Here's why the Political Compass ranks Obama not only as a conservative quite close to the Republican presidential contenders, but almost as staunch of an authoritarian. YMMV:
http://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2012
That certainly doesn't strike me as being in the least bit "liberal".
I think its a bit flawed because the test seems to have some kind of notion that corporatism = right-wing, and if it did, it completely ignores the Tea Party movement, which more or less wants an actual free market and to end the subsidies to the rich as well as the subsidies to the poor.
As for social matters, it depends how you define "Liberal." Interpreted a certain way, one could call someone like Ron Paul or Gary Johnson a "Liberal." However, that's not how the United States defines "Liberal." That may be how the term is used in Europe, but not in the United States. In the US, "Liberal" and "Authoritarian" are almost synonyms, at least as far as politicians go. Its not so much that conservatives paint liberals as authoritarian as that authoritarians try to pain themselves as liberal, and we give them the labels they want.
If that seems horribly unbalanced, let me balance it out a bit, I'll be the first to admit that Republicans like George W. Bush are very authoritarian as well. In fact, in a conversation I happened to have today, I pointed out that there are only two issues I utterly can't understand the other side on. One of those issues is (Issue I'm not discussing here) and the other is the USA Patriot Act, and my side is decidedly against. Thanks a lot for that piece of crap Mr. Bush.
However, State's Rights Republicans at least seem to understand State's Rights, which is itself an improvement because even if a given government is authoritarian, if its smaller, we can work on it more easily than if its affecting 300 million people at the same time. The bigger something is, the harder it is to change.
And for the record, I don't think the states are gods either. I'd definitely like to see issues determined even more locally than that. What's right for Long Island isn't necessarily what's right for NYC or Upstate New York, just to give a simplified example.
But ultimately, it is my opinion (And I stress that this is my OPINION and I would rather at least discuss it CIVILLY) that dramatically expanding the Federal Government generally leads to a more authoritarian government. I know a lot of liberals have good intentions when it comes to social welfare policies (Though I don't include Democratic leaders in this, "Bread and Circuses controlling the masses" comes to mind and I think they're purposely exploiting it) but I think that expanding the Federal Government, even with good intentions, inevitably makes things worse, for a number of reasons. State's rights (Or even more local than that) TENDS to reduce authoritarianism, and at least some Republicans seem to understand that. I have yet to see a Democrat that really understands it, though there may be one out there, and I definitely don't think Obama gets it. I wouldn't call him socially liberal so much as I'd just consider him authoritarian.
I could say the same about certain posters here who call Mitt Romney, and I mean the CURRENT Mitt Romney, a screaming liberal.
Or maybe we just don't believe his change is real????
I wouldn't even consider Romney a liberal outright, I just wouldn't consider him conservative. He is certainly moderate (At least by US standards) fiscally, and socially I'd consider him "Liberal" in the sense that he thinks the Federal government is much more of a solution than it should be.
You can't ? My impression is:
Progressive/Left Democrat/Liberal : Center right
Democrat/Liberal : Right wing
Moderate Democrat/Liberal, Centrist; Moderate Republican : Really right wing
Republican: So right-wing that it isn't funny any more
Conservative Republican or Libertarian: totally bonkers
I've talked to moderates before. You're not a moderate.
Moderates presumably draw significant portions of their political leanings from both sides of the fence. Thats not you.
But I am curious as to why you would actually think you're a moderate?
Form actually seems moderate fiscally, to the point where I don't actually know where he stands fiscally for sure, but I would guess he's probably a bit to the left of the center of US Politics.
Socially he's definitely very against what he considers authoritarianism, but that seems to connect quite a bit with what the Democratic Party considers authoritarian, so I'd say he's definitely "Left-wing" socially, at least by US standards.
But there are people on CFC who are a LOT more liberal/left than Form.
