights. (By insisting that government tell women what they can't do with their bodies and deciding who is and isn't allowed to marry, I claim they're being anything but conservative. Don't conservatives want a SMALLER role for government?)

So I'm basically forced to vote for economic policies I'm not sure about because otherwise, given that I'm planning to join the ranks of womanhood (and to find myself in a same-sex marriage), I'd be voting against my own interests.

[tekla]

Runaway debt is the result of waging two wars off the books while lowering taxes. 

[UCBerkeleyPostop]

Even Milton Friedman advocated Keynesian tactics (Government spending their way out of recession) in times of severe downturns.

[japple]

The idea that the Republican Party is fiscal conservative is a-historic. They're not. Military spending is a huge portion of Government spending.

All tax dollars to that go to welfare go right back into the economy. So while you hate paying taxes, if the constant direct economic peace keeping stimulus of welfare didn't exist, you'd make significantly less money.

[UCBerkeleyPostop]

We spend more on the military than the next ten biggest industrial nations combined.

My politics have become more conservative over the years, especially over economic matters. I'm still on the moderate side but more and more I'm of the opinion that there is a lot of stuff that government is doing that it doesn't need to do or that private investment and competitive enterprise will do better. My observations tell me runaway debt is more of a threat to the economy than government cutbacks.

Watch the film The Corporation and learn about externalities, how corporations internalize profits while passing on costs to you, the taxpayer.

[tekla]

That, and the very first thing that free enterprise uses their 'freedom' to do, is to limit competition.  Competition is wasteful after all.  So the longer any enterprise goes on, the less competitive it becomes, both through restrictive business practices as well as by regulation - usually asked for by the major players.