Party Difference - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

prosequence · 08-19-2003, 12:47 PM

Question for those on both sides of the border...
Do you feel that politcal parties have lost their defining features, that set them apart years ago. Is it time for new pariies and new titles ?

JumpinJesus · 08-19-2003, 01:12 PM

I don't think it's so much that they've lost their defining features as it is that they've become so narrow that there is no room for any healthy disagreement between members of a party.

I could start calling a potato an apple, but that's not going to change how it tastes.

The_Dude · 08-19-2003, 01:23 PM

i dont think a 3rd party will sprout up anytime soon.

the 2 party system is very very very deeply entrenched and both parties will fight any attempt to change the status quo.

look at the committe assigment system in congress as an example of this entrenchment.

neddy65 · 08-19-2003, 01:55 PM

the system definatly could use an overhaul! recently, here in Canada, there was a party vote to take place and anyone from the party who voted against the issue was to be expelled from said party. where is the democracy in that and forget about representing the people who elected you. If a system fails to perform it's stated or intended function lets not change the function but change the system.

prosequence · 08-19-2003, 05:59 PM

Hehe ... you said FUNCTION

JamesS · 08-19-2003, 07:33 PM

I believe the major parties still have differences, but sometimes political expediency trumps ideology (on both sides).

Look at our last two presidents. Clinton backed down on universal healthcare, gays in the military, adopted welfare reform, things of that nature - all of which are not true to Democratic positions.

Bush, it seems, is doing just the same in reverse: he has increased non-defense discretionary spending by 18% since he took office and has not vetoed a single spending bill, according to the Cato institute - not very Republican policies.

The biggest difference these days can be seen in demographics, really. Most Christian fundamentalists and a majority of rural citizens vote Republican, while minorities (with a few exceptions like Cubans) and those in an urban setting tend to vote Democratic. The policy of the two parties usually reflects a desire to maintain their 'coalitions'.

virus · 08-21-2003, 05:33 AM

i dunno, i think we can use a party overhaul. i tend to prefer candidates that are more opinionated and willing to say something, even if i don't agree 100% in what they're saying.

on the cover, the parties seem to have big differences. i read the platforms for 2000 recently, there's some scary shit in both, but it's all marketing. in practice there don't seem to be many differences at all.

seretogis · 08-21-2003, 07:38 AM

Interesting that you should bring this up.

In the latest "Limbaugh Letter" (Rush's newsletter, quite entertaining), the title article is "Whatever happened to limited government?" and he hammers on Republicans that are voting for "Big Government" programs. A funny quote from the article:

Quote:

The truth is, this big-government conservatism looks a whole lot like big-government liberalism. No matter how you slice it, folks, it isn't conservatism! Conservatism, the ideology of limited constitutional government, doesn't change because a majoirty in this Congress, including way too many Republicans, are spending like a drunken Ted Kennedy.

This is meeting the Democrats halfway, not to advance our agenda, but advance theirs. This strategy may be politically useful, short-term, to certain incumbent Republicans, but it's not how you build and sustain a political movement. Adopting liberal initiatives as a way of denying liberals their talking points is what I've called "the Biiiiig Theory," the effort to take issues away from the Democrats by adopting some of them. But giving the Democrats a percentage of what they want does nothin gbut water down our own beliefs. Far worse, it confiscates the people's treasure to create more dependency...with Republican endorsement.

I think he hits the nail on the head. By attempting to look more "compassionate" than Democrats, Republicans are in fact becoming Democrats. In an effort to look less like flower-power tree-huggers, Democrats are becoming Republicans. They're both meeting in the middle and becoming the "Let's Just Keep Ourselves in Office" party. The need for a legitimate third-party (or second party, to the Republicrats) is becoming much greater.

Darkblack · 08-21-2003, 10:40 AM

Hmm. Interesting. I don't know how I feel on this. I guess because I am very far to the left I have a problem with the two parties meeting in the middle but if they do it right, wouldn't it be better for the country. You know, compromising. I mean, Rush sounds like he is saying it is our way or no way! Which I would love it to be my way or no way but really that isn't helping.

Macheath · 08-21-2003, 06:43 PM

Most mainstream political parties in the western world have been taken over by managerial types and corporate bean counters with cattle prods watching to zap into line any surviving ideologues who say anything the least bit inspiring.

All else is spin..

dellamag6 · 08-21-2003, 06:55 PM

The difference is "We're Right .They're Wrong"

virus · 08-21-2003, 06:55 PM

holy shit! rush is channeling garofalo! i swear to god i heard her say the exact same thing on an interview one time. the world is a strange place.

JBX · 08-21-2003, 07:46 PM

Both parties have lost touch with the people they are supposed to represent. It's all about buying votes by blocks of people. Pork Barrel spending in districts discounting the taxpayers hard earned dollar. It's all about getting re-elected and nothing about the business that needs to be attended to. God Damn Hypocrites.

onetime2 · 08-22-2003, 06:02 AM

Both parties are playing to the middle to get elected but while in office they are enacting some of their more conservative or more liberal policies. Kind of slipping things by when they can. The thing I hate about politics right now is the absolute hatred of individuals by the supposedly politically educated.

I mean I disagree with Bill Clinton's stand on many things (not the least of which is his character) but overall I give him credit for a successful two term Presidency.

I disagree with Bush on several things but overall give him credit for taking a stand and staying dedicated to what he believes is the right course.

The insults hurled at the leaders of the "other" party are ridiculous. Even more ridiculous is that the people hurling the insults actually believe them.

We (the American people) make it too easy for politicians. They know they only have to cater to a fraction of the voters because the majority stay home on election day. So long as they garner support from their core (whether liberal or conservative) and can convince some of the fringe voters (moderate Republicans & Democrats, Independents, Greens, etc) that they're the best candidate they're in. If they had to convince the people who don't ever vote the ball game would be different.

We need to force more people to vote. No I don't mean we need to send the National Guard to their homes to walk them to the polls, but there have to be ways to get the rest of America to vote.

JumpinJesus · 08-22-2003, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by onetime2

We need to force more people to vote. No I don't mean we need to send the National Guard to their homes to walk them to the polls, but there have to be ways to get the rest of America to vote.

I think this is somewhat of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Most voters don't believe their vote counts for anything so fewer of them show up on election day. The politicians see this and realize that most people don't seem to care what goes on so they focus their attention on the special interests, lobbyists, and largest donors, therefore reinforcing the average voters' belief that politicians don't care about their constituents. When a politician does show an interest in the average American, he or she is accused of pandering. It seems almost like a no-win situation for all involved. But that's how cynical we've become regarding our political process.

08-19-2003, 12:47 PM	#1 (permalink)
prosequence Psycho Location: YOUR MOM!!	Party Difference Question for those on both sides of the border... Do you feel that politcal parties have lost their defining features, that set them apart years ago. Is it time for new pariies and new titles ? __________________ And now here I stand because of you, Mister Anderson, because of you I'm no longer an agent of the system, because of you I've changed...

08-19-2003, 01:12 PM	#2 (permalink)
JumpinJesus Junkie Location: Chicago	I don't think it's so much that they've lost their defining features as it is that they've become so narrow that there is no room for any healthy disagreement between members of a party. I could start calling a potato an apple, but that's not going to change how it tastes. __________________ "I can normally tell how intelligent a man is by how stupid he thinks I am" - Cormac McCarthy, All The Pretty Horses

08-19-2003, 01:23 PM	#3 (permalink)
The_Dude The GrandDaddy of them all! Location: Austin, TX	i dont think a 3rd party will sprout up anytime soon. the 2 party system is very very very deeply entrenched and both parties will fight any attempt to change the status quo. look at the committe assigment system in congress as an example of this entrenchment. __________________ "Luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity." - Darrel K Royal

08-19-2003, 01:55 PM	#4 (permalink)
neddy65 Loves green eggs and ham Location: I'm just sittin' here watching the world go round and round	the system definatly could use an overhaul! recently, here in Canada, there was a party vote to take place and anyone from the party who voted against the issue was to be expelled from said party. where is the democracy in that and forget about representing the people who elected you. If a system fails to perform it's stated or intended function lets not change the function but change the system. __________________ If you're travelling at the speed of light, and you turn the headlights on, do they do anything? My name is Inigo Montoya. You killed my father, prepare to die! Drink Dickens' Hard Cider because nothing makes a girl smile like a Hard DIckens' Cider!

08-19-2003, 05:59 PM	#5 (permalink)
prosequence Psycho Location: YOUR MOM!!	Hehe ... you said FUNCTION __________________ And now here I stand because of you, Mister Anderson, because of you I'm no longer an agent of the system, because of you I've changed...

08-19-2003, 07:33 PM	#6 (permalink)
JamesS Crazy Location: Land of the Hanging Chad	I believe the major parties still have differences, but sometimes political expediency trumps ideology (on both sides). Look at our last two presidents. Clinton backed down on universal healthcare, gays in the military, adopted welfare reform, things of that nature - all of which are not true to Democratic positions. Bush, it seems, is doing just the same in reverse: he has increased non-defense discretionary spending by 18% since he took office and has not vetoed a single spending bill, according to the Cato institute - not very Republican policies. The biggest difference these days can be seen in demographics, really. Most Christian fundamentalists and a majority of rural citizens vote Republican, while minorities (with a few exceptions like Cubans) and those in an urban setting tend to vote Democratic. The policy of the two parties usually reflects a desire to maintain their 'coalitions'. __________________ The tragedy of life is what dies inside a man while he lives. -- Albert Schweitzer

08-21-2003, 05:33 AM	#7 (permalink)
virus Tilted Location: NYC	i dunno, i think we can use a party overhaul. i tend to prefer candidates that are more opinionated and willing to say something, even if i don't agree 100% in what they're saying. on the cover, the parties seem to have big differences. i read the platforms for 2000 recently, there's some scary shit in both, but it's all marketing. in practice there don't seem to be many differences at all.

08-21-2003, 10:40 AM	#9 (permalink)
Darkblack Banned Location: Pennsytuckia	Hmm. Interesting. I don't know how I feel on this. I guess because I am very far to the left I have a problem with the two parties meeting in the middle but if they do it right, wouldn't it be better for the country. You know, compromising. I mean, Rush sounds like he is saying it is our way or no way! Which I would love it to be my way or no way but really that isn't helping.

08-21-2003, 06:43 PM	#10 (permalink)
Macheath Junkie Location: Sydney, Australia	Most mainstream political parties in the western world have been taken over by managerial types and corporate bean counters with cattle prods watching to zap into line any surviving ideologues who say anything the least bit inspiring. All else is spin..

08-21-2003, 06:55 PM	#11 (permalink)
dellamag6 Upright	The difference is "We're Right .They're Wrong"

08-21-2003, 06:55 PM	#12 (permalink)
virus Tilted Location: NYC	holy shit! rush is channeling garofalo! i swear to god i heard her say the exact same thing on an interview one time. the world is a strange place.

08-21-2003, 07:46 PM	#13 (permalink)
JBX Unfair and Imbalanced Location: Upstate, NY	Both parties have lost touch with the people they are supposed to represent. It's all about buying votes by blocks of people. Pork Barrel spending in districts discounting the taxpayers hard earned dollar. It's all about getting re-elected and nothing about the business that needs to be attended to. God Damn Hypocrites. __________________ "Youth and Strength is no match for Age and Treachery"

08-22-2003, 06:02 AM	#14 (permalink)
onetime2 Junkie Location: NJ	Both parties are playing to the middle to get elected but while in office they are enacting some of their more conservative or more liberal policies. Kind of slipping things by when they can. The thing I hate about politics right now is the absolute hatred of individuals by the supposedly politically educated. I mean I disagree with Bill Clinton's stand on many things (not the least of which is his character) but overall I give him credit for a successful two term Presidency. I disagree with Bush on several things but overall give him credit for taking a stand and staying dedicated to what he believes is the right course. The insults hurled at the leaders of the "other" party are ridiculous. Even more ridiculous is that the people hurling the insults actually believe them. We (the American people) make it too easy for politicians. They know they only have to cater to a fraction of the voters because the majority stay home on election day. So long as they garner support from their core (whether liberal or conservative) and can convince some of the fringe voters (moderate Republicans & Democrats, Independents, Greens, etc) that they're the best candidate they're in. If they had to convince the people who don't ever vote the ball game would be different. We need to force more people to vote. No I don't mean we need to send the National Guard to their homes to walk them to the polls, but there have to be ways to get the rest of America to vote. __________________ Strive to be more curious than ignorant.