Ziay!

themayorbynight

I'm noticing that political issues in America are often divisive and polorizing, with politians and parties demanding an all-or-nothing view of allegiance. George W. Bush is an excellent example (and no, this is not anti-Bush, I'm just using him because it seems everyone has an opinion). Reading the posts on various topics, people seem to be either totally 'pro' Bush or 'anti' Bush. Did I miss the memo that it was suddenly okay for a vote for a president to mean unquestioned support of everything he does? And since when has disagreement over a particular issue meant that you disagree with everything he does? Frankly, I'm disturbed by the angry tone of the rhetoric. I know good friends who no longer speak after the recent election because one is a 'liberal' and the other 'conservative'. And when did it become okay to be one or the other? Is it no longer possible to be a fiscal 'conservative', military 'liberal' and social issues 'moderate'? I just wanted to hear your thoughts.
Wow. Just from the few responces so far, it's small wonder the American electorate has become so apathetic. Apparently people can't even set aside their polar views in the hypothetical. I give up, America
So would someone who is pro-choise, voted for Bush, supported President Clinton, agrees with the war in Afghanistan, disagrees with the war in Iraq, wants military action on Iran, believes in a uniform tax code, thinks Mexican immigration laws should be relaxed, has staunchy conservative fiscal beliefs, is against Gay-marriage but supports 'civil unions' and registers as Independent be a 'Conservative' or 'Liberal'?... Why does everyone instist on painting people one way or the other when clearly no one is really that simple.

bennymonkey2001

I agree about the Lincoln analogy aside from two distinct and large differences, what Lincoln did was wrong, but he admitted it was wrong and did not deny it. Lincoln had to break the constitution to keep the country together. I contest that I feel Bush is doing what he feels is right, but his decisions to break the constitution have only divided the US further and he claims that it is legally justified. I agree with the users that the media does hinder politics, the use of technology has experts to dictate limited options of thinking, as opposed to encouraging discourse and infinite "truths". It seems to me that the concept of individual has been replaced by the concept of image. The media along with some help has made our private lives public, and our creativity is developed privately and used to better the public with different ideas, cultures and options. Since there is a lack of privacy there is no creativity and we have turned ourselves into walking symbols without meaning physically and intellectually, the result is that contribution to the public is transfered into who can scream the loudest and win, further deepening the divisive atmosphere. This signals a severe lack of content and logic, only passions alone that sweep through an empty society "like a whale through a net". -B Franklin

CitH

your honor, yes i agree with most of what you say, the problem is that most are using there political parties as the divide, this is why i have always admired John McCain he fights for his constituents,even when it goes against the parties
policy, he is his own man for the people of arizona,
although i may not agree with him all the time he is my idea of what a politician should be. we should vote for the man not the party.i think he would have made a good president,for the people not the party.

subgenius

I lean to the right however it is not cut and dry. Frankly I think if Bush is the best the republicans can come up with and Kerry is the best the democrats can come up with then maby we are in trouble. I don't hate Bush by no means, in fact if you read my answers you will find that I spend alot of time defending him. I think it is kinda like at work how everybody complains about the boss and thinks they can do a better job. Here is my attempt to answer your question; It basically comes down to democrat or republican when you vote. So even if you don't agree with everything one or the other is doing you have to figure what is the most important for you and support that. For instance I am passionatly against gun control and abortion so voting for a democrat is probably not going to happen, unless the republcans were pro something that I felt even more passion for. My next point is people who agree with somethings and not others usually feel so strongly about that one thing that it clouds there judgment on everything else. For example anti-war liberals who think the president is violating our civil liberties by tapping phones and emails. They can't get over the fact that they hate the war and so there for they hate Bush and any and everything he says or does. They fail to realize the lengths past presidents have gone to during a time of war. Lincoln had a man who was running for office in the north deported and shipped to the south. Think about the violation there. Prevented the process of a free election. He is widly reguarded as one of the best Presidents of all time. So as I sit here knowing that my dislike of liberals is strongly polerized to the right I have to say it is because I feel so strongly about some core issues.

racingcowboy58

Just a quick thought, but I honestly believe the influence of the electronic media promugates this division. It makes for good press. It's emotionally charged and keeps you watching.

palaguin

It's more of a battle between "traditional" morality versus "hippie" (for lack of a better term) morality. Conservatives of most types flock to the traditional, while liberals flock to the "hippie".

Curious1

I voted for bush but have been very dissapointed and vocal about his border policies, higher taxes etc. We should use the minds that God gave us and not just agree or disagree with someone because of their party. I do agree with the other answer that the media makes matters worse.

holbright

Politics goes in cycles. I think part of the reason we're so divided now is because Clinton was so popular, and the 1990's were so prosperous for everybody.

Today, Bush has taken the country much farther to the right than many Republicans even want to go.

I believe you'll see a backlash around 2008, and the trend will begin to reverse itself.