Just out of curiosity, which do you believe?
 

I have been thinking about this for awhile and just am curious as to what others believe.

I'm not going to comment right now because I don't want to bias the poll, so I'm going wait until at least 7 people have voted.

BTW I've made your votes public, because I want to encourage seeing how and why people vote and whom voted for what.

We may all be surprised by how some people vote and their rationalizations.

the majority of people get hosed. Only those people who join in the partisanship ever see any benefit.

Unanimous so far... Thinking about politics as a (very complicated) incentive system, someone must be gaining from a perception of partisanship. I think that it is a result of each party's attempt to drive the other side away from the valuable center.

I'm not old enough to know if the current climate of irrationality is unusual, but I'm struck by the number of things said in the media (by politicians) that are patently untrue. It seems that politicians don't feel particularly constrained by reality or objective assessments.

It benifits the parties and keeps both of them in power,
also keeping the other parties out of power.
The people get to choose "our guy R" or "our guy D"

The heavy partisanship also keeps people voting against their own self interest.
So many voters vote one party straight ticket ballots.
Sometimes based on the overall party platform
often because my grandparents were X, my parents were X, so I am X.

There was a party affiliation quiz floating around here recently
It was quite telling of the partys that best represented each person
I played around with it for a while, putting in various politicians actions
The dems I entered came out with dem on top
same with repubs.
Yet most people who took the poll had green or libertarian on top.

First, thanks to all who have voted, and I am surprised so far. Some good comments and observations have been made and it's cool.

I voted I believe the press because they sell more news, Limbaugh advertises what the NY Times and MSNBC has to say so people on the Right go there to truly see what they are saying. Then the Dems. complain about Fox and Limbaugh and their followers go to see what those media people are saying.

But I think it is deeper. I think Alpha is partially right that the partisanship keeps people polarized enough to keep any 3rd parties from making headway in.

In all honesty I can find reasons to agree with each answer, I guess that is why I put them up there.

It'll be interesting to see others comments and how the voting turns out.

Two parties lame. Legit representation? I dunno, it's tough comparing our structure to some European parlament deal, so I'm not going to go there.

My ma's seems pretty sound in her logic of saying that the two parties always bitch about shit, shit which never gets resolved, at best there is minute resolution, to keep people voting.

Bottom line is shit never really gets done, people only get stressed and die young ugly and of painful heart attacks.

What exactly am I saying? Vote for me in 2012.

Is it really a two party system? In reality, the two parties are run by Don King. Vince McMahon runs the Independent and Green parties but hasn't yet found his standout fighter to make a real challenge.

We all take so seriously what's really WWF 5 in a bigger ring.

Roll the cameras. Queue the next bad guy. Sell more popcorn.

Better for the media, fighers, teams, or for the managers and script-writers out of frame?

//Who do you believe gains more from partisanship and keeping hatred among the parties?//

Nobody gains, but it's just one of those (insane) things that happens naturally when you play a game with few rules and raising stakes. Polarisation, escalation, absurdity and ruthlessness become the order of the day - and everyone loses as a result.

I picked the parties and lobbyist like most of the other votes.

American politics really are like a WWF match or a sporting event. All that seems to matter is that your team is winning.

I said dems, but on second thought, thats probably killing them so I'll switch my vote to the repubs

Shhhhh don't let the secret out :|

I voted media, because while the parties benefit by using the divide to define themselves rather than actual policy or governance, I imagine many staffers find the stifling work environment it creates to be frustrating. Most politicians want to have their legislative agendas realized, and partisanship can only be used to slow productivity; a demoralizing way to operate.

The media on the other hand, thrive on controversy and sensation, and there's nothing easier than building a story on some out of turn statement by a frustrated congressman.

I voted the Media.

One can only imagine what the media would do with all of their free time.

Maybe talk about issues in a constructive way?

I voted Dems. To me it seem they need to demonize Republicans to motivate their base. It seems that the Democrats use race, abortion, big business, tax cuts, and the environment as issues that will lead to the end of the world with Republicans in control. In reality there is not much difference between the two parties.

Maybe this is a two part question...who's fault is it & who does it benefit?

The elite powerbrokers, and The elite powerbrokers

The way I see it, it benefits the two parties that exist for a few reasons. First, you have staunch Dems and Republicans. This causes a certain portion of the population to vote party tickets, regardless of the candidates. This shaves some ability for independants or "third" parties to get a good candidate truly in the race. The next problem comes from people's inability to vote their conscience. I've complained about this in other threads as well. I know a lot of people that voted for Bush because they didn't like Kerry, or vice versa, and wouldn't "waste" their vote on another candidate because it may help the person they really HATE win. This makes no logical sense to me. I voted for the Libertarian cadidate because I felt he was the best candidate we had to choose from. I tend to like Libertarian politicians, but would also NEVER vote a party ticket just to vote in that party. I always evaluate candidates individually, outside of their affiliations. If everyone did that, we wouldn't need/have a bipartisan system.

It is almost always the party and lobbyist because we didn't donate money for their campain, we just elect their special interests.

The same could be said about the GOP. The GOP demonize the Dems as much as the Dems demonize the GOP. Just listen to Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Coulter, GOP on this board, Glenn Beck and so on. The difference is right now the GOP have a bigger more organized attcak plan, but the Dems have had their chjance and will again it runs in cycles.

There is no unbiased media anymore. Its all about selling papers and getting ratings. As for who I believe, I take in all the facts first and then make up my own mind. I dont need the media to tell me what to think. Regretably though, most Americans still want to be told what to believe. See Fox News and the liberal meltage as a prime example

I don't believe that there really are big differences between parties for the most part. Most political parties are espousing a "common theme" designed to get the elected, to run too far from what most people consider acceptable puts you as a fringe party at the outset.

Most governments don't do a lot different, (UKer here), they make some tax cuts, some increases, wave some flags and cut some deals but at the end of the day most decisions are pretty moderate and bland... you don't see a government limiting the dole (unemployment money, paid basically forever if you "look" for jobs, equivalent to minimum wage essentially, opens up a lot of Government schemes) or stopping people riding the system (21 year old single mother, 3 kids 3 fathers, no job, no stable relationship, never looked for a job living on the dole... [one of my friends is the father, offered to marry... this is apparently better], gets a 4 bedroom council house for free (and skipped the queue) - different fathers = separate rooms).

Governments attempt to stay in power, to do so requires moderation for the most part unless you have a massive swing (say the BNP getting into power in Britain (far right, Britain for the British (WASPs basically not people of non WASP ethinicity born here)).