Suppose for a moment that you agree with the "platform" below. That might be hard for those who strongly disagree with my political philosophy, but it should help me come up with a set of political ideas that might actually be implemented in the foreseeable future, which isn't the case with my current, uncompromising stances. I'd be glad to broaden my own perspective and do the same for anyone else. I'll keep my list as short as possible by sticking to issues that matter a lot to me:

1. Completely ban abortion, ESCR, in vitro fertilization, assisted suicide and human cloning experiments- no exceptions.

2. Immediately bring all American troops home from overseas locations and cut military spending by 80 to 90%- end the possibility of a draft in any circumstances.

3. Abolish Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and welfare as we know them. Cut federal government aid by over 50% and focus it solely on grants to the most efficient private charities, which should in turn be given full freedom to do with the grants as they see fit.

4. Repeal the Patriot Act, ban torture and give due process to everyone in American detainment.

5. End foreign military aid (maintaining humanitarian aid) and withdraw from all international organizations and treaties.

6. Ban the use of fossil fuels in the near future and require energy companies, through an unfunded mandate, to convert to alternative sources (except nuclear power, which should not be allowed).

7. End all government regulation of firearms that are not fully automatic.

8. Require only a criminal background check for legal residency and citizenship- make amnesty contingent on a background check only and eliminate other immigration restrictions.

9. Abolish all federal taxes except for an 18% flat tax, regardless of family status, on personal income.

10. Eliminate all subsidies and tariffs and shorten the duration of intellectual property laws.

11. Abolish public schools and replace them with a voucher system.

12. Outlaw the death penalty.

13. Legalize gay marriage and adoption nationwide and apply anti-discrimination laws to the LGBT community.

14. Use all budget surpluses to pay off the national debt.

Okay, that list wasn't so short, but I have strong opinions about a lot of issues. I appreciate all replies. Thank you very much.

__________________
"Some people complain about the system. The system is not good, so they can't do anything. It's an excuse. Freedom is in your heart." (Jin Xing)

Find the items you are least willing to compromise on, and ally yourself with a party that reflects those views.

Compromise is intrinsic to a democracy.

__________________
My Political Blog (Most recent update Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

Some time ago, I figured out that only the Libertarian Party and a few Republicans agree with me on the six points on which I won't compromise. I was asking, however, what I should aim for in terms of particular issues. As you can see, most of my views are extreme (though in varying directions). I want to know what good compromises between my idealism and the status quo are. Otherwise, I will be constantly frustrated by the non-realization of my hopes. I thought that the political knowledge of others would be helpful in building a more moderate pseudo-platform.

__________________
"Some people complain about the system. The system is not good, so they can't do anything. It's an excuse. Freedom is in your heart." (Jin Xing)

complete your education
join the work force
become self sustaining
then, with the benefit of practical experience, revisit each of your stands

fwiw, our views converge on only one issue, #14 [Use all budget surpluses to pay off the national debt.], and if our nation's accounting system were not rigged you would find there have been no actual surpluses to retire the accumulated debt (social security revenues were spent to conceal the deficits)
on the following items, while we have similar approaches, i could not agree with the ideals as presented:

4. Repeal the Patriot Act, ban torture and give due process to everyone in American detainment.

9. Abolish all federal taxes except for an 18% flat tax, regardless of family status, on personal income.

12. Outlaw the death penalty.

but let me also add, unlike many, at least you are trying to establish principles which are meaningful to you and you have chosen not to unquestioningly parrot those things you have been taught/instructed to believe

__________________

Quote:

"I like to watch the news, because I don't like people very much and when you watch the news ... if you ever had an idea that people were really terrible, you could watch the news and know that you're right."

Frank Zappa

Compromises, eh? I guess I'll give my incredibly biased opinions on that. Otherwise I think Sadistic has good advice... Though I'd alter it to say vote for individual candidates that best support your most important issues.
For one thing, you'll never find a party that fully embraces this.
But from your other posts, you seem more concerned with results than legislation. You know there is no way to police completely abandonment and infanticide and even more so assisted suicide.
You should compromise on this one because it is not at all likely to come about through any party or candidate. And even if the legislation did, the problems would live on. Focus on a more realistic goal, such as overturning Roe v. Wade or making all states have those laws that allow women to leave newborns with hospitals and fire stations (can't recall the name). Baby steps (no pun intended).

Only the Libertarians will support this... though if you stick only to the realistic part about bringing troops home from Iraq, you can find candidates on either side that have some chance of getting into office, however small. Again, don't use all your ammo on one cause (that pun was intended, but it didn't work as well as the baby one).

Again, only Libertarians will go with this. Other parties actually worry about the specifics of what that means... Generally these things are just used for rhetorical purposes. You need to think this idea over more fully before you can really support it. You want something in place of the current system and don't really know what it is.

You can find candidates on both sides who support this, though completely overturning the Patriot Act is unlikely.

Highly unlikely. Mostly rhetorical when people speak of it. As it is now, we have a perfect relationship with orgs like the UN and the argument is really whether or not we should go along with what it does. We do or don't do as we please and use the UN when it is convenient.
You might also want to rethink "all". Would that include the Geneva convention?

???? That sounds like a good way to say "Sink or swim!" then proceed to drain the pool. You can't expect companies to just magically find new ways to produce energy and stay in business covering the cost of switchover. This sounds dangerous.

A lot of Republicans would go for this and all Libertarians.

It will be several years before this becomes even close to realistic given today's climate.

Some politicians go with things similar... but probably a bit different. There will need to be some adjustment of some kind for the poorest.


I don't see any politician actually standing by this.

If it happens, it will (and should be) a gradual process.


Libertarians... otherwise this will always be a state issue.

Some Democrats and Libertarians

That's something they talk about, not something they do.

All in all, your only real choice is to be... disappointed.
Not only are you going to have to prioritize the issues... You'll also need to compromise on their radical nature. Policy changes best when it changes gradually... and it always changes one piece at a time.
Have patience... and base your goals more on specific policies that meet general goals... rather than the opposite, which you are asking for now.

__________________
That information is classified and to be given only on a need-to-know basis...

And I do not need to know.

I already scheduled my GED tests. I can't do anything about my education until April 3 (the date of the first test). As for getting a job, I'll cross that bridge when I complete my education. I'm not going to stop coming up with political ideas in the meantime, however.
Incidentally, I know that the government uses accounting tricks to make the deficit look far smaller than it is, which is much of why I am so fiscally conservative. As for having a job giving me more political knowledge, it may refine my views slightly but it won't change them fundamentally. Even if I am a low-paid worker I'm not going to become pro-union, for example, nor will I support socializing medicine if I have trouble getting health care. I no longer allow my own irrational feelings to affect my political views, which is why I'm not the pro-censorship crusader I once was.

__________________
"Some people complain about the system. The system is not good, so they can't do anything. It's an excuse. Freedom is in your heart." (Jin Xing)

I already decided that a candidate need only oppose a pro-choice litmus test to get my vote. Do you think I should change my fundamental goal of outlawing all anti-life practices, however? Are things like abortion, at this point, as much a tragic, inevitable reality as disease and conflict?

Again, a candidate need only oppose the neoconservative nation building agenda to get my vote. I know that fear-mongering prevents my foreign policy isolationism from being implemented.

It would work in this way. Studies would be conducted on which private charities waste the least. The federal government would give them grants, but there would be no guaranteed payments to anyone. That means that if someone was using handouts for drugs and alcohol, for example, the private charity could cut them off until they agreed to seek rehabilitation, for example, and there would be no government interference in the process. In effect, all government aid would become a contingent welfare program (with no entitlements). I would transition to this very slowly, though.

I support putting the basic principles of the Geneva Convention into the Constitution, but yes, I support withdrawing from all international agreements.

I should have phrased that more clearly. I would consult with experts and set a realistic date (e.g. 2020 or 2030), at which point fossil fuels would become illegal. I oppose subsidies for anything- even for alternative energy.

So should I forget about this issue completely for the next few years?

I would exclude from taxation those who had received (through private organizations) a certain amount of government aid in a fiscal year.

The strange thing is that I could get Rothbard-type libertarians and Nader-type liberals to agree on this, but apparently the fat of pork is too delicious to most politicians (sorry for the dumb analogy).

How long before the majority of Americans stop listening to the Religious Right on these issues?

So I've noticed. If I'm supposed to believe Hillary Rodham-Clinton when she claims she will balance the budget...

That is superb advice. I appreciate your insight, JavaBlack!

__________________
"Some people complain about the system. The system is not good, so they can't do anything. It's an excuse. Freedom is in your heart." (Jin Xing)

It actually always has been. Infanticide has been a reality for a long time.
But you don't need to gie up hope altogether... You'll just find, much as focusing on a GED rather than a Ph.D right now, that it is best to take small and realistic steps rather than to try and take huge steps that are very unlikely and will be met with strong reaction.

In the meantime all you can do is find politicians who support something. But be careful. You really have to think about what order things must change in...
In the mean time, try to find someone with an idea similar or try to get your idea out there. Look at the Fair Tax. It's an idea that, while not quite in the realm of likely, is discussed as a possibility and it came from the grassroots.

It would be better to either impose progressive penalties or to subsidize. We really cannot know what a realistic date is... and there are just too many wildcards. We need to either support the science and technology or just let the market handle it.

Not necessarily. Just don't be too disappointed when nothing happens in this regard. Don't put too much stock in this idea catching on anytime soon.

Why are you apologizing... I would do the same thing. Some puns are just too tempting and succulent and make a really good soup base.

Be careful what you wish for. It's typically only the RR that has as strong a focus on pro-life issues as you do.
I think ethics should be taught as a subject in grade school so people can learn to discuss morals without falling back on the weary old traditionalist arguments.

You mean... you don't think she can do it?

__________________
That information is classified and to be given only on a need-to-know basis...

And I do not need to know.

Your aim should be to change the laws in favor of your views on those issues.

Allying with a party to elect people into power who share that goal is a means to that end. Therefore my answer remains the same.

We cant think for you....you will have to decide which compromises are acceptable to you. Do you know your own opinion or not?

Only if your hopes are unreasonable.

Compromise goes both ways. You will not always get what you want. If you cant accept that, then nothing you do will lessen your frustration.

Since you are not a moderate (You are authoritarian), I doubt that will be possible.

__________________
My Political Blog (Most recent update Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?