Here's a study, from three decades ago, that found that "at least four different belief systems exist among the American public."

[URL]http://www.umich.edu/~umisl/articles/parties.htm[/URL]

"An Alternative Analysis of Mass Belief Systems: Liberal, Conservative, Populist, and Libertarian"

[quote=Executive summary]We treat the dimension of government intervention in economic affairs as distinct from the dimension of expansion of individual liberties.

The liberal supports government economic intervention and the expansion of individual liberties; the conservative opposes both. The libertarian supports expanded individual liberties but opposes economic intervention. The populist supports economic intervention but opposes expansion of individual liberties.[/quote]

[quote]Some 72.4 percent of the sample can be classified as holding consistent or nearly consistent political beliefs using these categories. The relationships between our ideological categories and demographic groupings are generally consistent with expectations about these groups.[/quote]

The "World's Smallest Political Quiz" at [URL]http://www.theadvocates.org/quizp/index.html[/URL] is based on that system (except that it allows an area of "centrist" in the middle between the other four and uses the label ""statist" instead of "populist").

"The Political Compass" at [URL]http://www.politicalcompass.org/index[/URL] is similar, but also shows where various world leaders would score on their two-dimensional graph.

Edit: ==> Interesting is their display of the most prominent names in 2008 US political primaries, at [URL]http://www.politicalcompass.org/usprimaries2008[/URL].

[quote]When examining the chart it's important to note that although most of the candidates seem quite different, in substance they occupy a relatively restricted area within the universal political spectrum. Democracies with a system of proportional representation give expression to a wider range of political views. While Dennis Kucinich and Ralph Nader are depicted on the extreme left in an American context, they would simply be mainstream social democrats within the wider political landscape of Europe. Similarly, Hillary Clinton is popularly perceived as a leftist in the United States while in any other western democracy her record is that of a mainstream conservative.[/quote]

- - -

rogue,

How does your "fiscal conservative who is socially progressive" match up with "supports expanded individual liberties but opposes economic intervention"?

[QUOTE=garo;140456]Not true. Clinton had actually started the process towards paying of national debt. And you have to remember that when he came into office the budget was a sea of red ink. Just bringing it back in black was a major achievement just like it will be for the next president if he manages to achieve it.[/QUOTE]

The budget was in the black mostly due to the boom of the Internet (created by Al Gore, his VP :grin:) and the bull stock market.

[QUOTE=rogue;140464]The budget was in the black mostly due to the boom of the Internet (created by Al Gore, his VP :grin:) and the bull stock market.[/QUOTE]

Partly true, but it was also due to his increasing of tax rates. Give the man some credit, he left office with the budget in far better shape than when he took office. Probably in better shape than any President since at least the early 70s.

[QUOTE=cheesehead / Executive Summary;140457]The liberal supports government economic intervention and the expansion of individual liberties; the conservative opposes both. [/QUOTE]

From that snipet alone, I don't want to read the report. Liberals are in no way interested in expansion of individual liberties. Gun ownership, the liberal wants to restrict your liberties. Hate speech? The liberal wants to restrict your liberties. Seat belt usage? The liberal wants to restrict your liberties.

Conservatives want to restrict your liberties too, just on different issues.

That's why I trust neither conservatives nor liberals. Both think they can run my life better than I can.

As George pointed out, it wasn't just the Internet boom. The boom started in earnest in 1997-1998 and the budget was already in far better shape before that. And we have had a bull run (of sorts) during 2003-2007 in the stock market but that doesn't seem to have helped W balance his budget.

Several Australian-born friends of mine and I were discussing McCain's choice of running mate over coffee this morning, and while we disagreed on things as basic as whether this was a clever or stupid choice, one thing we did eventually agree on was this: The outcome of the election should settle once and for all the question of whether the U.S. is a secular democracy (as it professes to be), or a de facto Christian theocracy.

[quote=ewmayer;140515]The outcome of the election should settle once and for all the question of whether the U.S. is a secular democracy (as it professes to be), or a de facto Christian theocracy.[/quote]I can't see how the outcome would settle that question at all. Explain, please.

[quote=cheesehead;140526]I can't see how the outcome would settle that question at all. Explain, please.[/quote]All four key figures in the race profess to be Christians:

Obama: [URL]http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/01/21/obama/[/URL]
McCain: [URL]http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1018/p01s06-uspo.html[/URL]
Biden: [URL]http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0827/p01s07-uspo.html[/URL]
Palin: [URL]http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g4-w_DCWffagBaQb8Il9a0R2hkPAD92SL7E00[/URL]

I'm with cheesehead... What would one pair or the other winning prove about the United States of America vis-a-vis Christianity?!?

[QUOTE=tallguy;140533]I'm with cheesehead... What would one pair or the other winning prove about the United States of America vis-a-vis Christianity?!?[/QUOTE]

Both McCain and Palin represent the extreme Christian right. In fact, McCain choosing Palin rather than his first choice, Joe Lieberman, perfectly illustrates my assertion that McCain has sold his soul to the Christian right. They will of course be pleased by Palin, because she passes all the conservative Christian litmus tests:

Anti-abortion? Check.
Anti-teaching-of-evolution? Check.
Pro-prayer-in-schools? Check.
Pro-government-sponsored religious displays [e.g. 10 Commandments in public buildings]. Check.

And the fact that she's pro-Big-oil and a gun-totin' gal won't hurt with that demographic either.

With Obama and Biden you have professed Christians who strongly believe in secular government - BIG difference from the demographic McCain and Palin ally themselves most closely with. I'm rather astonished that the difference between "believing X" and "governing based on X" appears to be lost on you and Cheesehead.

[quote=tallguy;140533]All four key figures in the race profess to be Christians:[/quote]Foresight Exchange at [URL="http://www.ideosphere.com"]www.ideosphere.com[/URL] has a claim ([URL]http://www.ideosphere.com/fx-bin/Claim?claim=PnoC[/URL]) about whether a candidate saying s/he is not a practicing Christian is elected president by November 2016. It's currently trading at 22 on a scale of 1-99.

I don't think we can say the U.S. is a "de facto Christian theocracy" just because of professed Christianity by either the majority of citizens or an elected president. Let's see what happens to the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives ([URL]http://www.whitehouse.gov/government/fbci/[/URL]), at least. (You're not referring to "In God We Trust" on the coins, are you, Ernst?)

Edit:

Now I see Ernst's latest.

[quote=ewmayer;140539]Both McCain and Palin represent the extreme Christian right. In fact, McCain choosing Palin rather than his first choice, Joe Lieberman, perfectly illustrates my assertion that McCain has sold his soul to the Christian right.[/quote]Well, i don't think McCain is actually Christian Right. He's just decided that he can't get elected without their support, so must pander to them for now. Once he's in office, if he doesn't care about reelection he can afford to move back where he's more comfortable. (Yes, yes -- how many people could resist the lure of that second term as most powerful person on Earth?)

[quote]With Obama and Biden you have professed Christians who strongly believe in secular government[/quote]So? That won't "settle once and for all the question of whether the U.S. is a secular democracy (as it professes to be), or a de facto Christian theocracy". The Christian Right won't disappear. Coins will still profess trust in God. Creationism won't disappear. The first and third are sorta like the bindweed (or Creeping Charlie, among other names) that was in my yard when I owned a house -- you have to diligently attack over and over again and never miss a weakness in order to beat it back, because it's trying just as hard on its own behalf and has very deep roots.

[quote]the difference between "believing X" and "governing based on X" appears to be lost on you and Cheesehead.[/quote]But that's not what we were responding to. We were responding to your "The outcome of the election should settle once and for all the question of whether the U.S. is a secular democracy (as it professes to be), or a de facto Christian theocracy", which is not the same difference at all.

[quote=cheesehead;140540]But that's not what we were responding to. We were responding to your "The outcome of the election should settle once and for all the question of whether the U.S. is a secular democracy (as it professes to be), or a de facto Christian theocracy", which is not the same difference at all.[/quote]Thank you cheesehead, for saving me the time of typing that :grin: