3 ms·

It's strange that you say "why on earth would I change my party affiliation based on the actions of two members" as if those two members weren't the two highest

It's strange that you say "why on earth would I change my party affiliation based on the actions of two members" as if those two members weren't the two highest elected members of the state party. It's like if the CEO and Chairman of the board of a corporation were embezzling funds and someone replied "Why would I change my opinion of a company based on two random employees?" I think you did that because it's pretty obvious why someone might sour on an organization whose highest leaders continued in a pattern of bad behavior. In fact, quite the opposite of your claim here, I think it would be common sense to change your opinion on an organization based on a pattern of misbehavior by its top leaders. The reality of modern American politics, though, as I think you demonstrate as do most people, is that Negative Partisanship is the only factor at all that matters. The people on "your team" can do anything at all, because "the other team" is worse. This is the sentiment that drives all American politics at the state and federal level.

froggertoaster 5y ago
> The reality of modern American politics, though, as I think you demonstrate as do most people, is that Negative Partisanship is the only factor at all that matters. The people on "your team" can do anything at all, because "the other team" is worse. This is the sentiment that drives all American politics at the state and federal level. Completely and utterly wrong assumption about me on your part. Both parties suck. There is a lesser evil, and that's the evil I unfortunately subscribe to. Wish there was a better way, but there isn't, so I'm stuck with what I got.
- celticninja 5y ago
  In part though that is because you are looking on the micro level. This Republican facing no consequences enables others to act the same, then when it is so widespread that it infects the entire party it becomes acceptable for all of the party. Now they know they can get away with it and the electorate doesnt punish them. Sounds like you have swallowed their propaganda entirely if you think they are bad but they have convinced you the other guy is worse.
  - justin66 5y ago
    > Sounds like you have swallowed their propaganda entirely if you think they are bad but they have convinced you the other guy is worse. In this case, it was not a guy but a woman running against Parsons. (Wow, those are some downvotes! People reacted to this comment like a Missouri voter reacts to a female gubernatorial candidate.)
  - dgfitz 5y ago
    > This Republican facing no consequences enables others to act the same, then when it is so widespread that it infects the entire party it becomes acceptable for all of the party. I'm sure we could compile a list of elected officials across a spectrum of political parties where no consequences are faced (for an action, in-action, decision, cover-up, etc) when they may be warranted. I don't think this is a valid argument.
- criley2 5y ago
  >Completely and utterly wrong assumption about me on your part. Is it? >There is a lesser evil, and that's the evil I unfortunately subscribe to. Wish there was a better way, but there isn't, so I'm stuck with what I got. So, in a sense, by subscribing to a lesser of two evils idea, you're doing the same thing as "the other team is worse" (the thing I said). It is what it is, negative partisanship does drive everything, and the first step to better politics is admitting we have a problem.
seejayjordan 5y ago
chad_strategic 5y ago
> is that Negative Partisanship is the only factor at all that matter I couldn't have said it any better. It's all a political theater. (both sides) Negative Partisanship, drives anger and fear. Fear and anger drive donations and votes. Fear and anger drive views/clicks, news outlets and the media, everybody wins! Wash, rinse, repeat, circa 1776!
- rootusrootus 5y ago
  > both sides You literally just made a both sides argument. I'm not a fan of either party, but I'm also not a supporter of the idea that both sides are both equally bad. Only one side stormed the Capitol in an explicit attempt to reverse en election result they did not like, and persists to this day in insisting that they actually won. Yes, both sides have some problems, both say and do super annoying things, but 'both sides' is just giving the Republican Party an out, where instead we should hold them to account for trying to tip over the table and destroy our democracy.
violiner 5y ago
I, for one, have embraced my negative partisanship. I'm not a Democrat. I'm an anti-Republican.

froggertoaster 5y ago

> The reality of modern American politics, though, as I think you demonstrate as do most people, is that Negative Partisanship is the only factor at all that matters. The people on "your team" can do anything at all, because "the other team" is worse. This is the sentiment that drives all American politics at the state and federal level. Completely and utterly wrong assumption about me on your part. Both parties suck. There is a lesser evil, and that's the evil I unfortunately subscribe to. Wish there was a better way, but there isn't, so I'm stuck with what I got.

celticninja 5y ago
In part though that is because you are looking on the micro level. This Republican facing no consequences enables others to act the same, then when it is so widespread that it infects the entire party it becomes acceptable for all of the party. Now they know they can get away with it and the electorate doesnt punish them. Sounds like you have swallowed their propaganda entirely if you think they are bad but they have convinced you the other guy is worse.
- justin66 5y ago
  > Sounds like you have swallowed their propaganda entirely if you think they are bad but they have convinced you the other guy is worse. In this case, it was not a guy but a woman running against Parsons. (Wow, those are some downvotes! People reacted to this comment like a Missouri voter reacts to a female gubernatorial candidate.)
- dgfitz 5y ago
  > This Republican facing no consequences enables others to act the same, then when it is so widespread that it infects the entire party it becomes acceptable for all of the party. I'm sure we could compile a list of elected officials across a spectrum of political parties where no consequences are faced (for an action, in-action, decision, cover-up, etc) when they may be warranted. I don't think this is a valid argument.
criley2 5y ago
>Completely and utterly wrong assumption about me on your part. Is it? >There is a lesser evil, and that's the evil I unfortunately subscribe to. Wish there was a better way, but there isn't, so I'm stuck with what I got. So, in a sense, by subscribing to a lesser of two evils idea, you're doing the same thing as "the other team is worse" (the thing I said). It is what it is, negative partisanship does drive everything, and the first step to better politics is admitting we have a problem.

seejayjordan 5y ago

chad_strategic 5y ago

> is that Negative Partisanship is the only factor at all that matter I couldn't have said it any better. It's all a political theater. (both sides) Negative Partisanship, drives anger and fear. Fear and anger drive donations and votes. Fear and anger drive views/clicks, news outlets and the media, everybody wins! Wash, rinse, repeat, circa 1776!

rootusrootus 5y ago
> both sides You literally just made a both sides argument. I'm not a fan of either party, but I'm also not a supporter of the idea that both sides are both equally bad. Only one side stormed the Capitol in an explicit attempt to reverse en election result they did not like, and persists to this day in insisting that they actually won. Yes, both sides have some problems, both say and do super annoying things, but 'both sides' is just giving the Republican Party an out, where instead we should hold them to account for trying to tip over the table and destroy our democracy.

violiner 5y ago

I, for one, have embraced my negative partisanship. I'm not a Democrat. I'm an anti-Republican.