Modern Political Polarization and what to do about it.

Despite the polarization, the following big things still got done:
-War in Aghanistan
-War in Iraq
-TARP and other bailouts
-Affordable Care Act
-Medicare Part D
-Bush tax cuts
-The $787 billion stimulus package
-And maybe entitlement reform soon

Depending on which side of the aisle you're on, some of those were not very good for the country. Perhaps more polarization is needed...

 

I would love to have a party that is fiscally conservative but not crazy like the tea party nuts and socially liberal.

 

we have them. these days they're called democrats

 

The ACA and the stimulus package were fiscally conservative?

 

It saved the country from completely collapsing so yes, I do believe they were fiscally conservative actions to take.

And by all nominal studies they should have been bigger.

 

So if you're fiscally liberal you wanted to take actions that didn't save the country from completely collapsing?

 

trick question

 

I know what you mean though, the Democrats are not that fiscally liberal. I wouldn't call the Republicans fiscally conservative either, considering how much W spent.

I think both parties spend as much as they can get away with. The Republicans just add a bunch of tax cuts on top of it. The Dems try to raise taxes, but usually fail.

At least all that was true before this whole debt default thing.

 

Pretty much, both parties spend as much as they can get away with, on different priorities. Republicans loves wars and defense, national security. Democrats on domestic programs. Republicans also like to cut tax while they increase spending. When we finally have a fake surplus, we have to have a tax cut and not pay down the debt. Neither party want to address the debt issue if they can help it until this year. Now you have a bunch of tea party nuts who want to kill the country to heal it.

 

The United States is not a business, Mr. Boehner.

 

Maybe, in the same way that Mein Kampf was a shorter version of the Old Testament.

 

Too bad Nelson Rockefeller wanted to get laid, and then hell didn't freeze over for the next 45 years.

 

First you have to provide candidates worth voting for.

 

Hate to say this, but I think the extreme polarization is due to Obama being black (half = whole in this case). Once Obama is out next year or after second term, I think stuff will start going back to "normal". Racism still exists but it takes many covers these days. Zakaria said that the polarization is due to tea party. Well I say the tea party was formed (subconsciously) due to the last remnants of racism. It ain't the same racism that was caused by hatred. This surge is more due to fear of unknown/change.

The underlying issue that most refuse to accept is that this fear is really caused by the insane income disparity in US. Median household income is falling rapidly and unemployment was over-inflated for last 6 years. People are taking their anger of this out on superficial issues like immigration, religion, gays, minorities, and abortion.

 

You obviously weren't paying attention during the Clinton years. It goes back to "normal" when there's a Republican in the WH and it's "not normal" when there's a Dem in the WH.

 

It's a negative feedback loop. The fewer voters that decide an election, the more extreme the candidates, the more extremem the candidate, the fewer voters. Our current politicians aren't going to break the cycle. Only with large numbers of people voting will things change appreciably.

 

I am not sure why only 50-60% of the people vote, it doesn't take that much effort.

 

Part of it is that there is a vested interest on behalf of some folks to keep the vote totals down. Anytime you hear someone in the media say "the parties are the same" it means they are either delusional or trying to get voters to think that way so they don't care to vote. Anytime you hear someone say "my vote doesn't matter" that means they have bought into that mindset and are doing exactly what the powerful people want them to do (or in this case, not do). Anytime you see initiatives that would make it easier to vote opposed, that's an indication that those folks do not want it easier to vote. (There's a reason we have elections on a workday instead of the weekend.) Anytime you hear someone opposing voter initiatives by complaining about potential fraud, you know that person is in favor of keeping the vote totals low.

Think about what it would do to DC is all of a sudden the interest groups had their influence cut in half or more due to people just voting?