[Quantum]

Not even close. You are what many would call an "Establishment Republican".

Except your definition of liberal isn't the only valid term, outside of commercial media. Liberalism is not a single coherent ideology but rather a tradition which encompasses many types of it, from social liberalism to classical and neo-liberalism, whose ideas may contradict each other.

I'd say the OP's political stance is neo-liberalism/neo-conservative or a "liberal-conservative" because of his views on fiscal policy (except the progressive taxation), trade policy and foreign policy.

[Genghis Khan]

Except your definition of liberal isn't the only valid term, outside of commercial media. Liberalism is not a single coherent ideology but rather a tradition which encompasses many types of it, from social liberalism to classical and neo-liberalism, whose ideas may contradict each other.

I'd say the OP's political stance is neo-liberalism/neo-conservative or a "liberal-conservative" because of his views on fiscal policy (except the progressive taxation), trade policy and foreign policy.

It is implied that I'm referring to the modern definition of an American liberal, i.e universal healthcare, gun control, green energy, civic rights, regulated financial market etc.

[JohnRawls]

I'd he he is a Fiscally-conservative liberal .

In america the closest to your views is probably Ron Paul.

Your stance on the economy is definately conservative but your stance on public questions and foreighn policy is more of a liberal .

[Quantum]

It is implied that I'm referring to the modern definition of an American liberal, i.e universal healthcare, gun control, green energy, civic rights, regulated financial market etc.

Ah, I see. Then he's some type of libertarian with liberal interventionist views e.g. neo-libertarian.

[DanDaMan]

you cannot ban love and their arguments gay marriage are ridiculous

So then, logically, you are for legal right of polygamy and marrying your brother or sister and their legal ability to adopt children?

[ninurta]

[]you cannot ban love and their arguments gay marriage are ridiculous[]So then, logically, you are for legal right of polygamy and marrying your brother or sister and their legal ability to adopt children?

If he doesn't believe in banning love, and sounds libertarian, what do you think? What have the rest of us libertarians been saying?