So let me ask you this -- suppose for a moment that you support deficit-free small government

[OmahaBlueDog]

You are a fiscal conservative. You want low taxes, balanced budgets, and somewhat less regulation than exits today....

BUT

You also support choice. You favor a sane immigration policy. If people of the same gender want to marry, it's fine by you. You think that marijuana should be legal, gun control seems pretty reasonable, and you support equal pay for equal work. You even believe in gasp science.

Where do you go politically?

Economically, you are a Republican, but to be a Republican, you have to support candidates so fixated on ending abortion that they believe a woman should be forced to bear her rapist's baby, and then he should get paternal custody rights. To be a Republican, you have to support some seriously 13th century thinking in a theological sense.

Do you just register and not state a preference? Libertarian? Democrat? Republican?

[WooWooWoo]

1. probably vote for Obama now

and hope the Republicans nominate someone sane in 2016.

[OmahaBlueDog]

2. Or you don't vote

I know people who consider themselves Republicans who are in exactly this position. They want small government, but they think that their party has gone way the hell out in right field in terms of social policy.

[MannyGoldstein]

3. Easy. Democrats win on *both* counts.

Republicans *claim* to want smaller government and lower spending, but the actual record shows exactly the opposite. Compared to Democrats, they have historically grown government more and increased spending more. Google it and you'll see.

They do tend to lower taxes... but since they spend more, that just leads to horrific deficits.

[OmahaBlueDog]

7. Reagan promised to lower taxes, balance the budget, and raise defense spending.

His defense spending rivaled the Obama stimulus...and a lot of that was pissed away on useless or ill-conceived weaponry. The reality is Reagan spent our way out of the late 70s/early 80s recession.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

9. Republicans are the Borrow-and-Spend party. nt

[cynatnite]

4. The ones I know like this call themselves blue dogs...

They are conservative dems.

[OmahaBlueDog]

6. The people I know like this mostly consider themselves Republicans

I think of them as "country club" Republicans.

I call myself a Blue Dog. I'm more conservative fiscally than most here, but I'm to the left of people like Heath Schuler. I'm not going to tell you I've never voted for a Republican, but it's rare.

[Skittles]

5. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A FISCAL CONSERVATIVE

[Bernardo de La Paz]

8. There is. His name is Barack Obama or Bill Clinton (spending chart):

[pampango]

14. While I think federal spending should be significantly increased, that is an effective

chart to use on republicans who accuse the president of being a "typical big spending Democrat". Thanks for posting it, Bernardo de La Paz.

[WooWooWoo]

16. what do you mean?

[k2qb3]

10. A whole lot of Americans are right where you are IMO.

The Republican party only pretends to care about the issues we might possibly be considered to agree on economically, you're probably drawn to some elements of austrian theory, the trickle-down/chicago school monetarism of the GOP is a sick joke but it takes a bit of study to realise why. Sectreas O'Niel was the finest human being in the Bush administration and a real fiscal conservative and they fired him for it.

You're a center-left libertarian. I could have written your OP myself except for the bit about gun control which I consider the pro-life of the left. Third party candidates don't have any hope though so you certainly shouldn't vote for them in an election that has any chance of being close. I occasionally throw the better libertarian candidate a vote in safe races ( I've never lived in a swing state) just because I think the world would be a better place if they were seen as having enough clout to swing elections so they were courted as a voting block, better still if they replaced the GOP but that isn't happening either.

How you should register depends on how open your primaries are and which party you think needs help choosing candidates. You should vote Democrat.

[OmahaBlueDog]

19. Just to be clear - I'm actually referring to acquaintences. I'm a Dem

Probably a DLC Dem -- maybe a little to to the left of that.

except for the bit about gun control which I consider the pro-life of the left.

We could do a whole thread on that.

[abumbyanyothername]

11. Sounds like

The democratic party since the demise of Jimmy Carter.

[abumbyanyothername]

12. And I wrote that

before I saw the chart.

[Spider Jerusalem]

13. I dunno, economically are you a Republican?

The Republican party at present are not fiscal conservatives and don't belive in ending deficts. They want to cut taxes and cut spending on everything except the military; reducing tax receipts is no way to balance the books, and there has been no credible Republican deficit-reduction plan (not from Ryan, not from Romney, not from McCain in 2008, or Bush in 2004 and 2000).

And Americans already have got "low" taxes. Americans pay some of the lowest taxes of citizens in any developed economy. The marginal rate on an average income in the US is 27 percent. (For comparison it's 31.5 percent in Canada, and that pays for healthcare.)

And "less regulation" sounds...well, depending on what you're talking about it's ignorant at best and flagrant stupidity at worst; the US already has less regulation than most developed countries.

Anyway I'm not sure why you're asking this here because if you've been paying attention for the last 20 years or so it should be pretty bleeding obvious that that's where the Democratic Party has been going for a while; do you not remember Bill Clinton? Balanced budgets (and deregulation of the financial industry that contributed to some extent to the 2008 crash...whoops). And Obama has cut taxes on the middle classes (although at the same time, only an economic ignoramus would be incapable of seeing the argument for stimulative deficit spending in a financial crisis of the magnitude of 2008 to present...and with the EU still teetering on the brink the crisis is not over).

[nopedontlikeitatall]

15. OK Sparky taxes are lowest they have been since well almost everyone’s lifetime

How much lower should they be?
What regulations need to go, be specific.
Balanced budget is a worthy goal, so what should not be paid for by the Federal Government that current is being paid by the federal gov?

Taxes Pay for Civilization.

[datasuspect]

17. curious

you said:

" . . . low taxes, balanced budgets, and somewhat less regulation . . ."

-low taxes for whom? they're pretty low for the top, middle - hello tax bill

-balanced budgets - a democrat gave us that at one time

-less regulation - bush eviscerated many regulations, now you can die from eating cantaloupes and the banks are running around like 1930s gangsters.

[OmahaBlueDog]

21. When I hear Republicans complain about "regulation", it generally comes down to three entities

EPA, OSHA and the IRS. Some complain about various Dept. of Interior & Agriculture rules as well. Again, my OP was a reference to people I know, not myself. I feel Government has to be big enough to defend the citizenry against corporations, as well as foreign enemies.

Personally, I dont see how taxes could get any lower. I have one friend who's a fair-taxer (flat national sales tax). He earns well, and feels that he pays more than his fair share, and everybody else should too. Basically, he feels that if you're not well off, you should roll up your sleeves and work harder. I think hard work and ambition are great, but I also feel that citizens who've prospered should give back. My response is that a true "fair tax" would be a national flat tax on personal property, cars, and securities. After all, thats what we pay to defend and that takes up much of our court system.

-balanced budgets - a democrat gave us that at one time

My older daughter is too young to remember the Clinton presidency. Her response to Bill's convention speech was an immediate desire to get rid of the two-term limit.

[dkf]

18. What I don't understand is why anyone doesn't support a budget that is at least semi-balanced.

I can see temporary deficits in recessions, but this crazy spending driving us to insolvency is unfathomable.

Moreover why don't more people understand demographics and projections?

For the social stuff, I don't understand why it's anyone's business. Stop restricting things and stop asking others to pay for it.

This country is out of control and it's both parties. If only there were a fiscal sanity party. I am beginning to come to the conclusion that our political system is wholly unsuited for our needs.

[OmahaBlueDog]

20. It's certainly not Eisenhower's GOP

For the social stuff, I don't understand why it's anyone's business

It's a crazy disconnect. They are a party that favors small government and less regulation of businesses, but favors an exponential increase in interference in the personal lives of citizens.

I can see temporary deficits in recessions, but this crazy spending driving us to insolvency is unfathomable.

Personally, I agree with that philosophy. Deficits should be the exception, not the norm.

This country is out of control and it's both parties. If only there were a fiscal sanity party. I am beginning to come to the conclusion that our political system is wholly unsuited for our needs.

Congresscritters on both sides get re-elected "bringing home the bacon" for their district; Senators do likewise for their states. So government contractors (especially in defense) have gotten smart: spread the work out over many key states, and get the legislators beholden.

But here's the future I'd see with Mitt Romney: war in Iran (expensive); higher defense spending (expensive); and attempting to pay for this by making the bottom 90% of taxpayers pay for it.

[Zorra]

22. I'd go with the Dems or the Green Party.

Green Party Platform

Fair Taxation

Our current tax system is outrageously unjust. It is riddled with loopholes, subsidies and dodges for corporations and the super-rich. Most working people pay too much in taxes compared to corporations, multi-millionaires and billionaires. Many of our biggest and most profitable corporations pay little or no tax. Much investment income is taxed at less than the rate workers pay.

We can afford to cut taxes for most people if we make corporations and the super-rich pay their fair share. Then we can cut them even more when we halt our nation's wasteful spending on wars, weaponry and militarism.

We call for progressive taxation, shifting tax from individuals to corporations, taxing "bads" not "goods," taxing unearned income at the same rate as earned income, taxing speculation on Wall Street, and cutting corporate tax giveaways.

We will institute comprehensive tax reform to simplify the tax system. We will eliminate loopholes and other exemptions that favor corporate and wealthy interests over tax justice.

With the exception that Greens believe that strict control, regulation, and monitoring of profit seeking interests is critical for the preservation of the overall health, well being, and democratic interests of the public.

Most progressive Dems also recognize the absolute necessity of strict oversight of profit seeking interests.

We've already clearly seen how the deregulation of profit seeking interests has devastated our country and the world since the Reagan era began the decline of the United States.

You won't get much sympathy from either progressive Dems or Greens if you support destructive policies that allow the deregulation of profit seeking interests.

That's a primary, key part of the republican agenda.