Partisan Politics Good For America?

[Nodack]

OK Indy, you talked me into venturing into the political abyss. My goal here isn't to decide who is right or wrong in politics today, but to ask the question is partisan politics in todays America dividing the country in a dangerous way?

When I grew up there was no perceivable partisan difference between the different news stations that I was aware of. People just watched the station with their favorite anchor and it was perceived as just news without any political agenda. Since the internet was invented and a whole lot of things have changed in politics.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/12/upsho ... .html?_r=0

According to a new study from Pew Research, Republicans and Democrats in Congress aren’t the only partisans who deeply distrust people from the other side of the aisle. Liberals and conservatives prefer to associate with and live near their fellow partisans. They would be unhappy if their children married someone with a different political viewpoint. The result isn’t just polarized politics, but a divided society where liberals and conservatives increasingly keep apart.

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com ... y-divided/

A new survey finds that the divisions inside the Beltway actually reflect a deep ideological divide within the U.S. public that manifests itself not only in politics, but in everyday life. Indeed, this polarization is growing – and it has profound implications for economic and security issues that affect the rest of the world.
Republicans and Democrats in the United States are more divided along ideological lines, and the resulting political acrimony is deeper and more extensive, than at any point in recent U.S. history, according to the Pew Research Center survey.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/poli ... s/1965431/

Consider this test: The survey asked 1,000 Americans to assess two education policies. The first plan was to reduce class sizes and make sure schools teach the basics. The second was to increase teacher pay while making it easier to fire bad teachers.

For half the sample, the first plan was labeled a Democratic plan and the second a Republican plan. Then the labels were switched for the other half. The "Democratic" plan became the "Republican" plan, and vice versa.

In both cases, about three-fourths of Democrats and Republicans lined up behind the plan they had been told belonged to their party. In fact, both sides were inclined to describe their support as intense, to say they "strongly" favored it — regardless of which policy it happened to be. That predisposition to automatically retreat to separate camps is "one of the primary reasons why our political climate is so partisan and polarized," Mellman and Ayres write.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/ ... /16889203/

Joseph Collins, a retired Army colonel who served in the Pentagon for a decade and was active in the early planning of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, is now a director at the National Defense University. He argues that the U.S. is “pricing ourselves out of superpower status,” and Congress should be closing unnecessary military bases that cost too much to maintain. Taxpayers are also “spending huge amounts to modernize the nuclear arsenal,” though nuclear weapons are redundant, he said.

“This government is not going to work if the Congress won’t do the work it’s supposed to,” he said.

From my view, the blame is not equally shared between the two parties. The tea party element has pushed Republican members of Congress to the far right and made it a matter of honor not to negotiate with the president.

“Our revolution was a compromise,” said Punaro, who also noted the corrupting affect of political spending by outside groups on our politics. “Our Constitution is a compromise.”

The bottom line: How can we expect to win any foreign wars if being at war with each other is the top priority for some leaders?

http://www.centeroncongress.org/it’s-ti ... rtisanship

Yes, there are partisan divisions among voters. But most Americans want to see our challenges addressed pragmatically. They are not especially interested in ideologically driven legislative maneuvering, and have almost no patience for political leaders who zealously seek partisan advantage. They want politicians to find common ground — not dwell on their differences, promote special interests or place party loyalty ahead of national progress. Americans see the value in compromise, accommodation, and civility.
Congress, on the other hand, is filled with people who barely talk to each other, do their best to undermine the other side, and seek partisan advantage at every turn. There are exceptions, but I’m always struck by news stories outlining efforts to bridge the partisan divide — that these are news, rather than commonplace occurrences, highlights the problem.

[Dan H]

When I grew up there was no perceivable partisan difference between the different news stations that I was aware of. People just watched the station with their favorite anchor and it was perceived as just news without any political agenda. Since the internet was invented and a whole lot of things have changed in politics.

I think that's a little naive, perhaps. Although to be fair, Bob Woodward doesn't seem to think much of modern journalism.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/10/26/bob-w ... ons-video/

Generally speaking though, more sources of information are always good. If nothing else you're seeing stories that other places might not necessarily disseminate. Read the NY Post article I linked in the Sheryl Atkisson thread.

So far as cable news goes, you have MSNBC that leans distinctly left, CNN that's left-ist centrist, and Fox that's centrist-right. If anything ideas are lacking from a more libertarian, far-right perspective.

Republicans and Democrats in the United States are more divided along ideological lines, and the resulting political acrimony is deeper and more extensive, than at any point in recent U.S. history, according to the Pew Research Center survey.

And that's just a silly, historically uneducated comment from whoever wrote that article. Textbook example of cultural pessimism. You don't see Joe Biden challenging people to pistol duels a la Aaron Burr, and you don't see physical assaults with deadly weapons on the floor of the Senate a la Preston Brooks. There have certainly been times in our history where politics and culture have been acrimonious and divided. If anything our politicians have less intestinal fortitude than their predecessors; that's why Harry Reid will only accuse guys like Mitt Romney of evading taxes on the Senate floor, where his speech is protected from lawsuit for slander.

As far as non-politician references, compare and contrast the Occupy movement with the marchers at the '68 DNC. Or Brown's Raid on Harper's Ferry. The Black Panthers in Los Angeles when Daryl Gates was head of LA SWAT, or the Prairie Fire movement of the Weather Underground.

Although, we do have California politician Leland Yee attempting to import heavy military arms through his contact "Shrimp Boy" Chow. So things at least are entertaining.

But, you know, to sum it up in the terms of a former Obama administration official, "Dude, that was like two years ago."

[Nodack]

So far as cable news goes, you have MSNBC that leans distinctly left, CNN that's left-ist centrist, and Fox that's centrist-right. If anything ideas are lacking from a more libertarian, far-right perspective.

MSNBC distinctly left. Check
CNN center left. Check
FOX News center right. Not a chance. They are distinctly right. I call them the anti Obama station. If they ever posted any story that praised Obama in even the slightest bit I would be shocked beyond belief and their viewers would revolt.

I know there have been times where partisan divide was high in our country but in my 51 years on earth I have never seen it near as bad as it is right now.

Maybe I was a little naive about News in my youth and didn't recognize partisan politics in the news back when, but now days I don't even call the news news any more. It's political propaganda intended to divide the country into two groups and they want you to hate the other side. You may not agree Dan, but that's my opinion. You called out the arrival for being silly for saying the partisan divide was the highest in recent history and then talked about Aron Burr and pistol duels. That's not recent history like the guy said.

Break is over. Gotta go to work. Hope eke of this was legible from my iPhone. My eyes aren't what they used to be.

I

[Dan H]

MSNBC distinctly left. Check
CNN center left. Check
FOX News center right. Not a chance. They are distinctly right. I call them the anti Obama station. If they ever posted any story that praised Obama in even the slightest bit I would be shocked beyond belief and their viewers would revolt.

How many left-leaning commentators and opinion people does Fox have on?

How many right-leaning commentators and opinion people do CNN and MSNBC have on?

See here:

http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washin ... -news-bias

"Fox News is clearly more conservative than ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC and National Public Radio. Some will conclude that 'therefore, this means that Fox News has a conservative bias,'" he writes in an advance copy provided to Washington Whispers. "Instead, maybe it is centrist, and possibly even left-leaning, while all the others are far left. It's like concluding that six-three is short just because it is short compared to professional basketball players."

All you need to about how 'right wing' Fox is, is to look at the airtime Fox gives to the views of guys like Rand Paul. They're too busy propping up moderates like Chris Christie.

[SDC]

OK Indy, you talked me into venturing into the political abyss. My goal here isn't to decide who is right or wrong in politics today, but to ask the question is partisan politics in todays America dividing the country in a dangerous way?

When I grew up there was no perceivable partisan difference between the different news stations that I was aware of. People just watched the station with their favorite anchor and it was perceived as just news without any political agenda. Since the internet was invented and a whole lot of things have changed in politics.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/12/upsho ... .html?_r=0

According to a new study from Pew Research, Republicans and Democrats in Congress aren’t the only partisans who deeply distrust people from the other side of the aisle. Liberals and conservatives prefer to associate with and live near their fellow partisans. They would be unhappy if their children married someone with a different political viewpoint. The result isn’t just polarized politics, but a divided society where liberals and conservatives increasingly keep apart.

http://globalpublicsquare.blogs.cnn.com ... y-divided/

A new survey finds that the divisions inside the Beltway actually reflect a deep ideological divide within the U.S. public that manifests itself not only in politics, but in everyday life. Indeed, this polarization is growing – and it has profound implications for economic and security issues that affect the rest of the world.
Republicans and Democrats in the United States are more divided along ideological lines, and the resulting political acrimony is deeper and more extensive, than at any point in recent U.S. history, according to the Pew Research Center survey.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/poli ... s/1965431/

Consider this test: The survey asked 1,000 Americans to assess two education policies. The first plan was to reduce class sizes and make sure schools teach the basics. The second was to increase teacher pay while making it easier to fire bad teachers.

For half the sample, the first plan was labeled a Democratic plan and the second a Republican plan. Then the labels were switched for the other half. The "Democratic" plan became the "Republican" plan, and vice versa.

In both cases, about three-fourths of Democrats and Republicans lined up behind the plan they had been told belonged to their party. In fact, both sides were inclined to describe their support as intense, to say they "strongly" favored it — regardless of which policy it happened to be. That predisposition to automatically retreat to separate camps is "one of the primary reasons why our political climate is so partisan and polarized," Mellman and Ayres write.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/ ... /16889203/

Joseph Collins, a retired Army colonel who served in the Pentagon for a decade and was active in the early planning of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, is now a director at the National Defense University. He argues that the U.S. is “pricing ourselves out of superpower status,” and Congress should be closing unnecessary military bases that cost too much to maintain. Taxpayers are also “spending huge amounts to modernize the nuclear arsenal,” though nuclear weapons are redundant, he said.

“This government is not going to work if the Congress won’t do the work it’s supposed to,” he said.

From my view, the blame is not equally shared between the two parties. The tea party element has pushed Republican members of Congress to the far right and made it a matter of honor not to negotiate with the president.

“Our revolution was a compromise,” said Punaro, who also noted the corrupting affect of political spending by outside groups on our politics. “Our Constitution is a compromise.”

The bottom line: How can we expect to win any foreign wars if being at war with each other is the top priority for some leaders?

http://www.centeroncongress.org/it’s-ti ... rtisanship

Yes, there are partisan divisions among voters. But most Americans want to see our challenges addressed pragmatically. They are not especially interested in ideologically driven legislative maneuvering, and have almost no patience for political leaders who zealously seek partisan advantage. They want politicians to find common ground — not dwell on their differences, promote special interests or place party loyalty ahead of national progress. Americans see the value in compromise, accommodation, and civility.
Congress, on the other hand, is filled with people who barely talk to each other, do their best to undermine the other side, and seek partisan advantage at every turn. There are exceptions, but I’m always struck by news stories outlining efforts to bridge the partisan divide — that these are news, rather than commonplace occurrences, highlights the problem.

oh nodack, why bother coming here to talk politics. this isnt really the place.

oh i see...

[Nodack]

Thanks for the contribution to the thread sdc. You couldn't help but post a snide comment right off the bat could you?

Still think I should post in the politics threads Indy?

[Superbone]

Thanks for the contribution to the thread sdc. You couldn't help but post a snide comment right off the bat could you?

Still think I should post in the politics threads Indy?

SDC has been all about provocation on phx-suns.net. I personally just ignore it.

[SDC]

Thanks for the contribution to the thread sdc. You couldn't help but post a snide comment right off the bat could you?

Still think I should post in the politics threads Indy?

[Nodack]

Thanks for the contribution to the thread sdc. You couldn't help but post a snide comment right off the bat could you?

Still think I should post in the politics threads Indy?

SDC has been all about provocation on phx-suns.net. I personally just ignore it.

Thanks for the advice Superbone. I know right where that setting is.

[Indy]

Thanks for the contribution to the thread sdc. You couldn't help but post a snide comment right off the bat could you?

Still think I should post in the politics threads Indy?

SDC has been all about provocation on phx-suns.net. I personally just ignore it.

Thanks for the advice Superbone. I know right where that setting is.

I do think you should post here. A few clicks fixes the problem, as you already know.

[Dan H]

Just out curiosity, what is the obligation to come to compromise when the person who disagrees with you stakes out a position like this:

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2 ... Ebola-ISIS

I mean, if anything, what does it say about a person willing to compromise with such an existential threat?

[SwingMan]

Just out curiosity, what is the obligation to come to compromise when the person who disagrees with you stakes out a position like this:

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2 ... Ebola-ISIS

I mean, if anything, what does it say about a person willing to compromise with such an existential threat?

Crank demagougery is par for the course for the modern left these days - if anything, Republicans are about as strong as gauze trying to stop a semi. Nothing but a bunch of pussies who stand for next to nothing anymore.

Love this, though :

The last thing we did before we left for the recess was vote to sue the president for doing his job when the Republicans won't even do their job. They won't work with us.

Translation : "They won't give us what we want exactly how we want when we want it so we're gonna hurl ourselves on the floor, piss, whine, moan, groan, demonize, demagouge and throw a fit like the mental 3 year olds we are - AND DON'T TALK ABOUT THE 300+ BILLS SITTING ON HARRY REID'S DESK THAT HE WON'T PUT ON THE FLOOR BECAUSE HE'S BUSY OBSESSING ABOUT THE KOCH BROTHERS!!!!!"

Fuck the old bulls - in both parties.....

[Dan H]

My goodness, we need to have a GOP Czar and a war on the GOP! We can't have these sort of people in our political structure!

[SwingMan]

My goodness, we need to have a GOP Czar and a war on the GOP! We can't have these sort of people in our political structure!

We just need to get the pussies out of there - we need fighters with swords that aren't soggy fucking noodles....

[Nodack]

Dan, my question was whether partisan politics is good for America, not whether partisan politics exist. You don't need to show me articles of Democrats demonizing Republicans. Of course they demonize Republicans just like Republicans demonize Democrats. Have you watched TV lately? Political ad after political ad with both sides demonizing the other side. We could spend eternity in here posting counter articles quoting both sides demonizing each other. What would be the point? To try to prove which side was more partisan than the other? That would be a lesson in futility. You are a Republican, so maybe you actually believe that only Democrats are guilty of partisan politics. If that's true then I doubt we ever have a real honest conversation here which would parallel life outside this place.

I used to like talking politics in here in the old days because we were all kind of friends and could drop the standard BS that happens on CNN and FOX type comment sections and actually talk to each other like human beings for once. I know it's hard once you have dedicated yourself to being a foot soldier for your side to drop the war mentality and just talk from the heart like a real person talking to a real person.

I am a moderate. I want both sides to compromise and come to the center where I hang out. My voter card under party says PND- Party not designated for a reason. I don't agree with either side on everything, but I want our government to function. Right now our war on each other is making us weak IMO. If you ask me which side you are closer agreeing with I would have to say the Democrat party, but I disagree with them on plenty of issues.

On health care I sided with the Democrats only because they were willing to do something about our health care issues. From my view Republicans refuse to address the problem. I side with Republicans more so on illegal immigration. I believe you shouldn't sneak into a country illegally and expect citizenship. On the deficit I believe we should make a low deficit a priority. Republicans claim that to be one of their main goals and attacked Obama for doubling the debt, but they doubled the debt under Bush and never batted an eye over it. Obama voted against raising the debt limit under Bush, but was mad when they wouldn't do it under him, so I give them both a failing grade on that subject.

I've gotten away from my point and that was is partisan politics hurting our country and I would have to say yes in a big way. From your post Dan, I am taking it that you believe only Democrats are playing partisan politics and not Republicans. I'm not surprised, just disappointed.

[Dan H]

"You are a Republican, so maybe you actually believe that only Democrats are guilty of partisan politics."

Eh, not quite. Hence my comment about Fox News not being a bastion of conservatism. I'm a big Rand Paul fan. I guess you could say I'm a classic liberal; I like to refer to Dems as als because there's no personal freedom in their platfom. Do I vote Republican most of the time? Sure, when there's a conservative on the ballot that I generally agree with. Was I happy with Mitt Romney and McCain? Oh, hell no.

" From your post Dan, I am taking it that you believe only Democrats are playing partisan politics and not Republicans. I'm not surprised, just disappointed."

Never said that. But they're the ones in power at the moment so they're going to get the lion's share of attention. What I really can't abide is hypocrisy, which both parties have in abundance. I think you might want to re-read the posts I've made in this thread, because I think you're interpreting me as making points I'm not making.

[Indy]

"You are a Republican, so maybe you actually believe that only Democrats are guilty of partisan politics."

Eh, not quite. Hence my comment about Fox News not being a bastion of conservatism. I'm a big Rand Paul fan. I guess you could say I'm a classic liberal; I like to refer to Dems as als because there's no personal freedom in their platfom. Do I vote Republican most of the time? Sure, when there's a conservative on the ballot that I generally agree with. Was I happy with Mitt Romney and McCain? Oh, hell no.

" From your post Dan, I am taking it that you believe only Democrats are playing partisan politics and not Republicans. I'm not surprised, just disappointed."

Never said that. But they're the ones in power at the moment so they're going to get the lion's share of attention. What I really can't abide is hypocrisy, which both parties have in abundance. I think you might want to re-read the posts I've made in this thread, because I think you're interpreting me as making points I'm not making.

Really, Dan? You don't strike me as very liberal in many ways. You seem more of a conservative-leaning libertarian. (I am not throwing stones--just stating what I have in my head (which could very well be wrong) from the years of posts in these threads)

[Dan H]

Good call, Indy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism

[Indy]

I hadn't heard that term before

[SwingMan]

I hadn't heard that term before

I refer to the phenomenon as Old School Liberals/Liberalism, but I guess Classical Liberalism is about as good a term. Got a gay friend who lives like that - one of the nicest people you'll ever want to meet, too.