That's part of it. I would say they are conservative on economic issues, liberal on social issues and isolationist on foreign policy. A key point is they are rules-based and fairly inflexible. Hard coded suckers. Cobol.
RE: isolationist on foreign policy.
Has anybody asked Rand or Ron Paul whether they would have invaded the Taliban controlled Afghanistan after we knew that they were giving sanctuary to Osama Bin Ladin?
Also, what would they have done after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor?
Rules-based, like our Constitution, I can live with that.
What I see today, the whole gnashing of teeth and spitting nails, is exactly what happens when gov’t gets too big and is no longer held to those ‘base rules’. Sucks, eh?
We (the People) have allowed the courts to allow the Fed to social-structure using the tax code and (Unconstitutional) bennies, then wonder why the courts say “Nope, even out the field, apply it to ABC, XYZ, etc.”
Gov’t, at any level, has no business defining/regulating marriage. All else falls into a contractual basis with an easy solution: Wills. Otherwise, can’t prove it, it didn’t happen.
I have no idea what this means. I pretty much consider myself a libertarian and I believe in one and one one rule: leave me alone.
All else is superfluous.
Hank