Why are people so attached to their party?

[griz]

Fairly straight forward question. I see lots of comments such as "I’ll hold my nose and vote for my party’s candidate, because everybody in the other party is pond scum." The focus seems to be for your "side" to win, not any real overriding principle.

I’ll pick on one of our ex-presidents as an example, but it could easily go the other way. This candidate was accused of sexual harassment, assault, and admitted to affairs with employees. Yet some people voted for him because the Democrats were supportive of "protecting women". I may be reading this wrong but it seems to me a clear case of a party line vote rather than an issue oriented vote.

Do you really believe that the system has so much inertia that the only way to change is to vote Republicrate and hope for change from within? Are politics so dirty that the only people that can get elected require nose clips just to be around them?

Now I will acknowledge that I see the two parties as more alike than different, and I view this question as less Republican/ Democrat than two-party-system/voting-on-issues. So do you think we are destined to gravitate to a two party system (no matter which parties they are) or will we ever see votes for what we want?

 

[White Horseradish]

I think that's because the two parties do their damnedest to convince people that there is no other option.

 

[braindead0]

I think that's because the two parties do their damnedest to convince people that there is no other option.

I'll second that, and the funniest thing is they do it without ever saying much at all, just a bunch of euphemisms "create jobs", "decrease crime"... blah blah blah. They don't say how.. or why.. just tell people what they want to hear...

 

[Chipperman]

I'll vote GW for Pres, and Libertarian for most others

 

[cuchulainn]

There were a lot of sugar-based drinks spilled, and, well, they make the dance floor very sticky.

 

[Nazirite]

It might be genetic, most children ( with the exception of a few ) vote for the same party as their parents.

More than likely it’s based on personal experiences. It’s been my experience that people tend to stick with the same party throughout their entire lives. Unless they have an epiphany.

 

[rick_reno]

I was - having voted a straight Republican ticket since Nixon first ran - until this year. Herr Shrub has convinced to vote Libertarian. The Patriot Act, his immigration proposal, his verbal support for the AWB and his wild deficit spending have me believing there is so little difference between this "Republican" and his Democratic challengers that it doesn't make difference which one is in the White House. I don't know what Shrub is, but he isn't a Republican.

 

[Ginger]

I don't know if most people really are that attached to "their" party. In talking with people I know, there are several that are switching sides this time. All of them Left to Right (or Libertarian) but that's probably more a reflection of the kind of people I hang out with.

That said, I still hear a lot of the "anybody but Bush" talk at work. I'd rather vote issues than parties so Bush will get my vote this time (he didn't last time) but then I'm a Libertarian.

 

[Sistema1927]

Let's see, there are two political parties, and only two, that have a chance of having their candidate in the White House.

On the one hand, there is the party that supports abortion on demand without parental notfication, higher taxes, wealth redistribution, national government heathcare, more regulation, gun control, higher taxes (worth stating again), peace at any cost, cutbacks to the military, and higher taxes.

On the other hand, there is the Republican Party, which, while not perfect, and while it needs to return to its core values (it is nice to work from within as part of the RLC), is officially on the other side of all the issues listed above.

Hmmm, which one will I chose?

 

[spartacus2002]

For most people it's not a political affiliation, it's a religion.

 

[flatrock]

I vote republican most of the time, but not always. It depends a lot on my choices. I vote in the primaries with the hopes of haveing a decent choice, but I haven't been really impressed with a lot of my choices in those races either.

I have voted against Republican candidates in situations where I thought it was more important to get a particular RINO out of office and hopefully out of politics, and hopefully retake the office after the term of the Democrat ended. Unfortunately, those seem to always be the races where the republican wins.

Bush really is a RINO on most issues. He has lowered taxes, but he's also grown government spending by huge amounts. Some of the is for relatively short term issues, such as the war, and beefing up homeland security. Other things like the perscription drug plan for seniors are going to be around forever.

However, I'm still going to vote for Bush this fall. He does a lot of the wrong things, but I believe he's doing them for the right reasons. Despite all the mud slinging by the press I believe he's a man of integrity (at least for a polititian).

He's done things that have definately weakened our individual rights, but at the same time the AG, Feds, and ATF seems to keeping a tighter reign on their people and reducing the abuses of power that happened under the Clinton admin. What really scares me is what an administration like Clinton's would have done with the powers granted to them in the Patriot Act. Likely we will find out in the future unless that act gets repealed.

Bush seems to try and be honest with the American people. He doesn't always do things right, but all the times the press has claimed Bush has lied have pretty much shown to be untrue.

With Kerry, there's just one obvious lie after another. He has a long history of telling one group of people one thing, and telling another group of people another. His voting record in the Senate is the only thing I can guage him by because I don't think I can believe what he says. His voting record scares the crap out of me. His lack of integrity scares me. He needs to be kept out of the Oval Office, and if possible gotten out of the Senate as well.

Then there are the third party candidates.

Libertarian? Even if a libertarian were to somehow become president, about all they could do is slow down the legislative process. Without libertarians in the house, and especially the senate there's little he could do.

He couldn't get his agenda legislated. He'd never get his judicial nominees affirmed. He might even go his entire term without getting his AG affirmed.

Until the Libertarians make some gains in Congress, their presidential candidate can't be much more than a distraction.

I guess I should also mention Nader. He's got the integrity of Kerry with less flip-flopping. He's spent his life as a fear-monger who's obviously sought prestige and power by preying on people's fears of big government. He's even taken up the fight of big corporations against other less publicly popular corps to get their fincial backing. He has a long history of doing and saying what's best for him while claiming he's a consumer advocate.

He's like Moore, Jesse Jackson, and the other fear mongers who keep telling the gullible that they should fear the government / white man / gun owners or whatever. They aren't worried about the truth, and if they aren't concerned about the truth, they really aren't concerned about the people they are lieing to.

Look at the choices. The only ones that have a viable chance are Kerry and Bush, and of those two Bush is a FAR better choice.

I've heard people say they can't respect those that hold their noses and vote for the better of the bad choices. Well, I have a hard time having a lot of respect for someone who will ignore reality and the consequences of their actions in the name of an ideal that they know can't be attained in the given situation.

 

[cordex]

Tribalism.

A basic drive within humans to band together into clans. Defense of that clan is a pretty basic response.

Same thing that binds cops into their clique, firemen into theirs, THRers into ours, sports fans into theirs, etc.

Easier to side with a party than a principle. You win more often.

 

[Treylis]

This is really brought to the forefront by things like the PATRIOT Act--Republicans and other "conservatives" would have been absolutely screeching their heads off if it was a Democrat idea and they had passed it, but because Republicans were behind it, it's all fine, and even necessary!

This "cheering for my team" school of politics will kill us yet, you'll see.

 

[Standing Wolf]

We need four or five, six or eight political parties, all vying for our votes. The Republicrats and Democans know they'll divide the votes more or less equally. The more parties, the better the differentiation among them.

Competition is a good thing.

 

[4v50 Gary]

I was registered as a Democrat because my father was one. Then when I bought my own home, I reregistered but with the New Year's Party. The only platform is that everyday is New Year's Day. So far, no one has joined me. But the good thing is that I'm the only write-in candidate for my party's ticket. Darn it if I not only don't win, but I also don't get any Secret Service Protection.

 

[Bruce H]

Tradition, and lazyness. Parents did so I will too and I don't have time to see what they are talking about. It is just your life, why get involved?

 

[AZLibertarian]

I agree that most people vote the way their parents voted. My dad is a staunch Republican, and I was too, until I had my epiphany in my mid-30's. I then started to ask myself: 'Just what is it that the Republicans believe?' Not just 'What do Republicans say they believe', but what things do they vote for or against?

As others have said here earlier, IMO, there isn't a whisp of a difference between the Republicans and the Democrats when it comes to voting. Sure--their rhetoric is different. But their actions are nearly identical.

So I started to ask myself what I believed, and after some searching, I became a Libertarian. I'm comfortable in my beliefs, and honestly believe that most Americans are libertarian at heart. But most Americans are stuck at that stage of voting the way their families have always voted, and never putting much thought into what the people they are voting into office are doing once they're elected.

With that said, I'll be voting for Bush this fall. He's disappointed me terribly is very many ways. However, the War on Terror is far too important for me to get all wrapped around the axle because Bush said he'd sign a new AWB. A second term for Bush won't be perfect, but Kerry will be a disaster for this country on so many levels.

 

[cracked butt]

Its not that I'm attached to any one party, its more like I will vote for whatever candidate has the best chance of defeating his/her hardcore marxist opponent in each election.

 

[joe sixpack]

I would agree that many vote their registered party because they
have been convinced that there is no other option, and also that to do otherwise is "throwing away your vote".

More parties with the clout of the current Demos and Reps would be helpful
and the more competition the better these elected officials will have
to get things done and right or they are out of there.
It will become more than a race between jitwad1 and jitwad2.
And I don't mean jitwad3 and jitwad4, hopefully.

cheers, ab

 

[sigman4rt]

I have voted republican since 1972 except once(Jimmie Carter, still can't explain that one.) and finally last year changed to Independent. I'm just tired of Republicrat govt. It seems both parties want the same end and the only difference is how they get there. Everyone running for national office is whored out to special interest groups, if they weren't they wouldn't be in the position to get elected. Vote republican we're pro gun, how fast did those pro gun guys repeal the AWB after we, the gun owning citizens gave them control of the house, senate and the white house. Pro gun to them means they just aren't as anti gun as the dems. It's hard sometimes for me to believe that this is a country formed by a rebellion started by a three cent tax on tea.

 

[griz]

I think Cordex nailed it. Now I'm wondering what exactly one wins in that kind of vote.

 

[ReadyontheRight]

Because if the Republicans lose, the Democrats win. And they are the ones proposing 99% of the anti-gun and anti-freedom legislation.

You think George Bush and John Ashcroft's Patriot Act is bad? Wait until you see the one John Kerry and Attorney General Hillary Clinton dream up.

It will target gun ownership and internet discussion of guns -- among other things having nothing to do with terrorism in order to dismantle the "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy".

These people couldn't care less about protecting our interests, our American way of life or even our lives. All they care about is power - and they will say or do anything to get it.

 

[CEShooter]

I think cordex nailed it on the head. Plus too many Americans are lazy and ignorant and actually doing research on the candidates would cause them to miss "Survivor Season 385" where they can watch drama and people behaving poorly. It's easier to vote for a party that you think you know, that are the "good guys" with whom you belong, instead of voting for an individual one fully understands.

 

[yankytrash]

I thought flatrock really nailed it, as informed voters go anyway.

Simply put, when you don't want your vote "wasted", and you realize you'll never see eye-to-eye on all issues with any one candidate, it comes down to the nose-holding that's been mentioned. There is no perfect choice, unless you yourself are running.

 

[GeneC]

" ..... honestly believe that most Americans are libertarian at heart. But most Americans are stuck at that stage of voting the way their families have always voted, and never putting much thought into what the people they are voting into office are doing once they're elected."



I just don't buy into any of this. I don't believe most Americans are LP at heart. I've looked at the LP and just simply disagree with their platform. There's NO way I believe in gay marriages,open borders, letting juries interpret law,etc. I really believe those things will cause more problems than solve anything. I don't buy into that people're stuck voting the way of their family. Sounds like you don't give the general public much credit. I think they DO study the Parties and candidates, but it's true with ANY politician, you can only go by what they say( and they're past performance in their past offices). What they do after election is another issue. Imo, There needs to be an easier and swifter impeachment process whereby if any politician renigs on promises, out they go.