CDZ The polarization of American politics.

[Syriusly]

[
The polarization isn't a byproduct of the right, I get tired of it being treated as a mutual problem. The left has been racing, not walking, further left and claiming the right is divisive for not going along.

Oh really?

The right used to be Ronald Reagan and George Bush- the right has been racing to the right for 2 decades now.

And this is of course part of the issue. The right wing nut jobs think that they are mainstream.

 

[Syriusly]

One of me favorite shows: "Adam Ruins Everything" has an election special out now. I recommend that everyone watch it. He is fairly evenly critical of both candidates and parties.

If you don't wish to, here is the spoiler: according to the show, the most important problem in American Politics is polarization. No one on either side can talk to the other side.

I know that I am very polarized, that I will only rarely discuss issues with the left. I have my reasons and I have expressed them elsewhere. No real need for me to repeat it.

At the end of the show, Adam requested that we all try to find common ground with the other side that we can agree on and possibly make progress with.

I'm skeptical. Not just because it's hard to get the left to cooperate, but because you and I, the average citizen, can no longer effect change. I seriously doubt that even if everyone on this board all agreed that the debt was a major problem, for example, and even if we agreed on a plan of action, we could not get that solution in place.

That said, I'm willing to try an experiment. I already know a few issues that I agree with the left on. They are:

1. Evolution is the best explanation of how life came to be as it is on this planet.
2. The government should stay out of marriage completely. Anyone should be able to get married to anyone else as long as that person consents and is of the legal age of consent.

There are a few things that I think that I can come to terms with the left on:

1. That our debt is one of the most important issues we face.
2. That lying by our politicians should not be tolerated.
3. The influence of money in our politics is harmful.

It isn't much but it's a start. Anyone want to try to reach accross? See if it's possible.

It would be lovely to have a discussion on a topic without it immediately becoming polarized- that essentially doesn't happen here at USMB.

Issues that I can find common ground on with the right?

1. We need a secure Southern border- it can be accomplished.
2. We should have a good policy to deal with illegal immigration- we just disagree on the details.
3. I am against citizenship for those who are here illegally- though I am support legalizing those here already.
4. I am for supporting our police in the very hard job they have.
   
5. I am for truly supporting our troops and veterans
6. We should avoid foreign conflicts that do not serve the interests of America.

 

[Syriusly]

One of me favorite shows: "Adam Ruins Everything" has an election special out now. I recommend that everyone watch it. He is fairly evenly critical of both candidates and parties.

If you don't wish to, here is the spoiler: according to the show, the most important problem in American Politics is polarization. No one on either side can talk to the other side.

I know that I am very polarized, that I will only rarely discuss issues with the left. I have my reasons and I have expressed them elsewhere. No real need for me to repeat it.

At the end of the show, Adam requested that we all try to find common ground with the other side that we can agree on and possibly make progress with.

I'm skeptical. Not just because it's hard to get the left to cooperate, but because you and I, the average citizen, can no longer effect change. I seriously doubt that even if everyone on this board all agreed that the debt was a major problem, for example, and even if we agreed on a plan of action, we could not get that solution in place.

That said, I'm willing to try an experiment. I already know a few issues that I agree with the left on. They are:

1. Evolution is the best explanation of how life came to be as it is on this planet.
2. The government should stay out of marriage completely. Anyone should be able to get married to anyone else as long as that person consents and is of the legal age of consent.

There are a few things that I think that I can come to terms with the left on:

1. That our debt is one of the most important issues we face.
2. That lying by our politicians should not be tolerated.
3. The influence of money in our politics is harmful.

It isn't much but it's a start. Anyone want to try to reach accross? See if it's possible.

There are things I can agree with, on the right. I think schools need to be brought back to more local levels as opposed to federal. I think the left has a tendancy to go overboard in their anti-Christian scrubbing of public places. I see no reason not to acknowledge that our country's main heritage is Judeo-Christian and enjoy Christmas pagents, songs, nativities etc as expressions of that heritage instead of insisting it be secularized or removed. Same with certain aspects of public prayer like before games.

I think both the right and left agree on the influence of money in politics being harmful - at least I agree with that.

Money in politics is a big one, and I agree that there needs to be reform. Many in the left complain about corporate money and we on the right counter with union money. Would you agree to getting rid of both?

Absolutely.

Citizen's United opened the door to both.

My feeling is that if you can't be sent to prison because you are not an actual person, then you shouldn't be able to contribute money to politics.

 

[PredFan]

One of me favorite shows: "Adam Ruins Everything" has an election special out now. I recommend that everyone watch it. He is fairly evenly critical of both candidates and parties.

If you don't wish to, here is the spoiler: according to the show, the most important problem in American Politics is polarization. No one on either side can talk to the other side.

I know that I am very polarized, that I will only rarely discuss issues with the left. I have my reasons and I have expressed them elsewhere. No real need for me to repeat it.

At the end of the show, Adam requested that we all try to find common ground with the other side that we can agree on and possibly make progress with.

I'm skeptical. Not just because it's hard to get the left to cooperate, but because you and I, the average citizen, can no longer effect change. I seriously doubt that even if everyone on this board all agreed that the debt was a major problem, for example, and even if we agreed on a plan of action, we could not get that solution in place.

That said, I'm willing to try an experiment. I already know a few issues that I agree with the left on. They are:

1. Evolution is the best explanation of how life came to be as it is on this planet.
2. The government should stay out of marriage completely. Anyone should be able to get married to anyone else as long as that person consents and is of the legal age of consent.

There are a few things that I think that I can come to terms with the left on:

1. That our debt is one of the most important issues we face.
2. That lying by our politicians should not be tolerated.
3. The influence of money in our politics is harmful.

It isn't much but it's a start. Anyone want to try to reach accross? See if it's possible.

It would be lovely to have a discussion on a topic without it immediately becoming polarized- that essentially doesn't happen here at USMB.

Issues that I can find common ground on with the right?

1. We need a secure Southern border- it can be accomplished.
2. We should have a good policy to deal with illegal immigration- we just disagree on the details.
3. I am against citizenship for those who are here illegally- though I am support legalizing those here already.
4. I am for supporting our police in the very hard job they have.
   
5. I am for truly supporting our troops and veterans
6. We should avoid foreign conflicts that do not serve the interests of America.

Well, you and I have 6 things we can agree on.

The question in all of those plus the ones on money in politics where I have two there's on the left who I agree with, is what now? I realize that we are likely not going to affect change, so......what do we get for reaching across?

 

[PredFan]

One of me favorite shows: "Adam Ruins Everything" has an election special out now. I recommend that everyone watch it. He is fairly evenly critical of both candidates and parties.

If you don't wish to, here is the spoiler: according to the show, the most important problem in American Politics is polarization. No one on either side can talk to the other side.

I know that I am very polarized, that I will only rarely discuss issues with the left. I have my reasons and I have expressed them elsewhere. No real need for me to repeat it.

At the end of the show, Adam requested that we all try to find common ground with the other side that we can agree on and possibly make progress with.

I'm skeptical. Not just because it's hard to get the left to cooperate, but because you and I, the average citizen, can no longer effect change. I seriously doubt that even if everyone on this board all agreed that the debt was a major problem, for example, and even if we agreed on a plan of action, we could not get that solution in place.

That said, I'm willing to try an experiment. I already know a few issues that I agree with the left on. They are:

1. Evolution is the best explanation of how life came to be as it is on this planet.
2. The government should stay out of marriage completely. Anyone should be able to get married to anyone else as long as that person consents and is of the legal age of consent.

There are a few things that I think that I can come to terms with the left on:

1. That our debt is one of the most important issues we face.
2. That lying by our politicians should not be tolerated.
3. The influence of money in our politics is harmful.

It isn't much but it's a start. Anyone want to try to reach accross? See if it's possible.

There are things I can agree with, on the right. I think schools need to be brought back to more local levels as opposed to federal. I think the left has a tendancy to go overboard in their anti-Christian scrubbing of public places. I see no reason not to acknowledge that our country's main heritage is Judeo-Christian and enjoy Christmas pagents, songs, nativities etc as expressions of that heritage instead of insisting it be secularized or removed. Same with certain aspects of public prayer like before games.

I think both the right and left agree on the influence of money in politics being harmful - at least I agree with that.

Money in politics is a big one, and I agree that there needs to be reform. Many in the left complain about corporate money and we on the right counter with union money. Would you agree to getting rid of both?

Absolutely.

Citizen's United opened the door to both.

My feeling is that if you can't be sent to prison because you are not an actual person, then you shouldn't be able to contribute money to politics.

Just get rid of it completely. At least in the election process anyway. Make it publicly funded, put them on a tight budget, and require media outlets to give air time equally for free as a stipulation of their broadcast license.

The debates pay for themselves with ads, so there is exposure there too. TV interviews as well. It can be done.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

the right has been racing to the right for 2 decades now.

.

....and in equal measure, the left has been racing to the left.


thus the problem.

 

[320 Years of History]

Another thing I'd like to see as goes the electoral process is that candidates offer up their various proposals and the "debates" be dual part events participated in not by the candidates but rather by actual subject matter experts. Part one would be a "general education" on the topic delivered by two experts. Part two would be the actual debate, which may be participated in by several experts, depending on the complexity and breadth of the topic . Economic topics would be "taught" and then "debated" by economists, environmental topics by scientists, etc.

To get a rough sense of what I have in mind, take a look at the beginning and then various parts of this video:



I don't much care who the debaters/teachers be so long as they (1) are not politicians and (2) are well respected, non-extremist experts in their discipline. If an extreme POV is needed, fine, then include an extremist among the "panel" and make it clear that that person represents whatever extreme position s/he does. I don't have a problem with hearing extremist views so long we first are informed about what is the dominant view of the majority of experts so that we know that if we, as individuals watching, do prefer the extreme position, we also know the risks concomitant with doing so.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The American political process has been hobbled by a disdain for pragmatism, hostility toward facts and the truth, and contempt for compromise, the consequence of rightwing authoritarianism and extremism – the product of conservative ideologues who adhere blindly to sanctioned doctrine and dogma as they pursue an ‘all or nothing,’ scorched earth policy that is as wrong as it is reckless and irresponsible.

Neither conservatism nor liberalism alone is warranted, both need to function together for the political process to function.

Liberalism checks the conservative propensity for authoritarianism, its contempt for civil rights, and unwarranted hostility for necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory policy; where conservatism checks liberal idealism and dependence on government programs and solutions which can be wasteful and unproductive.

Because of conservative extremism and unwillingness to compromise, liberals have for the most part abandoned seeking common ground with conservatives, and understandably so.

Until conservatives are willing to acknowledge the fact that most Americans reject rightist doctrine and dogma, and are willing to compromise and work again with liberals, political polarization and paralysis will only become more entrenched.

 

[PredFan]

The American political process has been hobbled by a disdain for pragmatism, hostility toward facts and the truth, and contempt for compromise, the consequence of rightwing authoritarianism and extremism – the product of conservative ideologues who adhere blindly to sanctioned doctrine and dogma as they pursue an ‘all or nothing,’ scorched earth policy that is as wrong as it is reckless and irresponsible.

Neither conservatism nor liberalism alone is warranted, both need to function together for the political process to function.

Liberalism checks the conservative propensity for authoritarianism, its contempt for civil rights, and unwarranted hostility for necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory policy; where conservatism checks liberal idealism and dependence on government programs and solutions which can be wasteful and unproductive.

Because of conservative extremism and unwillingness to compromise, liberals have for the most part abandoned seeking common ground with conservatives, and understandably so.

Until conservatives are willing to acknowledge the fact that most Americans reject rightist doctrine and dogma, and are willing to compromise and work again with liberals, political polarization and paralysis will only become more entrenched.

I can put you squarely into the hopelessly polarized column, thanks for playing.

 

[Coyote]

One of me favorite shows: "Adam Ruins Everything" has an election special out now. I recommend that everyone watch it. He is fairly evenly critical of both candidates and parties.

If you don't wish to, here is the spoiler: according to the show, the most important problem in American Politics is polarization. No one on either side can talk to the other side.

I know that I am very polarized, that I will only rarely discuss issues with the left. I have my reasons and I have expressed them elsewhere. No real need for me to repeat it.

At the end of the show, Adam requested that we all try to find common ground with the other side that we can agree on and possibly make progress with.

I'm skeptical. Not just because it's hard to get the left to cooperate, but because you and I, the average citizen, can no longer effect change. I seriously doubt that even if everyone on this board all agreed that the debt was a major problem, for example, and even if we agreed on a plan of action, we could not get that solution in place.

That said, I'm willing to try an experiment. I already know a few issues that I agree with the left on. They are:

1. Evolution is the best explanation of how life came to be as it is on this planet.
2. The government should stay out of marriage completely. Anyone should be able to get married to anyone else as long as that person consents and is of the legal age of consent.

There are a few things that I think that I can come to terms with the left on:

1. That our debt is one of the most important issues we face.
2. That lying by our politicians should not be tolerated.
3. The influence of money in our politics is harmful.

It isn't much but it's a start. Anyone want to try to reach accross? See if it's possible.

There are things I can agree with, on the right. I think schools need to be brought back to more local levels as opposed to federal. I think the left has a tendancy to go overboard in their anti-Christian scrubbing of public places. I see no reason not to acknowledge that our country's main heritage is Judeo-Christian and enjoy Christmas pagents, songs, nativities etc as expressions of that heritage instead of insisting it be secularized or removed. Same with certain aspects of public prayer like before games.

I think both the right and left agree on the influence of money in politics being harmful - at least I agree with that.

Money in politics is a big one, and I agree that there needs to be reform. Many in the left complain about corporate money and we on the right counter with union money. Would you agree to getting rid of both?

Absolutely.

Citizen's United opened the door to both.

My feeling is that if you can't be sent to prison because you are not an actual person, then you shouldn't be able to contribute money to politics.

Just get rid of it completely. At least in the election process anyway. Make it publicly funded, put them on a tight budget, and require media outlets to give air time equally for free as a stipulation of their broadcast license.

The debates pay for themselves with ads, so there is exposure there too. TV interviews as well. It can be done.

Might give third party candidates a shot too.

 

[Coyote]

One of me favorite shows: "Adam Ruins Everything" has an election special out now. I recommend that everyone watch it. He is fairly evenly critical of both candidates and parties.

If you don't wish to, here is the spoiler: according to the show, the most important problem in American Politics is polarization. No one on either side can talk to the other side.

I know that I am very polarized, that I will only rarely discuss issues with the left. I have my reasons and I have expressed them elsewhere. No real need for me to repeat it.

At the end of the show, Adam requested that we all try to find common ground with the other side that we can agree on and possibly make progress with.

I'm skeptical. Not just because it's hard to get the left to cooperate, but because you and I, the average citizen, can no longer effect change. I seriously doubt that even if everyone on this board all agreed that the debt was a major problem, for example, and even if we agreed on a plan of action, we could not get that solution in place.

That said, I'm willing to try an experiment. I already know a few issues that I agree with the left on. They are:

1. Evolution is the best explanation of how life came to be as it is on this planet.
2. The government should stay out of marriage completely. Anyone should be able to get married to anyone else as long as that person consents and is of the legal age of consent.

There are a few things that I think that I can come to terms with the left on:

1. That our debt is one of the most important issues we face.
2. That lying by our politicians should not be tolerated.
3. The influence of money in our politics is harmful.

It isn't much but it's a start. Anyone want to try to reach accross? See if it's possible.

It would be lovely to have a discussion on a topic without it immediately becoming polarized- that essentially doesn't happen here at USMB.

Issues that I can find common ground on with the right?

1. We need a secure Southern border- it can be accomplished.
2. We should have a good policy to deal with illegal immigration- we just disagree on the details.
3. I am against citizenship for those who are here illegally- though I am support legalizing those here already.
4. I am for supporting our police in the very hard job they have.
   
5. I am for truly supporting our troops and veterans
6. We should avoid foreign conflicts that do not serve the interests of America.

Well, you and I have 6 things we can agree on.

The question in all of those plus the ones on money in politics where I have two there's on the left who I agree with, is what now? I realize that we are likely not going to affect change, so......what do we get for reaching across?

I think that's a question each side asks, but it didn't used to be that way.

I've thought about this, and how, recently - the term "politician" has become a dirty word, a pejorative. Even more so if they've been in office a long time.

But the thing is - that also means they are experienced in the art of negotiation, making deals, finding solutions that can be considered win-win. Compromising. But "compromise" has become another dirty word.

But that's how a lot of legislation gets passed - no one gets everything they want, but they get some of it. We seem to have lost our way here.

 

[Coyote]

The American political process has been hobbled by a disdain for pragmatism, hostility toward facts and the truth, and contempt for compromise, the consequence of rightwing authoritarianism and extremism – the product of conservative ideologues who adhere blindly to sanctioned doctrine and dogma as they pursue an ‘all or nothing,’ scorched earth policy that is as wrong as it is reckless and irresponsible.

Neither conservatism nor liberalism alone is warranted, both need to function together for the political process to function.

Liberalism checks the conservative propensity for authoritarianism, its contempt for civil rights, and unwarranted hostility for necessary, proper, and Constitutional regulatory policy; where conservatism checks liberal idealism and dependence on government programs and solutions which can be wasteful and unproductive.

Because of conservative extremism and unwillingness to compromise, liberals have for the most part abandoned seeking common ground with conservatives, and understandably so.

Until conservatives are willing to acknowledge the fact that most Americans reject rightist doctrine and dogma, and are willing to compromise and work again with liberals, political polarization and paralysis will only become more entrenched.

Both conservativism and liberalism are necessary. One protects the status quo - essentially who we are, our history and our values. The other expands the status quo - the definition of who is "us" and who isn't "us". Success is in balancing the two - not forcing such a rapid rate of change that the majority can't accept it and rebels, yet ever striving to increase the group that is "us". Liberalism is our heart, conservatism is our heritage.

When it comes to extremism - well, both sides are guilty and as a leftist, I'm aware that my own side has been too extreme as well, and it's hard to admit it. One example that come to mind: forcing all visable attributes of Christianity from the public sphere, for one while allowing greater freedom for minority religions.

 

[Syriusly]

the right has been racing to the right for 2 decades now.

.

....and in equal measure, the left has been racing to the left.


thus the problem.

There is certainly the issue that the loudest voices have been racing to the right and the left.

Reagan and Tip O'Neil use to be able to fight each other politically, but end the day with a shot of whiskey together- that is not done by either side anymore- and both sides have contributed to it.

Both sides.

 

[Syriusly]

One of me favorite shows: "Adam Ruins Everything" has an election special out now. I recommend that everyone watch it. He is fairly evenly critical of both candidates and parties.

If you don't wish to, here is the spoiler: according to the show, the most important problem in American Politics is polarization. No one on either side can talk to the other side.

I know that I am very polarized, that I will only rarely discuss issues with the left. I have my reasons and I have expressed them elsewhere. No real need for me to repeat it.

At the end of the show, Adam requested that we all try to find common ground with the other side that we can agree on and possibly make progress with.

I'm skeptical. Not just because it's hard to get the left to cooperate, but because you and I, the average citizen, can no longer effect change. I seriously doubt that even if everyone on this board all agreed that the debt was a major problem, for example, and even if we agreed on a plan of action, we could not get that solution in place.

That said, I'm willing to try an experiment. I already know a few issues that I agree with the left on. They are:

1. Evolution is the best explanation of how life came to be as it is on this planet.
2. The government should stay out of marriage completely. Anyone should be able to get married to anyone else as long as that person consents and is of the legal age of consent.

There are a few things that I think that I can come to terms with the left on:

1. That our debt is one of the most important issues we face.
2. That lying by our politicians should not be tolerated.
3. The influence of money in our politics is harmful.

It isn't much but it's a start. Anyone want to try to reach accross? See if it's possible.

It would be lovely to have a discussion on a topic without it immediately becoming polarized- that essentially doesn't happen here at USMB.

Issues that I can find common ground on with the right?

1. We need a secure Southern border- it can be accomplished.
2. We should have a good policy to deal with illegal immigration- we just disagree on the details.
3. I am against citizenship for those who are here illegally- though I am support legalizing those here already.
4. I am for supporting our police in the very hard job they have.
   
5. I am for truly supporting our troops and veterans
6. We should avoid foreign conflicts that do not serve the interests of America.

Well, you and I have 6 things we can agree on.

The question in all of those plus the ones on money in politics where I have two there's on the left who I agree with, is what now? I realize that we are likely not going to affect change, so......what do we get for reaching across?

We can set an example.

Oh I know it is certainly a fantasy- but there can be civil discourse.

Right now our politicians are terrified of appearing to be willing to have any discourse with the opposite side- because the right and the left demonizes politicians who are not unflinchingly orthodox and uncompromising. But somehow we need to encourage civil discourse among people rather than just angry rhetoric- and the revenge cycle of instransigence.

 

[Iceweasel]

[
The polarization isn't a byproduct of the right, I get tired of it being treated as a mutual problem. The left has been racing, not walking, further left and claiming the right is divisive for not going along.

Oh really?

The right used to be Ronald Reagan and George Bush- the right has been racing to the right for 2 decades now.

And this is of course part of the issue. The right wing nut jobs think that they are mainstream.

You called the right nut jobs and think that puts you in a superior position? You aren't particularly bright. Nor do you understand the county has been drug way to the left since Reagan's day. He too fought the establishment in the GOP as well as the liberals. If liberals were mainstream they wouldn't need to lie about everything they want to do.

JFK wouldn't have a home in the Democrat party these days. Maybe you should spend more time thinking than insulting people. Being stuck on stupid is a horrible way to live.

 

[Iceweasel]

the right has been racing to the right for 2 decades now.

.

....and in equal measure, the left has been racing to the left.


thus the problem.

There is certainly the issue that the loudest voices have been racing to the right and the left.

Reagan and Tip O'Neil use to be able to fight each other politically, but end the day with a shot of whiskey together- that is not done by either side anymore- and both sides have contributed to it.

Both sides.

Rather than hurling shitballs try being specific. Give us examples of issues where the right has been racing to the right.

The fact that Tip O'Neil was more reasonable than a Pelosi or Reid doesn't help your case.

 

[2aguy]

the right has been racing to the right for 2 decades now.

.

....and in equal measure, the left has been racing to the left.


thus the problem.

There is certainly the issue that the loudest voices have been racing to the right and the left.

Reagan and Tip O'Neil use to be able to fight each other politically, but end the day with a shot of whiskey together- that is not done by either side anymore- and both sides have contributed to it.

Both sides.

That is a lie......tip o'neil hated Reagan and broke every promise he made...on illegal immigration and taxes.....both sides didn't contribute to it.....ted kennedy led the way in attacking Republicans...

 

[Tehon]

the right has been racing to the right for 2 decades now.

.

....and in equal measure, the left has been racing to the left.


thus the problem.

Speaking as a leftist, it seems to me that the left has been unwittingly dragged to the right. The democrat party has fully embraced the neo liberal/conservative values generally associated with the right.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

the right has been racing to the right for 2 decades now.

.

....and in equal measure, the left has been racing to the left.


thus the problem.

Speaking as a leftist, it seems to me that the left has been unwittingly dragged to the right. The democrat party has fully embraced the neo liberal/conservative values generally associated with the right.

If a person is far enough left, everything else looks right to them and if they are far enough right, everything looks left.

Abandon this sense of yours that your politics is your tribe, and you might see that.

"Safe spaces" on campus where racist people of color can eliminate whites from their midst, bakers being forced to write statements on cakes supporting gay marriage, talk of "microaggressions", an avowed socialist nearly winning the democratic nomination -- I'd say the left has traveled an ENORMOUS distance to the left since the days of Kennedy.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Liberalism checks the conservative propensity for authoritarianism, .

You are confusing the authoritarian vs libertarian pole with the left vs right poll. If you have not noticed the degree of authoritarianism in communist countries, you have not been paying attention.

The left has become MUCH more authoritarian over the years, what with the politically correct witch hunt of impure thoughts.