[lapyignipinge]

I don't know what the f*ck is going on in this world, but I'm pretty sure that those "Conservatives" and "Liberals" in Congress are responsible and the jack-offs who insist that everyone choose one or the other of their lame-ass labels are jut making it worse. I'm abstaining from this trolling poll.

Idon't think Ablarc is a troll.

Thanks for the benefit of the doubt, BR. Not positive that’s a good thing.

When things are bad, it’s good to have “subversives”; they’re tomorrow’s straight arrows. History has been driven mostly by folks whom at least some people regarded as trolls, because they asked questions that challenged cherished beliefs --Jesus Christ, Socrates, Oscar Wilde, Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Mahatma Gandhi-- and they got people so mad that folks didn’t rest till they had made every one of them dead.

I think the poll is, at its heart, trolling. It is asking who defined themselves by terminology advocated by the extreme left.

No idea what you mean here; the conclusion precedes the observation, and the observation is highly suspect. This sounds like something Sarah Palin would say. The truth about her and her followers, however, is that they define themselves in no uncertain terms; and then they define everyone else.

We have seen the posts on WNY that involve the word "Liberal" and it is always divisive, inflammatory, angry, and, often, incoherent.

Examples?

I enjoy forum members making provocative posts, challenging the status quo, and offering new perspectives.

Well, I don’t know about challenging the status quo or offering new perspectives, but the post certainly seems provocative to you, so you must be enjoying it.

But really, what’s provocative about it? It’s a question Gallup asks a thousand people a day.

For me , this poll asks each of us to put a narrow label on ourselves that simply doesn't apply.

You better leave MidtownGuy out of the “each”; he doesn’t mind so much putting a narrow label on himself; knows where he stands, I guess.

The poll is too clear cut. I'm liberal on some things but conservative on others.

At least you’re not angry.

What of the socially progressive, fiscal conservative?

He can decide whether his allegiance is greater to gay marriage or a cap on the minimum wage.

What of the conservative business man that sees a need for increased government intervention via regulation of out-of-control industries, e.g. insurance and financial?

This person is fictional, because oxymoronic. You could, however, refer to him as a somewhat liberal businessman.

It is a very narrow poll. I think the numbers would be greatly altered and much more telling had their been an option of "other".

That’s right; almost everyone except MidtownGuy would have been “other.” What would we have learned from that? That most people have allegiance to some views of both liberals and conservatives? Pshaw, most of us already knew that.

The poll is polarizing and maybe Ablarc wanted to demonstrate how useless polls can be. I don't know.

Getting close.

The introduction makes it clear the pollster (the trollster) thinks that most folks think it won't apply.

What I really am finding out is the surprising capacity of “moderates” and “centrists” to be madder than wet hens. I thought that was reserved for extremists at each end. Seems like it turns out there are extremists of the Center. That’s something I didn’t know. Did you?

But why is the poll polarizing? Surely because its rules don’t allow us to proclaim what many of us Americans think is the only virtue: Centrism. Look what harm the President is doing to his ability to get something done for us by applying the presently-naive ideology of Centrist bipartisanship. Turns out, in the Congress there's no one in the Center. No one to compromise with.

I would call myself a European conservative. Let's say center right.

In Europe, you can say exactly where you stand without getting offended that someone asked you to label yourself.

Also Australia:

I despise conservatism (and politics).

I'm all for progress and reform (much more than the pols of any persuasion) and embrace other aspects of the definition of liberal.

It's all very confusing and contradictory. Perhaps it's just the terminology.

You can’t do without words for things; it’s the only way you can talk.

Perhaps capitalist and socialist are more internationally uniform, and would be more useful terms to describe an aspect of one's perspective.

Problem is, these days even the self-styled Socialists are really Capitalists –like the ones in China; and the self-styled Capitalists (like Fabrizio) believe in certain Socialist virtues –like government health insurance. Eh, Fabrizio?

I am a neither conservative nor liberal Republican, but I am more capitalist. While I do belive the rich makes jobs for the poor, it is kinda how the human money eco-system works.

You could say the rich make jobs for the poor, and the poor make wealth for the rich. To get really rich, it helps to have those minimum-wagers.

Don't Fence Me In.

('Cuz you'll only use it against me.)

Mildly paranoid, you say?