4 ms·

I actually think we suffer from false equivalency in the US. The two parties are radically different, the rhetoric is radically different. It's not that we suff

I actually think we suffer from false equivalency in the US. The two parties are radically different, the rhetoric is radically different. It's not that we suffer from a lack of consensus, it's that the right in the US has swerved sharply right, while the left has meandered a little left lately (but rightward across a ~30 year time span). The first source I could find, it's not universally agreed upon, but here: http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/06/yes-polarization-is-asymmetric-and-conservatives-are-worse/373044/ http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/06/yes-pola... It's really easy to try to be bipartisan and blame both sides, but the Republican party has been changing rapidly. You could argue the Democrats haven't been changing fast enough... but whatever is going on, it's not symmetrical.

Silhouette 10y ago
The irony of your comment is that while you might well be right about the trends, by global political standards the two main parties in the US are barely distinguishable, except for a few clear dividing lines like guns or abortion.
- croon 10y ago
  I think that's the point. I'm going to make a derisive comparison: A parent trying to cooperate with their child (if they can't assert dominance) will in many cases resort to move closer to the childs position, like getting them a candy as a reward if they put their shoes on. It doesn't matter much if the parent is in the right, if there is no way to convince the other party. Then diplomacy on your part is the last resort. I'm not saying this is the right thing to do, but it does make logical sense. If the GOP relentlessly moves to the right, and refuses to be bipartisan on anything (even something as basic and frankly obvious as public healthcare), then you're forced to move to the best they can agree on, as someone mentioned earlier: romneycare. I'm in no way knocking the core ideals of: less government spending, sane tax legislation, less hurdles to start a business, more freedom over what to put in your body, etc. But that's not what any of the GOP brass is about, at least not anymore. It's fucked, but somehow tens of millions of people keep voting to fuck themselves, on basically all issues other than gun control and abortions. As a non-native, it's beyond baffling. But I guess Republican Jesus loves guns, female subservience and anarcho-capitalism.
  - ryandamm 10y ago
    As a native, it's baffling. I think the only explanation is the breakdown between input and output; when spin and now outright confabulation carry more weight than facts, people can easily be swayed to vote against their own self interest. Basically, Fox News created the Tea Party. Which in turn helped the rise of Breitbart and other, even more insane outlets. It's a howling echo chamber of lies, whose fuel is hate and ultimate outcome is more inequality... which is perhaps the real motive underneath it all. So that's a series of guesses, but yeah, still baffling.
- ryandamm 10y ago
  Yeah, that's true too. A global perspective on US politics is usually depressing.
FabHK 10y ago
Yes. A fine example is that Obamacare is basically Romneycare (the health care system Mitt Romney had instituted in, what, Massachusetts?). That is, the most progressive health insurance scheme that Democrats could politically push through is basically an old Republican scheme, and they now denounce it as some terrible socialist abomination (even though it is far less comprehensive than what nearly all other developed nations have, with better results).
croon 10y ago
This is spot on.

Silhouette 10y ago

The irony of your comment is that while you might well be right about the trends, by global political standards the two main parties in the US are barely distinguishable, except for a few clear dividing lines like guns or abortion.

croon 10y ago
I think that's the point. I'm going to make a derisive comparison: A parent trying to cooperate with their child (if they can't assert dominance) will in many cases resort to move closer to the childs position, like getting them a candy as a reward if they put their shoes on. It doesn't matter much if the parent is in the right, if there is no way to convince the other party. Then diplomacy on your part is the last resort. I'm not saying this is the right thing to do, but it does make logical sense. If the GOP relentlessly moves to the right, and refuses to be bipartisan on anything (even something as basic and frankly obvious as public healthcare), then you're forced to move to the best they can agree on, as someone mentioned earlier: romneycare. I'm in no way knocking the core ideals of: less government spending, sane tax legislation, less hurdles to start a business, more freedom over what to put in your body, etc. But that's not what any of the GOP brass is about, at least not anymore. It's fucked, but somehow tens of millions of people keep voting to fuck themselves, on basically all issues other than gun control and abortions. As a non-native, it's beyond baffling. But I guess Republican Jesus loves guns, female subservience and anarcho-capitalism.
- ryandamm 10y ago
  As a native, it's baffling. I think the only explanation is the breakdown between input and output; when spin and now outright confabulation carry more weight than facts, people can easily be swayed to vote against their own self interest. Basically, Fox News created the Tea Party. Which in turn helped the rise of Breitbart and other, even more insane outlets. It's a howling echo chamber of lies, whose fuel is hate and ultimate outcome is more inequality... which is perhaps the real motive underneath it all. So that's a series of guesses, but yeah, still baffling.
ryandamm 10y ago
Yeah, that's true too. A global perspective on US politics is usually depressing.

FabHK 10y ago

Yes. A fine example is that Obamacare is basically Romneycare (the health care system Mitt Romney had instituted in, what, Massachusetts?). That is, the most progressive health insurance scheme that Democrats could politically push through is basically an old Republican scheme, and they now denounce it as some terrible socialist abomination (even though it is far less comprehensive than what nearly all other developed nations have, with better results).

croon 10y ago

This is spot on.