Supporting ethanol is not liberalism. It depends on what the candidate is saying.
For the uneducated (and I suspect you know little about grain farming) the ethanol debate involves real farms and real farmers who feed America. To simply END those supports after the government practically forced them to farm hedgerow to hedgerow, practically forced them to buy the equipment to do so, would be unethical blindness to the culpability of the government at the expense of America’s farmers.
Also, for the uneducated, “gallon to gallon” is not the proper formula for determining the cost of ethanol compared to gasoline. The real forumula would take into account that grain used to produce ethanol does NOT lose its usefulness as feed for livestock. One must SUBTRACT from the cost of production the value of the livestock feed and/or the value of the meat/dairy produced.
Saying that slamming Cruz on his reputation as a rabble rouser is not liberalism if you’re focused on the methodology and not on Cruz’s reason for protesting. So, it depends on whether you are supporting the establishment’s position or whether you’re objecting to the style/decorum of the method used.
So, just because I disagree with your methodology of condescension does not mean that I am a liberal. I’m simply pointing out that you use rudeness as a tool, and that I don’t think it gains you anything.
In fact, I think it hurts your arguments.
as you have admitted, you have a lot of economic liberalism in your past, and present. You just proved it.