Political leanings poll

[Jacob]

Obama is a socialist now?

That isn't a new label for him.

But neither is it remotely accurate

[garbon]

Obama is a socialist now?

That isn't a new label for him.

But neither is it remotely accurate

So?

[Admiral Yi]

Moi.
Under Obama the headcount in the Federal government has gone down and non-entitlement spending declined.

Are you including DoD?

I can't think of any significant "big government" initiative other than Obamacare, and Obamacare is at its core, the old Heritage health plan.  It is a way to achieve goals that are bipartisan without a single payer structure.  The stimulus was in fact temporary.  His rhetoric is less small government than Bubba but in terms of action I don't see a distinction.

I can think of a number of less significant ones that were realized (home insulation, mortgage refinance, buying GM and Chrysler for the UAW, Race to the Top, Common Core, Obamaphones(!), filling the donut hole) and he has proposed free juco for everyone and more free money for Schumer families with children.

[Jacob]

Er, no.  Social democrats still want the means of production in the hands of the workers.  Obama has not said he wishes to do that.

I don't think Social Democrats have wanted the means of production in the hands of the workers for at least three or four decades, if not more.

Social Democrats, in my perception, seem to be primarily about strong worker protections (minimum wage, union rights, labour laws et. al.) and substantial redistribution (i.e. taxation, various benefit schemes) in the pursuit mitigating wealth inequality. They also often have a preference for public ownership in the service of the public interest.

Nothing about the means of producition in the hands of workers... that's for straight up Socialists.

[Admiral Yi]

Also non-entitlement spending has declined presumably because of the sequester.

[dps]

He made volumes of speeches from the 60s onward advocating small government.  He continued with that rhetoric through his presidency.  Obviously as pragmatic as he was he had to compromise on some of those principles to get things done.  You're not going to get ideological purity out of any president these days (if ever?).

He oversaw a massive expansion of the military.  That wasn't a compromise, that was his main deal.

That's the thing with "small government" conservatives:  the DoD never counts.

Actually, I wouldn't mind us having a smaller army and maybe a smaller air force.  But I want a bigger navy, maybe even with a few of the battleships Neil so loves.

[Razgovory]

Er, no.  Social democrats still want the means of production in the hands of the workers.  Obama has not said he wishes to do that.

I don't think Social Democrats have wanted the means of production in the hands of the workers for at least three or four decades, if not more.

Social Democrats, in my perception, seem to be primarily about strong worker protections (minimum wage, union rights, labour laws et. al.) and substantial redistribution (i.e. taxation, various benefit schemes) in the pursuit mitigating wealth inequality. They also often have a preference for public ownership in the service of the public interest.

Nothing about the means of producition in the hands of workers... that's for straight up Socialists.

It was my impression they were moving toward a socialist program through democratic means, but if you are right they really can't be describted as Socialist anymore, and Derspeiss (and the whole of the GOP) is still wrong.

[Siege]

He made volumes of speeches from the 60s onward advocating small government.  He continued with that rhetoric through his presidency.  Obviously as pragmatic as he was he had to compromise on some of those principles to get things done.  You're not going to get ideological purity out of any president these days (if ever?).

He oversaw a massive expansion of the military.  That wasn't a compromise, that was his main deal.

That's the thing with "small government" conservatives:  the DoD never counts.

Actually, I wouldn't mind us having a smaller army and maybe a smaller air force.  But I want a bigger navy, maybe even with a few of the battleships Neil so loves.

Battleships are very inefective in the modern battlefield.
I would rather have more ship-killers, like attack subs.
And carriers are the ultimate force projection platform.
Battleships are only good for target practice.

[Razgovory]

He made volumes of speeches from the 60s onward advocating small government.  He continued with that rhetoric through his presidency.  Obviously as pragmatic as he was he had to compromise on some of those principles to get things done.  You're not going to get ideological purity out of any president these days (if ever?).

He oversaw a massive expansion of the military.  That wasn't a compromise, that was his main deal.

That's the thing with "small government" conservatives:  the DoD never counts.

Actually, I wouldn't mind us having a smaller army and maybe a smaller air force.  But I want a bigger navy, maybe even with a few of the battleships Neil so loves.

Battleships are very inefective in the modern battlefield.
I would rather have more ship-killers, like attack subs.
And carriers are the ultimate force projection platform.
Battleships are only good for target practice.

I would say all of them are ineffective on a battlefield.  They really need a sea to operate in.

[mongers]

I'm fairly right-wing, one nation pro-Europe Heathite Tory, so I don't really have anywhere to select on the poll. 

[dps]

He made volumes of speeches from the 60s onward advocating small government.  He continued with that rhetoric through his presidency.  Obviously as pragmatic as he was he had to compromise on some of those principles to get things done.  You're not going to get ideological purity out of any president these days (if ever?).

He oversaw a massive expansion of the military.  That wasn't a compromise, that was his main deal.

That's the thing with "small government" conservatives:  the DoD never counts.

Actually, I wouldn't mind us having a smaller army and maybe a smaller air force.  But I want a bigger navy, maybe even with a few of the battleships Neil so loves.

Battleships are very inefective in the modern battlefield.
I would rather have more ship-killers, like attack subs.
And carriers are the ultimate force projection platform.
Battleships are only good for target practice.

I would say all of them are ineffective on a battlefield.  They really need a sea to operate in.

Yeah, when they're on a battlefield, they're kind of immobile.

[The Brain]

If the Yamato had reached Okinawa the war wouldn't have ended until '46, maybe '47.

[Ed Anger]

Goldwater would punch Siege in the nuts.

[Barrister]

I would say all of them are ineffective on a battlefield.  They really need a sea to operate in.

[Siege]

Goldwater would punch Siege in the nuts.

Sure.
He and what army.