Partisanship

Partisanship (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

TheHeretic -> Partisanship (9/28/2008 11:19:24 PM)
To avoid rehijacking another thread that has already been set back on the rails once, it seems best to give these questions a place of their own. It was suggested that I cannot render a fair opinion of the debate, because.. quote: You are obviously very partisan, Guilty. I love the great festival and spectacle of US politics. I love the conversation and debate that come with it. That I'm usually more anti-Democrat than pro-Republican is pretty much irrelevant, it's a two-party system. If partisanship means taking a side, yeah, I do that. Of course, I also defend Christianity (Fundy sects, not so much) more often than I criticize, and I'm not a Christian. If I find myself trapped with a television tuned to a sporting event, I just want the Yankees/Raiders/Jeff Gordon to lose. I don't care who beats them. Having explained that I'm pro-choice more times than I care to count, let's explore this thing, and the impact it has on our conversation... How far does partisanship go? Does it trump other values you hold? When you engage in a discussion with someone on the other side, how far do you assume theirs goes? Do you believe you can reliably make assumptions about their character based on that? How heavily does a given politicians affiliation weigh in your judgements? Your willingness to offer an opinion on a thread about their misconduct, or possible misconduct? Other thoughts, and stream of consciousness would be welcome as well, of course.

juliaoceania -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 5:31:05 AM)
quote: How far does partisanship go? Does it trump other values you hold? I am an ideological sort, so I would not consider myself a "go team" person. In other words my values trump everything else... and party affiliation means nothing to me quote: When you engage in a discussion with someone on the other side, how far do you assume theirs goes? Do you believe you can reliably make assumptions about their character based on that? I know plenty of people who disagree with me that I admire and I know plenty of people who agree with me that I do not. I judge people by their words and their deeds. I have one friend that I work out with that is a staunch conservative in many ways (such as military) but he is also pro socialized medicine because he does care about people....He hunts yet he is also pro environment... He is a nice person. I think that those who demonize someone because they see the world differently than themselves are kinda scary and part of what is wrong with this country. People who personally attack over political difference have different values than I do. I would prefer to argue ideas than personality or party affiliation. I notice that most negativity and ad hominems come from the right wing. They do it because it works quote: How heavily does a given politicians affiliation weigh in your judgements? Your willingness to offer an opinion on a thread about their misconduct, or possible misconduct? I have not been contributing to political threads lately. I do not contribute to most scandal threads in general. My comments on political threads tend to be about positions that people hold and issues... not about personality for the most part. A politicians POSITIONS are what I judge them by

Irishknight -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 5:35:47 AM)
I think partisanship often trumps truth in this country. It is easier for people to hate the other party than repair their own party's failings. As such, each party offers us weak candidates who are unfit for the office of dog catcher and they spend more money than many people earn in a decade to tell us how much the other guy sucks.

TheHeretic -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 6:35:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I notice that most negativity and ad hominems come from the right wing. Well look what the cat dragged in... Hello, Julia. Will you be sticking around to support the USA's first woman Vice-President?

juliaoceania -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 6:39:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I notice that most negativity and ad hominems come from the right wing. Well look what the cat dragged in... Hello, Julia. Will you be sticking around to support the USA's first woman Vice-President? You are so genteel and polite and you never ever try to pick partisan fights.... thanks for the chuckle, lovely thread! I just wish you would have claimed some sort of nonpartisan position... (oh that is right, you are just anti democrat, not "pro" anything, how sad to be motivated by negativity instead of hope) Edited to add, if the republicans put forward a pro female woman, then I would vote for her... Sarah Palin may have a vagina, but her positions are anti woman... hence she forced women to pay for their own rape kits in Alaska... Sarah Palin's POSITIONS are what I dislike about her, not her party affiliation

kittinSol -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 6:46:07 AM)
http://www.collarchat.com/m_2137704/mpage_1/tm.htm Thought you might like to skim over this... welcome back to the boards.

Marc2b -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 7:46:33 AM)
Partisanship is nothing more than good old fashioned tribalism. It is the substitution of emotion for reasoned judgment. Your tribe’s victory is more important than the results the victory brings about. In the end it’s all about gloating. If anybody doesn’t believe me just check these boards the day after the election. The need to gloat, to feel superior over others, seems to be an innate human need. It is one that is only overcome by an intellectual force of will and it is a very rare person who can do that all the time. Most of us (or so I’d like to think) can do it most of the time (what society we have wouldn’t be possible otherwise) but there are some people who lack the ability at all. These are the vitriol spitters in any election. The ones who mockingly question and put down the intelligence and morality of the opposition and of those who support the opposition for no other reason than they are (cue the ominous horror movie music)… one of them. Both sides are guilty of this but isn’t fascinating that both sides accuse the other side of it while proclaiming their own innocence? ...and the whirly-gig goes on.

cloudboy -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 8:01:06 AM)
I am a result oriented person. If the Republicans had achieved some worthy goals, I might vote for them. But, as is, they have failed miserably. "Voluntary Compliance" hasn't worked in the financial sector. "Preemptive War" hasn't worked abroad. Sacrificing good relations with Russia over Georgia is stupid. Supply side economics has not kept us out of recession or balanced the federal budget. Using wedge issues (abortion, gays, guns) to gain power --- the old Republican trick, is a necessary party evil given its anti-populist platform. To me, it makes the Republicans a fundamentally dishonest group. The Republicans exaggerate foreign threats. First it was the USSR and then it was IRAQ. I think they do this to get elected, not to protect America from actual threats. On top of all of the above, The Republicans abandoned fiscal conservatism in the 1980s, and as such are the most profligate ruling group the US has ever witnessed. Marrying tax cuts to borrowing corrupted their ability to level with the American public about sensible tax policies. Next, I believe in separation of Church and State. The influence of evangelical Chistians on republican policies in the areas of education and family planning violate the principles of our Constitution IMO. If the Republicans could actually cut federal spending on defense, implement realistic foreign policy objectives, and run a budget surplus -- I might vote for them. As is, they are a three-prong failure.

Musicmystery -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 8:05:08 AM)
quote: I think partisanship often trumps truth And that's really the point, isn't it? Anything for power, damn the cost. Remember the "they're stealing our issues" arguments? If you cared, wouldn't you throw a party that your opposition now embraced your position? But then enter extremists. I was fiercely independent until Falwell and Reagan and company went so overboard, and the only check available was the Democrats---and still is, which is why I lean that way.

kittinSol -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 8:06:36 AM)
Wasn't it you who posted a thread (later pulled) on pushing liberal people overboard a boat [;)]? On a more serious note, I disagree with you: in my case, anyway, political belief has nothing to do with tribalism. It's not like supporting a football team after all. It's nothing to do with a knitting circle. It's different from belonging to office cliques. Playground politics are far behind most of us (or, are they?). Political persuasions aside, one can have strong opinions and not belong to any kind of group: as long as there is mutual respect, there need not be partisanship. But people cannot expect the opposition to behave more honourably than themselves when they indulge in lies, manipulation and gloating intellectual honesty. Perhaps it's time for everybody to grow up? Fair play doesn't just mean winning graciously; it's about being a good looser too.

rexrgisformidoni -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 8:09:05 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy I am a result oriented person. If the Republicans had achieved some worthy goals, I might vote for them. But, as is, they have failed miserably. "Voluntary Compliance" hasn't worked in the financial sector. "Preemptive War" hasn't worked abroad. Sacrificing good relations with Russia over Georgia is stupid. Supply side economics has not kept us out of recession or balanced the federal budget. Using wedge issues (abortion, gays, guns) to gain power --- the old Republican trick, is a necessary party evil given its anti-populist platform. To me, it makes the Republicans a fundamentally dishonest group. The Republicans exaggerate foreign threats. First it was the USSR and then it was IRAQ. I think they do this to get elected, not to protect America from actual threats. On top of all of the above, The Republicans abandoned fiscal conservatism in the 1980s, and as such are the most profligate ruling group the US has ever witnessed. Marrying tax cuts to borrowing corrupted their ability to level with the American public about sensible tax policies. Next, I believe in separation of Church and State. The influence of evangelical Chistians on republican policies in the areas of education and family planning violate the principles of our Constitution IMO. If the Republicans could actually cut federal spending on defense, implement realistic foreign policy objectives, and run a budget surplus -- I might vote for them. As is, they are a three-prong failure. There is an excellent book about how Republicans have abandoned their old platform and how blue collar workers with nothing to gain (in fact they lose) switched to the republican platform on the wedge issues and the lack of real reaction of moderates and democrats. Whats the matter with kansas is the book, thomas frank. and he presents in my opinion a fairly unbiased viewpoint as well.

Marc2b -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 9:03:22 AM)
quote: Wasn't it you who posted a thread (later pulled) on pushing liberal people overboard a boat Not quite. I posted a thread about who on the CM boards you would push overboard the life boat. I remain baffled as to why it was pulled as I was upfront on the thread that it was intended to be tongue in cheek and all in good humor. I make no claims to being immune to human nature and I strongly believe that we need to find outlets for many of our inborn needs. A little good natured rib poking is one way to achieve this. quote: On a more serious note, I disagree with you: in my case, anyway, political belief has nothing to do with tribalism. It's not like supporting a football team after all. It's nothing to do with a knitting circle. It's different from belonging to office cliques. Playground politics are far behind most of us (or, are they?). No. My observations and experiences throughout life has been that playground politics is not far behind us at all. You have already stated, more than once, that you consider humans to be Tabula Rasa, a position I consider fundamentally wrong (I guess we’re just going to have to agree to disagree on that). I see little difference between a strong kid picking on a weak kid in the schoolyard and a strong nation picking on a weak nation. I see little difference between a schoolyard fight between the jocks and the Goths and a full blown race riot. I see little difference between a clique of high school girls plotting to destroy the reputation of a particular girl and office politics as people scheme for advancement. The difference is in scale. In all cases the underlying motives spring from a fundamental part of human nature. quote: Political persuasions aside, one can have strong opinions and not belong to any kind of group: Like me. The low tax, let’s repeal minimum wage, free marketer who is pro-choice and anti-Intelligent Design in the classrooms. quote: as long as there is mutual respect, there need not be partisanship. But respect is more an intellectual exercise than an emotional one and it is easier to get negatively emotional about people you don’t personally know. quote: But people cannot expect the opposition to behave more honourably than themselves when they indulge in lies, manipulation and gloating intellectual [dis]honesty. (I presume you meant dishonesty) The problem is that both side are equally convinced (and can produce equal evidence) that the other side is indulging in lies, manipulation and intellectual dishonesty. Can you honestly say that both Obama and McCain have not been victims of viscous smears in this campaign? quote: Perhaps it's time for everybody to grow up? Fair play doesn't just mean winning graciously; it's about being a good looser too. Yes it does but the gracious winners and the gracious losers tend to be low volume. They will be drowned out by the gloating chuckles and the wailing and gnashing of teeth on the day after the election.

kdsub -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 10:46:16 AM)
My best friend could not be more opposite of my political views... the only way this affects of friendship is it gives us something to argue and debate about gleefully. My own mother voted for Bush...lol... I still love her...although I am thinking of a paternity test. I understand that most people here, that are against my views politically, are good people just not too smart…I forgive them Butch

kittinSol -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 10:48:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub I understand that most people here, that are against my views politically, are good people just not too smart…I forgive them I admire your immense magnanimity: what's your secret :-) ?

kdsub -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 10:59:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kittinSol quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub I understand that most people here, that are against my views politically, are good people just not too smart…I forgive them I admire your immense magnanimity: what's your secret :-) ? My secret is...If I can get them to drive and meet me...I put sugar in their gas tanks. Butch

slvemike4u -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 11:48:57 AM)
Partisanship at work,as we speak in congress.The bailout bill has failed.94 Democratic nays,132(?)Republican nays...and the Republicans blame Speaker of the House Pelosi for her speech...wtf 132 Republicans were swayed by a Nancy Pelosi speech?...They decry partisan politics while simultaneously playing partisan politics...I will need a link to this speech,this must be the mother of all speech's if she swayed 132 Republican Rep's...

slaveboyforyou -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 11:52:57 AM)
quote: My secret is...If I can get them to drive and meet me...I put sugar in their gas tanks. Butch You know that doesn't actually work, right? Just an FYI.

slvemike4u -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 11:54:33 AM)
Sugar in the gas tank...doesn't work?Your not using enough!

kdsub -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 11:55:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveboyforyou quote: My secret is...If I can get them to drive and meet me...I put sugar in their gas tanks. Butch You know that doesn't actually work, right? Just an FYI. Really...why don't take a drive to St Louis...[image]http://www.collarchat.com/micons/m16.gif[/image]

slaveboyforyou -> RE: Partisanship (9/29/2008 11:57:39 AM)
No Mike it doesn't. Cars have fuel filters for a reason. Sugar is just like sand, it won't get into the engine. If you really want to do some damage to a car, pour a couple of gallons of diesel into a gasoline burning car. Kerosene will work too. I assure you the motor will be fucked after that. Didn't mean to hijack; just an FYI from your friendly neighborhood vandal. [:D]

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125