Want o be unbiased politically, but...

Post Reply New Topic

Republicans are just absolutely delusional lately and offer no plausible solutions that may help our economy/foreign resource dependence, etc. Even if they make a good argument, it is just debated to be seen through with yelling incoherent, bigoted things.

On the other hand we have the democrats, who are too forgiving in some cases (such as not assassinating those who can't be cured, like multiple killers and rapists;letting republicans claim there's a liberal media bias; etc.) and that compromise on eveything until their ideals are drowned in riders that allow the republicans to get more money abusing the middle/lower class.

What we need is more independent candidates running for office, but I doubt it could happen under this system. We have too much flocking behind one candidate/party and not enough rational debate and real solutions offered.

We also need a political climate that stories aren't reduced to entertainment and sound-byte sensationalism, but actual analysis of ways we can get out of the issues we're facing, with humorous interviews that have a good message and coherent thoughts behind them, much like The Daily Show. We also should have more parties get PACs so that they can run for office and try a new approach. It as worked for Canada fairly well from my observations. FInally, there's the BS about "not talking to terrorists." To respond to that statement I have a Dusturbed lyric (err, sample): How can you make peace if you won't talk to your enemy?"

Thoughts anyone?

Republicans and democrats have little to no difference besides tone. Nothing really changes, whatever happens usually would of happened regardless of who is in office.

Never settle for something you agree only a little with.

There was an interesting essay by the American Green Party to this effect.
Green Party Essay on the Democrats

Also interesting is this chart of political candidates for the 2012 election:


From the 2008 election we had:

Where Cynthia McKinney was running for the Greens, Ralph Nader was an independent, Brian Moore represented Socialist Party USA, Chuck Baldwin was from the Constitution Party, and Bob Barr was from the Libertarian Party (an odd candidate for them).

As you can see, Obama's rhetoric proved to be little more than posturing and he has now moved well to the right and the socially conservative. If you want to read more about these charts, or look at ones for other countries for comparison, you can go to Political Compass Test. You can also take a test to place yourself on the chart, which is fun.

Nice chart AstroGeek. Obama definitely became more conservative later on, as unemployment rate went from stagnant to decreasing to stagnant again. He also is too easy on businesses shipping jobs overseas and importing foreign oil, rather than doing mining in I think North Dakota, where we have hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil underground.

I notice on that chart very few people are near the middle. That scares me.

I'm going to make a radical topic switch here and pose a question inspired by a post on here: should our political beliefs be tied in with our acknowledgment of science? I find it scary how many Republicans are creationists and/or deny global warming...but it shouldn't define political party.

I wouldn't say that Conservatives "don't care about science." Otherwise, they wouldn't expend so much effort in seeking to refute science.

Saying that Conservatives "don't care about science" is tantamount to saying "Ronald Reagan didn't care about Communists", "George Bush didn't care about Al Qaeda", and "Hitler didn't care about disabled people, Jews and Gypsies."

For Conservatives, Science is just one more human endeavour that belongs on the ash heap of human history.