Does America Really Have Four Political Parties Instead of Two?

[Daktoria]

What would happen if the bottom two groups saw how the top two groups were dividing them? All liberals and conservatives aren't the same after all.

Maybe the real problem in politics today is that both sides are lead on by manipulative leadership, and that leadership leads its membership to fighting the other side's membership so members prove themselves to leaders.

It's kind of like how in WW1 you had the French and the Germans, and both sides had commanders who told their soldiers to go off and assume the risk of getting killed just to prove themselves on their own sides while fighting the war.

 

[Moonglow]

and what of the independents?

 

[KevinWestern]

What would happen if the bottom two groups saw how the top two groups were dividing them? All liberals and conservatives aren't the same after all.

Maybe the real problem in politics today is that both sides are lead on by manipulative leadership, and that leadership leads its membership to fighting the other side's membership so members prove themselves to leaders.

It's kind of like how in WW1 you had the French and the Germans, and both sides had commanders who told their soldiers to go off and assume the risk of getting killed just to prove themselves on their own sides while fighting the war.

I think the problem with politics is that it's not lead by lofty ideals or even people who believe in a "better world", etc.

It's lead by money, and the politicians are controlled by the people with the most of it. The Democrats/Republicans might argue on things like gay marriage and abortion, but when it comes to not prosecuting any Wall Streeters following the largest collapse since 1929 in 2008, or the Libor scandal, etc, they both seem to agree! Or when it comes to starting wars or sending hundreds of millions in weapons to rebel (al-qaeda linked) fighters in Syria, they both seem to agree! Or when it comes to a never ending bailout they both seem to agree! Or when it comes to catering to monsanto they both seem to agree! Or when it comes to signing the NDAA 2012 that makes it legal for the gov't to arrest citizens and detain them indefinitely without trail... you guessed it... they both seem to agree!

How come Republicans/Democrats agree on all the stuff that screws EVERYONE over, and disagrees only on the minor issues?

Now, I'm not trying to crash your idea on ideology; it makes sense. My point is that ideology doesn't hold up if our politicians aren't actually sincere anymore; the only thing they "believe in" is money.




.

 

[Daktoria]

Well I kind of agree with you on that. Money is a quantified, rather than qualified, form of communication, so it degrades the dignity of people to whether or not they're quantifiably popular or powerful.

The problem is that when social values become deconstructed such that people aren't uniting in common when they communicate, money is all they have left.

 

[regent]

The big difference is that liberals are more accepting of ideas and able to tolerate those that believe somewhat differently than they do--the big tent thing. Conservatives are more rigid and cannot easily accept beliefs that go beyond a certain range. The Tea Party and Republican party illustrate that concept. It also explains and perhaps why the present Republican party is America's third major conservative party while the Democratic party trace back to Jefferson.

 

[KevinWestern]

The big difference is that liberals are more accepting of ideas and able to tolerate those that believe somewhat differently than they do--the big tent thing. Conservatives are more rigid and cannot easily accept beliefs that go beyond a certain range. The Tea Party and Republican party illustrate that concept. It also explains and perhaps why the present Republican party is America's third major conservative party while the Democratic party trace back to Jefferson.

Well, that I think can be argued both ways. Sure, the Democrats are more "all inclusive" when it comes to gay marriage, however what about things like healthcare?

They had an idea - mandated insurance plans - and made it so that every person in America would be forced to buy a plan or "else" (ie a fine). Millions lost their already established plans and family doctors, etc directly because of this legislation. isn't this an example of forcing your belief system onto everyone else?

Or what about when Obama Admin hacks into an AP news person's email account after they wrote a negative piece about him, in order to intimidate and deter that from happening again? Isn't that an example of forcing your beliefs onto others? Story is here.

Or what about a liberal IRS worker hitting tea party outlets with unfair audits? Isn't that an example of forcing beliefs onto others?

 

[regent]

The big difference is that liberals are more accepting of ideas and able to tolerate those that believe somewhat differently than they do--the big tent thing. Conservatives are more rigid and cannot easily accept beliefs that go beyond a certain range. The Tea Party and Republican party illustrate that concept. It also explains and perhaps why the present Republican party is America's third major conservative party while the Democratic party trace back to Jefferson.

Well, that I think can be argued both ways. Sure, the Democrats are more "all inclusive" when it comes to gay marriage, however what about things like healthcare?

They had an idea - mandated insurance plans - and made it so that every person in America would be forced to buy a plan or "else" (ie a fine). Millions lost their already established plans and family doctors, etc directly because of this legislation. isn't this an example of forcing your belief system onto everyone else?

Or what about when Obama Admin hacks into an AP news person's email account after they wrote a negative piece about him, in order to intimidate and deter that from happening again? Isn't that an example of forcing your beliefs onto others? Story is here.

Or what about a liberal IRS worker hitting tea party outlets with unfair audits? Isn't that an example of forcing beliefs onto others?

Most people are not totally liberal or conservative so using an individual as evidence of a trait may not be accurate. As for the IRS the primary job of the executive branch is to enforce the laws of the United States. Also accepting a wider range of beliefs is--wider range not all behavior.

 

[KevinWestern]

The big difference is that liberals are more accepting of ideas and able to tolerate those that believe somewhat differently than they do--the big tent thing. Conservatives are more rigid and cannot easily accept beliefs that go beyond a certain range. The Tea Party and Republican party illustrate that concept. It also explains and perhaps why the present Republican party is America's third major conservative party while the Democratic party trace back to Jefferson.

Well, that I think can be argued both ways. Sure, the Democrats are more "all inclusive" when it comes to gay marriage, however what about things like healthcare?

They had an idea - mandated insurance plans - and made it so that every person in America would be forced to buy a plan or "else" (ie a fine). Millions lost their already established plans and family doctors, etc directly because of this legislation. isn't this an example of forcing your belief system onto everyone else?

Or what about when Obama Admin hacks into an AP news person's email account after they wrote a negative piece about him, in order to intimidate and deter that from happening again? Isn't that an example of forcing your beliefs onto others? Story is here.

Or what about a liberal IRS worker hitting tea party outlets with unfair audits? Isn't that an example of forcing beliefs onto others?

Most people are not totally liberal or conservative so using an individual as evidence of a trait may not be accurate. As for the IRS the primary job of the executive branch is to enforce the laws of the United States. Also accepting a wider range of beliefs is--wider range not all behavior.

Definitely, but my point was that you said conservatives "don't accept beliefs beyond a certain range", and just want to say that the Democrats are also the same way in that they have a certain way of thinking and also don't accept beliefs beyond a certain range.

Not singling them out (as Repubs do this too), just want to point out it goes both ways.

 

[Nyvin]

The big difference is that liberals are more accepting of ideas and able to tolerate those that believe somewhat differently than they do--the big tent thing. Conservatives are more rigid and cannot easily accept beliefs that go beyond a certain range. The Tea Party and Republican party illustrate that concept. It also explains and perhaps why the present Republican party is America's third major conservative party while the Democratic party trace back to Jefferson.

The Republican party started out as the Liberal party. The southern Democrats were conservative also.

 

[regent]

The big difference is that liberals are more accepting of ideas and able to tolerate those that believe somewhat differently than they do--the big tent thing. Conservatives are more rigid and cannot easily accept beliefs that go beyond a certain range. The Tea Party and Republican party illustrate that concept. It also explains and perhaps why the present Republican party is America's third major conservative party while the Democratic party trace back to Jefferson.

The Republican party started out as the Liberal party. The southern Democrats were conservative also.

Parties can change, individuals can change but ideologies do not change. The change most difficult for some to understand, are the changes people or politicians make to carry out an ideology. At one time liberals believed in small powerless governments, but as they gained control of government they gradually became believers in using government to carry out their liberal beliefs.