6 votes

Tea Party: Libertarians VS Social Conservatives

Great article that shows the statistical differences between the two groups that compose the Tea Party. Enjoy!

Link:

http://reason.com/poll/2011/09/26/is-half-the-tea-part-liber...



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The terminology is a bit

The terminology is a bit unfortunate. Many / most libertarians, RP included, are social conservatives, as absent a redistributionist government, other modes of living is simply not affordable for most people.

The distinction is really more about whether people think it's cool for government to force a set of choices upon people or not. RP does not, but is still a social conservative.

I don't think most

I don't think most libertarians/RP are social conservatives.

When it comes to specific issues, like religion, God, abortion, stem cell research, drugs, prostitution, gay marriage, etc. libertarians are generally far to the "left" of not only social conservatives, but America in general.

For example, Ron Paul is against banning all those things federally. But even at the state level, the only thing he thinks should be banned is abortion. He supports prayer in schools, but approaches creationism with much hesitation. He isn't a cross-clutcher, and has openly praised stem cell research.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

Like i have said many times

a libertarian must define themself, as a candidate. It is the only way to measure my principles to a libertarian I can support. Ron meets my principles, so I support him., even though I do not claim to be a libertarian.

I am too old and experienced to fall into a label.
Ron Paul speaks my language , the Constitution.
As far as I am concerned the rest would take care of itself.
And yes, I agree the FED is not good policy and is not Constutitonal. But the proper use of the U.S. Constitution is the MOST important to me.

Ask Occupiers if they want to keep the Constitution and you will find out who your true friends really are. Everything they ask for, in the demands, goes against my interpritation of what should be the roll of government which uses the U.S. Constitution. They are socialists with another agenda. Though they speak Ron Paulian about Wallstreet. They created the problems by not being responsible with their life and finances. Now they too want a bailout. They are mad because they did not get the bailout that they wanted all of us to pay to them.

Dirivitives are not meant to be a lifestyle, they are an investment tool.
These people signed on the line and lost, just as Wallstreeters did. They just did not get bailed out . They are just as bad as Wallstreet. They want a bailout. Now they want to go so far as to amend the Constitution. More regulation that does not work for me. They want to destroy to their likeing.
I cannot support those who want a government bailout.
They become their own enemy and mine. Sorry. I'm an adult who knew better than to get in too deep. They invested and lost, be it a home or job. We were told where the economy was going for years in advance. Ron told us many times and so did all the indicators. They did not prepare. And yes there was some sucking in by the PTB. But they all claim to be adults.

I have compasion for those who lost their jobs because of NAFTA and globalization . They were scamed. Unemployment is owed and payed by business', and government needs to honor their commitment to it. Wallstreet has nothing to do with unemployment. Globalization does. Spreading the Wealth is globalization's plan. It is America's wealth they want to spread, do you hear any other Countries wanting to spread theirs', NO.
So, they gave our jobs away and now want to steal from our retirement and inheritance. Globalization is NO friend of mine.

Good information.

thanks. The figures are about what I suspected is about what i suspected.
These figure fall inot Ron Pauls ctagory except the last set. Why are the tea baggers not being reached? They seem to have Ron's views.

Not really. RP's stance on

Not really.

RP's stance on government supporting no set of values is against the majority of the tea party.

His idea for opt-out of Medicare and SS is very well-accepted. However, his plan to cut SS/Mediciare is very unpopular, even amongst the tea party.

On homeland security, they widey differ from him.

Suprisingly, they also differ from the wars; most support the wars. That is a key point of RP's campaign.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

What do you mean by

RON supports no set of values ?
He supports the Constitution which sets American values.
Just asking .

This really requires further

This really requires further explanation?

Ron Paul does not support the government pushing any kind of cultural ideology or religion over another, something a lot of conservatives certainly disagree with.

Plan for eliminating the national debt in 10-20 years:

Overview: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2010/09/12/my-plan-for-reducin...

Specific cuts; defense spending: http://rolexian.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/more-detailed-look-a

On The View

Cain said homosexuality was a choice which upset a lot of people.

TheKingIsComing

Why do they call it a

PREFERRENCE? If it is not a CHOICE? There is no know Gene.
So I guess he would be correct.

Good article

.