More evidence of asymmetric polarization

[PokerGuy]

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.

A lie can be polarizing just as the truth can be. In fact, truth has nothing to do with polarization.

 

[Moonbeam]

A lie can be polarizing just as the truth can be. In fact, truth has nothing to do with polarization.

You don't understand the situation because you don't know what the truth is. For those who don 't know truth polarizing and lies bring comfort. For those who know he truth lies may be poLarizing, but for the wise, they will make them laugh.

 

[cubby1223]

http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/w...servatives-are-driving-partisan-rancor-in-dc/

Take the author's analysis or ignore it, I thought this just packaged interesting findings from a recent Pew poll. It basically finds that while both parties dislike and distrust their political opponents, this is considerably more true for conservatives than liberals. It also shows that conservatives are more likely to sequester themselves in situations where they are insulated from disagreement, and that they overwhelmingly reject compromise as a way to achieve their goals.

This is highly disturbing information. How can you deal with a group that thinks you are evil, won't listen to contrary information, and wouldn't want to compromise even if they did?

Are you serious?

Consistent liberals don't have an unfavorable view of Republicans? Every liberal I know has a passionate hatred of Republicans. Some friends of mine even held a party to celebrate Ronald Reagan's death.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vty7ESzusdY

Seriously? What the hell is this chart supposed to say? MSNBC is vicious in their hatred of Republicans and conservatives. More conservatives watch Fox News than liberals watch MSNBC. How exactly do you quantify that in terms of polarization conclusions? MSNBC is out of touch with many liberals. It doesn't do anything demonstrative to suggest conservatives are more polarizing. It simply shows that MSNBC doesn't present content appealing to many liberals. I want to know who the 8% of liberals who favor Fox News are.

This is just funny When you are right you don't have to compromise!

When Democrats and Republicans can't reach consensus on the proper role of government in healthcare, that's partisan polarization. But when Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) says that "Obamacare is going to destroy everything we know as a nation," that's partisan warfare.

It's all a matter of perspective. If you believe you are right it you do not see your position as warfare. When you believe the other person is wrong then you see his position as warfare. It works for all issues not just Obamacare, tax levels, spending levels, entitlement levels.



Ah well. This thread did it's job. The two sides have both seen the errors in their ways and have come to an understanding with each other.

Er, no, one side declared they are right and that the other side is the wrong, unreasonable people who must be forced to change in order to move this country forward.

Tomorrow will bring us the same day as yesterday. Life moves forward as if this thread was never created

 

[fskimospy]

Are you serious?

Yes?

Consistent liberals don't have an unfavorable view of Republicans? Every liberal I know has a passionate hatred of Republicans. Some friends of mine even held a party to celebrate Ronald Reagan's death.

Did you read the chart? 53% of consistent liberals have "very unfavorable" views of Republicans. That's a lot! By contrast however, 72% of consistent conservatives have the same view about Democrats. That's a lot more.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vty7ESzusdY

Why are you trying to use anecdotal evidence against scientific polling? This is a big research no-no.

Seriously? What the hell is this chart supposed to say? MSNBC is vicious in their hatred of Republicans and conservatives. More conservatives watch Fox News than liberals watch MSNBC. How exactly do you quantify that in terms of polarization conclusions? MSNBC is out of touch with many liberals. It doesn't do anything demonstrative to suggest conservatives are more polarizing. It simply shows that MSNBC doesn't present content appealing to many liberals. I want to know who the 8% of liberals who favor Fox News are.

Both networks are highly partisan news operations that put out what basically amounts to propaganda. Conservatives seem to like their brand of propaganda a lot more than liberals do.

This is just funny When you are right you don't have to compromise!

It's all a matter of perspective. If you believe you are right it you do not see your position as warfare. When you believe the other person is wrong then you see his position as warfare.

You're kind of proving this thread's point.

Ah well. This thread did it's job. The two sides have both seen the errors in their ways and have come to an understanding with each other.

Er, no, one side declared they are right and that the other side is the wrong, unreasonable people.

Tomorrow will bring us the same day as yesterday. Life moves forward as if this thread was never created

This is simply evidence that the two sides are not equally unreasonable, using self reported data from people. It's certainly something to think about, no?

 

[justoh]

Are you serious?

Consistent liberals don't have an unfavorable view of Republicans? Every liberal I know has a passionate hatred of Republicans. Some friends of mine even held a party to celebrate Ronald Reagan's death.

Maybe "some friends of yours" isn't as compelling of a statistic? Maybe 53% of consistent liberals isn't all of them?

 

[BUnit1701]

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.

You really need to get a grasp on reality. Heritage is NOT the Republican party or the official mouthpiece of conservatism everywhere. They are a conservative leaning think-tank, nothing more.

 

[cubby1223]

The reality is that conservatives compromise a shit-ton in their lives.

My basic understanding of conservative versus liberal has developed into this - conservatives believe it is the job of the individual to compromise and make sacrifices to fit in and succeed in society, while liberals believe it is the job of society to compromise and make sacrifices and conform to the specific desires of individuals.

Here is the latest example of the uncompromising liberal:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2387701

Is it the liberal who doesn't want to compromise her hair, makeup, and piercings? Or is it society who is unwilling to compromise? Problem is society is largely an unmeasurable concept, it is just a large group of individuals each acting according to their own free will, so how do you make quantifiable judgments as to the level of compromise on each individual's part?

To measure who is more compromising than another, you must first make a declaration of what is right and what is wrong, then make a declaration of where each person begins, and who is more willing to move themselves closer to the right. For most conservatives, their positions are already a position of compromise. And the declaration of what is right versus wrong is such a relative concept it just begs for partisan bias.

 

[piasabird]

Compromise means one thing to people with common sense and a different thing to political parties. I keep seeing it in politics meaning the right must compromise with the left, but I don't see much compromise from the Democratic Party. Lately it is the House considering bills from the Senate, but the Senate only wants to pass bills from the democrats. That is not compromise. That my friend is the president saying "My way or the highway!"

 

[ivwshane]

The reality is that conservatives compromise a shit-ton in their lives.

My basic understanding of conservative versus liberal has developed into this - conservatives believe it is the job of the individual to compromise and make sacrifices to fit in and succeed in society, while liberals believe it is the job of society to compromise and make sacrifices and conform to the specific desires of individuals.

Here is the latest example of the uncompromising liberal:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2387701

Is it the liberal who doesn't want to compromise her hair, makeup, and piercings? Or is it society who is unwilling to compromise? Problem is society is largely an unmeasurable concept, it is just a large group of individuals each acting according to their own free will, so how do you make quantifiable judgments as to the level of compromise on each individual's part?

To measure who is more compromising than another, you must first make a declaration of what is right and what is wrong, then make a declaration of where each person begins, and who is more willing to move themselves closer to the right. For most conservatives, their positions are already a position of compromise. And the declaration of what is right versus wrong is such a relative concept it just begs for partisan bias.

So conservatives get to say what's right and wrong? Where is the compromise in that? How does your view deal with republican opposition to gay marriage and anti abortion laws?

I thought the right was for individual freedom and liberty, now you are saying they aren't.

Maybe you should talk to the other righties and get your priorities and principals straightened out before declaring what conservatives are for and against

 

[justoh]

It's not measuring who is more likely to compromise among the pool of those being polled.

It's measuring who supports their elected officials making compromises.

You can't just say that liberals don't understand what the word means, or that they do and it means something entirely different to what conservatives think it means. Plus this would also require them knowing the minds of the elected officials and what they think the word means.

 

[ivwshane]

Compromise means one thing to people with common sense and a different thing to political parties. I keep seeing it in politics meaning the right must compromise with the left, but I don't see much compromise from the Democratic Party. Lately it is the House considering bills from the Senate, but the Senate only wants to pass bills from the democrats. That is not compromise. That my friend is the president saying "My way or the highway!"

You mean like not supporting a student loan reform bill because it's not paid for and then still not supporting it because it's paid for via a closure in tax loopholes?

Or do you mean things like "jobs" bills that are nothing more than deregulation bills that don't add actual jobs?

If you keep seeing no compromise from the left then maybe you need to go somewhere else to get a new perspective

 

[ivwshane]

You really need to get a grasp on reality. Heritage is NOT the Republican party or the official mouthpiece of conservatism everywhere. They are a conservative leaning think-tank, nothing more.

Well if a think tank doesn't represent all republicans then you might want to tell the poster below you that some random person doesn't represent all liberals/democrats.

 

[michal1980]

You mean like not supporting a student loan reform bill because it's not paid for and then still not supporting it because it's paid for via a closure in tax loopholes?

Or do you mean things like "jobs" bills that are nothing more than deregulation bills that don't add actual jobs?

If you keep seeing no compromise from the left then maybe you need to go somewhere else to get a new perspective

Like compromising on the 2nd amendment, where the left only wants more restrictions. The compromise is just how much they restrict your rights.

ie, not compromising at all.

 

[ivwshane]

Like compromising on the 2nd amendment, where the left only wants more restrictions. The compromise is just how much they restrict your rights.

ie, not compromising at all.

Not true at all! A background check isn't restricting your rights one single bit!

Thanks for another example though!

 

[Oldgamer]

They are not in a bubble as an exercise of conscious will, but because of Stockholm syndrome. Conformity to group think, with all the moral inclinations of group loyalty, has in the past, under conditions of threat, helped humanity to survive. This only becomes a brain defect when there is no external threat except one they create by projection.

LOL, true..

 

[Cozarkian]

You mean like not supporting a student loan reform bill because it's not paid for and then still not supporting it because it's paid for via a closure in tax loopholes?

How is it a compromise to demand something else you want instead of offering something the other person wants? Imagine this conversation:

Wife: Let's go to dinner and a movie.
Husband: It's too expensive, we need to cut our expenses and save if we are going to do that.
Wife: Okay, let's compromise. We'll cancel your tee time, sell your golf clubs and use that to pay for going to dinner and a movie.

Now, compare that to this response:

Wife: Okay, let's compromise. I'll cancel the massage I had scheduled during your golf game, we'll use the money to pay for dinner and a movie tonight and to buy some massage oil so tomorrow night we can give each other massages and do whatever else you want to do.

 

[michal1980]

Not true at all! A background check isn't restricting your rights one single bit!

Thanks for another example though!

see you are so blind that you dont even know what compromise is.

What are you willing to give up for these background checks?

 

[ivwshane]

How is it a compromise to demand something else you want instead of offering something the other person wants? Imagine this conversation:

Wife: Let's go to dinner and a movie.
Husband: It's too expensive, we need to cut our expenses and save if we are going to do that.
Wife: Okay, let's compromise. We'll cancel your tee time, sell your golf clubs and use that to pay for going to dinner and a movie.

Now, compare that to this response:

Wife: Okay, let's compromise. I'll cancel the massage I had scheduled during your golf game, we'll use the money to pay for dinner and a movie tonight and to buy some massage oil so tomorrow night we can give each other massages and do whatever else you want to do.

So you don't understand how a student loan reform bill that had bipartisan support and has every reason to be passed on its own with no strings attached, failed because it wasn't paid for in a way that was acceptable to republicans not a compromise?

Let's ignore the fact tht republicans have no problem with the government losing out on money because of tax loopholes for the rich and yet are complaining about replacing lost revenue from loans the government would be making with high interest rates on said loans. I guess because students with student debt aren't rich yet the republicans couldn't give a fuck about them until they are rich.

 

[lotus503]

Ignoring it....partisan horse shit. The sooner people realize one party is no better than the other the sooner this country will improve.

bingo

 

[ivwshane]

it is.

Since you've have been continuously proven to know shit about how this country works, its laws, the constitution, and a whole host of other topics, please feel free to explain how a 5 minute background check infringes on your rights.

I await your ignorant reply!

 

[Paul98]

The problem is the lack of good faith negotiation and compromise. You have one side asking for something, when the other side comes up with a plan that includes that item. They then will say you have to give them something else.

It seems like for many of the republicans it's simply wait to see what the other side says and stand against it.

 

[Cozarkian]

So you don't understand how a student loan reform bill that had bipartisan support and has every reason to be passed on its own with no strings attached, failed because it wasn't paid for in a way that was acceptable to republicans not a compromise?

Okay, let's take your premise that it had bipartisan support. That gives us this:

Wife: Let's go to dinner and a movie.
Husband: That sounds like a great idea, but I don't think we can afford it.
Wife: Let's just put it on the credit card and worry about it later.
Husband: That's really not a good idea, let's find a compromise to pay for it.

Now, compare:

Wife (non-compromise): Okay, cancel your tee time and sell your golf clubs to pay for it.

Wife (compromise): Okay, why don't you just play 9 holes of golf this weekend instead of 18, and I'll get a facial instead of a full massage. That way we both sacrifice.

I guess because students with student debt aren't rich yet the republicans couldn't give a fuck about them until they are rich.

Well, if that's the case, then it wasn't really a bipartisan bill, was it? That means my first scenario should apply and again, Democrats failed to compromise.

 

[TerryMathews]

Not true at all! A background check isn't restricting your rights one single bit!

Thanks for another example though!

Let me know when they propose one OK?

Mandatory FFL transfers isn't "improved background checks" its a poll tax for guns.

 

[nehalem256]

Did you read the chart? 53% of consistent liberals have "very unfavorable" views of Republicans. That's a lot! By contrast however, 72% of consistent conservatives have the same view about Democrats. That's a lot more.

So what you are saying is that 47% of consistent liberals hold a "not unfavorable" view of the party according to them stands for homophobia, racism, misogyny, and the 1%...

What about that doesn't make sense?

 

[fskimospy]

So what you are saying is that 47% of consistent liberals hold a "not unfavorable" view of the party according to them stands for homophobia, racism, misogyny, and the 1%...

What about that doesn't make sense?

1. The chart is about those who hold a 'very unfavorable' view. Not holding a very unfavorable view is not equal to holding a 'not unfavorable' view. This is basic English.

2. There is nothing in the study that shows those individuals hold the beliefs you are attributing to them.

Dumbass.