More evidence of asymmetric polarization

[TerryMathews]

It's definitely polarizing speech. The takeaway from this poll is not that only one side is polarized or that only one side engages in this sort of activity. It is that one side does so considerably more than the other.

If you're against it, you should be against it 100%. That one side does it less than the other shouldn't be relevant.

 

[fskimospy]

Name a Republican who voted for passage of PPACA.

Democrats compromised with other Democrats. There is no other way to describe the situation.

Again, you're supporting my position here. The poll isn't about Democrats and Republicans, it's about liberals vs. conservatives. Liberals compromised with moderates. The conservatives stood there and vowed undying, total opposition from the very beginning. Liberals gave up a big thing they wanted to achieve a larger overall goal that they had. Conservatives howled.

They did so to a degree that harmed the bill from their perspective even, as they certainly could have gotten some policy concessions in order to give the Democrats the bipartisan support they desperately wanted for it. Even today there are a bunch of things in the ACA that everyone agrees should be changed. Conservatives refuse to change those things because they believe that if they offer something less than unwavering opposition they will be viewed as treasonous.

 

[fskimospy]

If you're against it, you should be against it 100%. That one side does it less than the other shouldn't be relevant.

That's insane, of course it's relevant.

If one guy punches me in the face once and another guy punches me in the face twice, even though I am against face punching that doesn't mean that I'm equally mad at both people.

 

[nehalem256]

Again, you're supporting my position here. The poll isn't about Democrats and Republicans, it's about liberals vs. conservatives. Liberals compromised with moderates. The conservatives stood there and vowed undying, total opposition from the very beginning. Liberals gave up a big thing they wanted to achieve a larger overall goal that they had. Conservatives howled.

That is the key point. Conservatives weren't being offered anything they wanted.

Its like compromising on how many of your balls you let someone cut off. Obviously the person doing the cutting is going to be a lot more willing to agree to "only" cutting off one ball.

 

[TerryMathews]

That's insane, of course it's relevant.

If one guy punches me in the face once and another guy punches me in the face twice, even though I am against face punching that doesn't mean that I'm equally mad at both people.

Is one more guilty than the other?

 

[fskimospy]

That is the key point. Conservatives weren't being offered anything they wanted.

Its like compromising on how many of your balls you let someone cut off. Obviously the person doing the cutting is going to be a lot more willing to agree to "only" cutting off one ball.

Amazing how republicans being offered a bill based on the same idea they came up with in the past offers them 'nothing that they wanted'. Amazing how in your mind you can hold both this thought and the thought that republicans haven't radicalized.

You should read 1984. You've mastered the art of doublethink.

 

[TerryMathews]

The poll isn't about Democrats and Republicans, it's about liberals vs. conservatives.

This poll has been used by a number of posters in this thread to perpetuate ideas about Republicans.

Don't you think in a conversation where Democrat/Republican and Liberal/Conservative are being used interchangeably that highlighting that you are specifically talking about conservative Democrats is a relevant distinction?

Moonie: do conservative Democrats also have a brain defect?

 

[fskimospy]

Is one more guilty than the other?

Yes. Multiple punches are a worse offense, generally than a single punch.

Why would you want to treat two people equally when one engages in the behavior you don't like much more frequently than the other?

 

[TerryMathews]

Amazing how republicans being offered a bill based on the same idea they came up with in the past offers them 'nothing that they wanted'. Amazing how in your mind you can hold both this thought and the thought that republicans haven't radicalized.

You should read 1984. You've mastered the art of doublethink.

We've been through this. Maybe if the Democrats had actually offered the Chaffey bill instead of changing it substantially the Republicans would've voted for it? We will never know.

Also, want to point out: nehalem was talking about conservatives, not Republicans. I understand how you could've made that mistake however.

 

[PokerGuy]

What's interesting is that you guys don't seem to see just how totally you are projecting onto those you view as your political opponents. From making the stimulus have a huge tax cut component, to adopting what was essentially a Republican plan for health care, to adopting what was essentially a Republican plan to combat climate change, to offering enormous spending cuts in exchange for revenue increases, etc, etc, there have been tons of efforts by the Democrats to compromise.

Yeah, sure. So I say "jump off the cliff", you say "no", then I say "ok, compromise, jump slowly". That's not compromise.

Regardless, the point is that these kinds of polls just reflect how people see themselves, it doesn't say anything about how they actually act. The hateful intolerant "tolerant" left is a prime example. I'm sure if polled they'll claim to be very tolerant of others and other views, but in practice they are hateful and intolerant of anything they disagree with.

You don't need to be a rocket scientist to see how the parties differ on this, just go look at their campaign ads. When liberals campaign for things they talk about what they can accomplish for people or what programs they want to implement. Conservatives are far more likely to talk about how they will stick to their guns, how they are true conservatives, etc. Not wavering is simply seen as a far more desirable trait on the right.

haha, so blinded by ideology as usual. The libs campaign the same way as the righties -- there is very little difference, lies and half truths all around.

 

[fskimospy]

We've been through this. Maybe if the Democrats had actually offered the Chaffey bill instead of changing it substantially the Republicans would've voted for it? We will never know.

Why didn't the republicans offer that? Why didn't the present amendments to change it to that?

We both know why.

 

[TerryMathews]

Yes. Multiple punches are a worse offense, generally than a single punch.

Why would you want to treat two people equally when one engages in the behavior you don't like much more frequently than the other?

Because they both need to stop?

 

[TerryMathews]

Why didn't the republicans offer that? Why didn't the present amendments to change it to that?

We both know why.

Because they weren't in control of the House.

 

[fskimospy]

Yeah, sure. So I say "jump off the cliff", you say "no", then I say "ok, compromise, jump slowly". That's not compromise.

Regardless, the point is that these kinds of polls just reflect how people see themselves, it doesn't say anything about how they actually act. The hateful intolerant "tolerant" left is a prime example. I'm sure if polled they'll claim to be very tolerant of others and other views, but in practice they are hateful and intolerant of anything they disagree with.

haha, so blinded by ideology as usual. The libs campaign the same way as the righties -- there is very little difference, lies and half truths all around.

You illustrate my points unintentionally better than I ever could.

 

[TerryMathews]

I've never understood the liberal fetish of trying to give away credit for "President Obama's crowning achievement."

Is it because he's Black?

 

[fskimospy]

Because they weren't in control of the House.

You don't need to control the house to offer amendments or propose bills.

 

[TerryMathews]

You don't need to control the house to offer amendments or propose bills.

No but why jump in front of a train you know you can't stop?

 

[PokerGuy]

You illustrate my points unintentionally better than I ever could.

Of course I do. I'm right, which in your mind illustrates your wrong conclusions Teamwork! :thumbsup:

 

[fskimospy]

I've never understood the liberal fetish of trying to give away credit for "President Obama's crowning achievement."

Is it because he's Black?

Getting effective health reform passed was his signature achievement. I don't care who wrote it.

 

[TerryMathews]

I don't care who wrote it.

 

[fskimospy]

/facepalm

Who wrote it is relevant when discussing ideology and compromise. It is not relevant for "taking credit", which is what your post was about.

 

[TerryMathews]

/facepalm

Who wrote it is relevant when discussing ideology and compromise. It is not relevant for "taking credit", which is what your post was about.

Well then just damn those racist conservative Democrats.

 

[Jhhnn]

War on women

Remember, something doesn't have to be false to be polarizing.

Quite remarkable- an admission much larger than you understand. If the truth is polarizing, that means one side believes in lies, which are really the cause of polarization.

How did they come to believe?

In a reconstituted Iraqi nuclear program, for example? Iraqi WMD's & "links" to Al Qaeda?

Tax breaks for "job creators" create jobs?

Unemployment isn't a function of offshoring & automation?

"Anchor babies" aren't really Constitutionally protected American citizens?

Christians are persecuted in this country?

I could go on, but I think it's not the truth that's polarizing but rather the opposite-emotionally appealing lies are polarizing. Their existence is not accidental. Their existence is purposeful.

 

[justoh]

Name a Republican who voted for passage of PPACA.

Democrats compromised with other Democrats. There is no other way to describe the situation.

There's only one person contorting here: the one trying to lay PPACA at the feet of the Republicans.

L2r

 

[TerryMathews]

L2r

stfu