>I am registered as unenrolled. And I vote differently, depending on the person running. Usually for a lesser of two evils <g>. Generally I am fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I would probably put myself in the libertarian camp if they had a chance of winning <g>.
>
>This seems like an oxymoron to me. All those social programs take an awful lot of money to run <s>

Agreed in parts. But fits with the concept of checks and balances
(except for the latter and the budget, making the first a cheque).
Half seriously: if you look at previous states, problems will arise when the external threat is eliminated,
the plebs grows in numbers and are pacified instead of given real work or sent off to slaughter and rape a bit.
Oligarchs not getting a more than fair cut from the war loot and preying among small farmers added to unrest

From that POV argueing for economic hard-line views coupled with direct monetary subsidy for the poor
is a bad recipe IMO. The good part of the german attempt to weather the financial crisis was
that money was used to keep people working even under the danger of not letting some biz fail early
if their trouble stemmed not because from financial crisis but othermore internal reasons -
their prolonged survival dampens the recovery later.