Are political moderates and independents stupid?

[str8 outta Old Town]

The problem in the US is that party politics has been captured by deeply insignificant "moral" issues. The real base of politics is economic issues, issues like gay marriage are about as insignificant as it is possible to imagine, yet they take up hours and hours of debate, and people actually decide to vote against their own personal (and class) economic interests on the basis of them.

For the reasons behind this, you have to look to the American revivals of the 19th and 20th centuries, the availability of cheap land stopping the proper development of class politics, and the capture of Unions by corrupt machine politics in the early part of the 20th century.

[Isalie]

With 26% of the population on Medicare, 15% on food stamps, and the people drawing SS+ SSDI, that's what I'm talking about.

It seems to me that this is a symptom rather than the problem, "cutting spending" will accomplish what except starvation in the world's richest country?

Concerning the problem with people playing the system, as long as the "elite" is perceived as corrupt, I don't see how the ones trying to make ends meet are going to put much stock in playing by the rules.

[Elder Sister]

The problem in the US is that party politics has been captured by deeply insignificant "moral" issues. The real base of politics is economic issues, issues like gay marriage are about as insignificant as it is possible to imagine, yet they take up hours and hours of debate, and people actually decide to vote against their own personal (and class) economic interests on the basis of them.

The issue of gay marriage is not insignificant. It is as big a deal as segregation, and it's about prejudice and basic human rights being denied a group of people because of antiquated ideas that are no different than the sort of blind abuse that blacks suffered in the 60s.

I know that the economy is a big issue, but the issue of gay marriage is about right and wrong. I'm not gay but I do not want to live in a country where we do not allow someone to pursue the basic liberties granted to all Americans because of something that they were born with. Being gay is no different than being a female, or African American, or any other minority. And it's not something that has to be 'fixed' or ashamed about.

I think the sooner our society realizes this, the better off we'll be. We have punished and inflicted judgment on people for being gay and it's time to recognize that it's wrong, it's hateful, and it's evil.

I think our entitlement culture is hurting us but it drives me crazy that we are supposed to be the home of the free and the brave and we have forced an entire segment of the population to live a lie for years.

It's a huge deal.

[Inigima]

I couldn't agree more. Well said.

[Lord of Oop North]

Since when did moderation become equated with wishy-washiness? I hate indecisiveness as much as the most extreme extremist, but the two do not necessarily go hand in hand. You can lean towards the center, away from the farthest fringes, and still hold high convictions about issues that are important to you. This is false characterization by blowhards, a partisan tactic to demonize them, which only supports the thesis that extremists are idiotic.

[Inigima]

Since when did moderation become equated with wishy-washiness? I hate indecisiveness as much as the most extreme extremist, but the two do not necessarily go hand in hand. You can lean towards the center, away from the farthest fringes, and still hold high convictions about issues that are important to you. This is false characterization by blowhards.

I'm still waiting for you to tell me what it means to be a "moderate."

[Lord of Oop North]

I'm still waiting for you to tell me what it means to be a "moderate."

I thought it was obvious. You don't hold yourself to be far left or far right on the political spectrum. It is someone who is not partisan for the sake of being partisan, as are many who succumb to extreme tribal views. It is someone who is open to conciliation with political opponents, as opposed to blindly bickering, which accomplishes nothing. For example, I can hold conservative views without holding to all of the racist, sexist and religious hogwash that typically accompanies the far right of the spectrum. I can also hold left-wing views without singing Le Internationale, and subscribing to their newsletter.

The fact that you guys need to demonize moderates just goes to show you how partisan your country has really become.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

LooN,

I don't know if it is demonization of moderates as much as it is snotty self justification of hyper-partisanship.

;)

[Muttering Bill]

Now, 'independents', they're stupid. They're stuck dealing with the options others give them instead of voting in primaries to try to alter the choices because they won't pick a side; even though the vast majority always vote the same way.

If I'm registered as an 'independent' I can still vote in primaries. I'd get to choose what balot I want when I get there. Though I understand that this may not be the case in every state. Perhaps they do tend to vote one way or the other most of the time; they're just not closed off to the possibilty that the other side might turn up with someone better.

So if I'm unregistered, does that mean I should be wearing a helmet and a bib? Being uninformed or indifferent does not necessarily make one stupid.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

I dislike primaries. The fact that States are paying for internal party elections to determine who those parties will offer as candidates in general elections gives the mistaken impression of a "playoff" before the "finals". The only election that counts in the US system is the general election and the fact that the duopoly has a choke hold on who may and may not appear on the ballots in general elections is a huge problem in my opinion.

[Datepalm]

I thought it was obvious. You don't hold yourself to be far left or far right on the political spectrum. It is someone who is not partisan for the sake of being partisan, as are many who succumb to extreme tribal views. It is someone who is open to conciliation with political opponents, as opposed to blindly bickering, which accomplishes nothing. For example, I can hold conservative views without holding to all of the racist, sexist and religious hogwash that typically accompanies the far right of the spectrum. I can also hold left-wing views without singing Le Internationale, and subscribing to their newsletter

Thats incidental moderation though. Your (or the US, anyway) political system is laid out in such a way that you're here on some issues and there on some others, so you end up being a moderate despite holding strong opinions. If you moved someplace where the political compass was rotated a bit differently, you could easily find yourself lined up pretty closely with a given party, and end up voting for them election after election.

I think you're using an odd definition of extremism - i'm a self identifying extremist (and i'm not 16, even) but it's not because I identify particularly strongly with some party (I tend to be extremely pragmatic and utterly unloyal in terms of party support. I might actually campaign for labour this time round) but becuase my political/ideological views entail extreme change. I do not want a few things different, I want everything different. That makes me an extremist, not my favorite songs. You're a moderate, presumably, (to my way of looking at things) because you're by and large pretty satisfied with things and think we only need some fairly minor stuff to be different in the world. What actual party lines up with the most effective ways to achieve what you want at any given voting date is irrelevant to the general identification.

[sologdin]

though DP's definition has the virtue of being thoughtfully qualitative, rather than merely quantitative, the extreme/moderate distinction is irredeemably philistine.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

DP,

If someone would like things to be different but recognizes that such difference is highly unlikely to come about (because most disagree with that person's opinions and that person is unwilling to force change upon others) and as such they act in pragmatic fashion regarding political choices is that individual an "extremist" as you define the term?

[Datepalm]

Now you're introducing the optimism-pessimism scale and soon we get too many dimensions to graph easily.

[KARMAgrinder]

Are people who ask stupid questions stupid?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

DP,

Bah, all we need is the proper multidimensional configuration space to plot such a graph.

:P

[Elder Sister]

Are people who ask stupid questions stupid?

People who lick their guitar necks are stupid.

[KARMAgrinder]

People who lick their guitar necks are stupid.

This is true. Says a lot about the people paying the OP any mind.

[jurble]

wut, I don't lick any guitar necks

oh, the avatar

My stance on guitar-licking is that if an individual wishes to lick a guitar, it is his right, and any government restriction on guitar-licking is tyranny!

[Fragile Bird]

wut, I don't lick any guitar necks

oh, the avatar

My stance on guitar-licking is that if an individual wishes to lick a guitar, it is his right, and any government restriction on guitar-licking is tyranny!

So you are a libertarian too?