Pages: (149) 1 2 3 4 ... Last » ( Go to first unread post )
Add Reply
New Topic
New Poll

 TRUMP NATION 2017-2020, Trumped up trickle down piss
Beezzi
 Posted: Aug 1 2015, 02:48 PM
Quote


Happy 10th Anniversary!
Posts: 2101




QUOTE (Patrick @ Aug 1 2015, 10:45 PM)
QUOTE (Supernature @ Aug 1 2015, 05:26 PM)
Two things:

i) I have to ask because I have an outside perspective, but it seems to me that in terms of economic stewardship, the two parties are increasingly difficult to differentiate (both playing into the hands of corporations / lobbies, etc...), like some people said in the OT thread.
But does the average American still perceive them as different in this department ? Do they cast their vote entirely based on the parties' positions on social issues ? Are they even aware of the interactions between the two concepts ?



sorry for interfering in your discussion, but I only wanted to say that yes,
the current trend is social issues. anything else seems to be irrelevant,
and it's a trend that is observable everywhere.


You never interfere in a discussion! You keep things lively and interesting. We're X-fans, differing points of views is our specialty! ;-)

Diversity makes us stronger....

--------------------
"I meditate and do yoga. I sit cross-legged and try not to levitate too much." - Jeremy Brett
PM
^
PatriX
 Posted: Aug 1 2015, 02:55 PM
Quote


Another "x" in statistix
Posts: 2045




QUOTE (Beezzi @ Aug 1 2015, 05:48 PM)


You never interfere in a discussion! You keep things lively and interesting. We're X-fans, differing points of views is our specialty! ;-)

Diversity makes us stronger....


I WILL QUOTE YOU FOR THAT.
Anyway, I didn't want to interrupt as I'm not well-versed in US politics.
I can talk all day about Poland, but US? Nope.
The thing is, I am worried, because everywhere is going downhill.
Whether it's russia or US, everywhere is a crisis.
But yeah, you would be surprised that people are ONLY voting due to social issues (and also outside of USA).
Currently, a party that can 'ho themselves on social issues is the winner.
It will go down in history as "The Great Populism Evar"

--------------------
formerly known as Chakal
I am a relic.
PMEmailWebsite
^
Lycaon pictus
 Posted: Aug 1 2015, 02:58 PM
Quote


Still Endangered
Posts: 3984




QUOTE (Supernature @ Aug 1 2015, 06:26 PM)
Two things:

i) I have to ask because I have an outside perspective, but it seems to me that in terms of economic stewardship, the two parties are increasingly difficult to differentiate (both playing into the hands of corporations / lobbies, etc...), like some people said in the OT thread.
But does the average American still perceive them as different in this department ? Do they cast their vote entirely based on the parties' positions on social issues ? Are they even aware of the interactions between the two concepts ?

ii) I'd like to know more about the Democrat candidates' positions on foreign affairs / policies. More specifically, what they plan to do in the Middle East. Have they said anything about it ?


1) The average American perceives them as different. Liberals--and the Democratic party-- is seen as fiscally irresponsible because they favor funding social programs. This is perceived as either rewarding lazy people (welfare, food stamps, daycare, job programs, etc), or propping up "niche" instituions enjoyed by liberal elite (arts programs, NPR, the environmental protections, etc) Conservatives--the GOP--is seen as more fiscally responsible, solely because they don't favor funding social programs. They also get points because specific social programs pull at specific ideological heart strings (welfare queens, people against environmental regulation, etc).
The idea that Conservatives are in fact not fiscally responsible because of their habit of funding costly wars and cutting taxes is a new idea that gained traction because of the Bush presidency. The idea that investing in programs is fiscally responsible in the long term is a matter of political ideology. The idea that trickle down economics doesn't work is and that corporations are making hand over fist at everyone's expense is also new (not really "new" but to average people).
Absolutely everyone (not really, but pretty much) votes on social issues and rationalizes that decision based on the framework I posted above when asked about serious issues. If they like the EPA and and NPR and dislike war, they vote left and say "war is expensive, and the environment is a public good that should be invested in." If they chafe at regulation, and welfare programs, they vote right and say, "over-regulation is choking American business and the government should not be supporting people too lazy/dumb to get a job."
Your hypothetical "average American" is going to differ a lot depending on age, and where they live though.

2) I don't know what Bernie's foreign policy agenda is. I'd assume it's "get out of all these wars and stay out" though. Hillary has said she was wrong for supporting the Iraq war. I think she is genuinely centrist as far as foreign policy is concerned. And that's centrist for the US, which would be...I guess center-right somewhere else?? I think she would continue Obama's phasing out of the Middle East, but would most certainly continue our drone strike program.
PM
^
Lycaon pictus
 Posted: Aug 1 2015, 03:00 PM
Quote


Still Endangered
Posts: 3984




QUOTE (Patrick @ Aug 1 2015, 06:45 PM)
QUOTE (Supernature @ Aug 1 2015, 05:26 PM)
Two things:

i) I have to ask because I have an outside perspective, but it seems to me that in terms of economic stewardship, the two parties are increasingly difficult to differentiate (both playing into the hands of corporations / lobbies, etc...), like some people said in the OT thread.
But does the average American still perceive them as different in this department ? Do they cast their vote entirely based on the parties' positions on social issues ? Are they even aware of the interactions between the two concepts ?



sorry for interfering in your discussion, but I only wanted to say that yes,
the current trend is social issues. anything else seems to be irrelevant,
and it's a trend that is observable everywhere.

Agreed.
Your average joe doesn't know or care about economics, or foreign policy. They want to vote for someone who they think cares about the same things they care about, and that is often very personal.
PM
^
PatriX
 Posted: Aug 1 2015, 03:08 PM
Quote


Another "x" in statistix
Posts: 2045




QUOTE (Lycaon pictus @ Aug 1 2015, 06:00 PM)

Agreed.
Your average joe doesn't know or care about economics, or foreign policy. They want to vote for someone who they think cares about the same things they care about, and that is often very personal.


If it makes you feel better, USA is not unique in that department.
I will probably regret saying that, but I believe that even if there were no black people, no asian people, there would still be racial racism.
No one is more racist than a white person, and I don't try to analyze that, as it would put me in an awkward position. I shouldn't even start this topic, but I
feel I should mention that, because it's a very important factor in current times.

Anyway, and that part of my post is important,
I noticed a trend of the rise of the more nationalistic parties. In whole europe,
the parties that feed on phobias get the most votes, or are the most popular.
It's important to point out that every political party is populistic.
There is not a single politician that believes in what s/he says.
Everything that politican says, s/he says so you would vote for him/her.
Populism is all rage now, because people want to return to the standards of living from decade ago.
It's another topic for another thread why the standards have decreased, but it's
obvious that the winner will be the person who promised the most.
OF course, promises mean nothing, because there will be always an excuse

"I wanted to give your priviledges, but I was outvoted", and etc.

And yes, I will say that
it's 76 years since last world war.
...

I don't speak about left vs right, because for me, they both are fiscally irresponsible.
Common sense, I will repeat common sense is what the political parties are missing.

--------------------
formerly known as Chakal
I am a relic.
PMEmailWebsite
^
RLAAMJR.
 Posted: Aug 2 2015, 04:50 AM
Quote


Storm's #1 Fan Forever!
Posts: 100792




I think Clinton will win.

I was hoping Rand Paul would run for president.

--------------------
"Lightning, deliver this place from darkness!" - Storm in X-men TAS

"Do you know what happens to a toad when struck by lightning? Same thing that happens to everything else." - Storm in first X-men Movie.
PMEmail
^
Beezzi
 Posted: Aug 2 2015, 05:58 AM
Quote


Happy 10th Anniversary!
Posts: 2101




Kai totally called it...

And I said it was impossible - I will never learn.

--------------------
"I meditate and do yoga. I sit cross-legged and try not to levitate too much." - Jeremy Brett
PM
^
AgentFelix
 Posted: Aug 3 2015, 07:50 PM
Quote


Damn. I might start carryin' beans.
Posts: 3051




Isn't the two party system the best guys?! Omg so much great representation
PM
^
Lycaon pictus
 Posted: Aug 3 2015, 08:56 PM
Quote


Still Endangered
Posts: 3984




PM
^
jarrod
 Posted: Aug 4 2015, 04:27 AM
Quote


cum ninja
Posts: 3646




Clinton is NOT a centrist on foreign policy. She's a total Hawk, like Obama or McCain. She's far right of most Americans on that issue, who tend to be non-interventionist or even isolationist. But virtually all mainstream politicians are.
PM
^
0 User(s) are reading this topic (0 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

Topic Options
Pages: (149) 1 2 3 4 ... Last »
Add Reply
Fast Reply
New Topic
New Poll