View Poll Results: Do you believe that partisan politics divides people unnecessarily?

Voters
31. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    25 80.65%
  • No

    6 19.35%
Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 100

Thread: Is partisan politics too partisan?

  1. #61
    Student
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Last Seen
    05-12-13 @ 01:51 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    251

    Re: Is partisan politics too partisan?

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    In science, the hypothesis has a clear meaning. If we have 50 different states passing 50 different laws, what hypothesis is proven?
    No hypothesis is "proven" in science. Science can only invalidate a hypothesis or justify it. There's no such thing as scientific "proof". There are only working theories. The laws of physics are simply working theories that have been justified consistently enough to be universally adopted as a means of quantifying phenomena, and even those "laws" are subject to being struck down at a moment's notice when science discovers something new.

    Science justifies and disproves all hypotheses without respect to their origins. That is the inherent value of the scientific method. It can disprove a false religious doctrine, or justify a religious doctrine that holds up to objective scrutiny on its merits.

  2. #62
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    01-17-18 @ 09:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    60,111

    Re: Is partisan politics too partisan?

    Quote Originally Posted by SocialEngineer View Post
    You're right. It takes a team effort to run the partisan propaganda machine and the mass media.

    And pro wrestlers get hurt all the time. That doesn't mean that their adversaries intended to hurt them, and it doesn't mean that our politicians changed the laws with the collective interests of our society in mind.
    Yes, they get hurt but not because their opponent is trying to hurt them. It's just an inherent risk relating to the nature of their work

    And there is no legal requirement for politicians to keep the collective interests of society in mind. It's up to the people to ensure that they do.

    We get the government that we deserve
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  3. #63
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,169
    Blog Entries
    27

    Re: Is partisan politics too partisan?

    Quote Originally Posted by polgara View Post
    Good morning, Pero.

    : I shudder to imagine what it might take to get our politicians working together again, and I'm quite serious about that! Whatever it turns out to be, I can almost guarantee that it won't be fun and games for most people!

    Are you rethinking your move?...your recent posts almost sound like your wife is a little reluctant to leave family right now...
    I am not rethinking the move, the wife is. Perhaps a challenge from a viable third party candidate. More what looks like a viable third party that can win some house and senate seats. During Perot's run, the two parties more or less came together to ensure he wouldn't win and then adopted quite a lot of his ideas and worked together to get some passed so his supporters would come back to the two major parties. They succeeded. Perhaps another outside threat like Perot, only with more of a grass roots party, a bottom up instead of a top down.

    But independents are so diverse and all over the political scale it would be pretty had to get them unified enough for a viable third party. That is unless the two major parties really get them ticked off by all their shenanigans. As it is, when independents get ticked off, they vote for the opposite party. Get ticked off at the Republicans, they vote Democratic like they did in 2006, 2008 and 2012. If independents get ticked off at Democrats, they vote Republicans, 1994 and 2010 are examples. Perhaps one of these days they will come to realize it makes no difference who is in charge and start to coalesce around a new party. I doubt that though.

    I am doing yard work after 4 days of rain down here, so i will be in here for a little bit and then back outside for awhile. Today is my come and go day.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  4. #64
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    01-17-18 @ 09:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    60,111

    Re: Is partisan politics too partisan?

    Quote Originally Posted by SocialEngineer View Post
    No hypothesis is "proven" in science. Science can only invalidate a hypothesis or justify it. There's no such thing as scientific "proof". There are only working theories. The laws of physics are simply working theories that have been justified consistently enough to be universally adopted as a means of quantifying phenomena, and even those "laws" are subject to being struck down at a moment's notice when science discovers something new.

    Science justifies and disproves all hypotheses without respect to their origins. That is the inherent value of the scientific method. It can disprove a false religious doctrine, or justify a religious doctrine that holds up to objective scrutiny on its merits.
    You're being a bit pedantic here. But if it helps, I'll agree - it validates or invalidates a hypothesis. That doesn't change my point which your post fails to respond to

    If 50 states pass 50 different laws relating to an issue (say abortion), what specific hypothesis is validated or invalidated?
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  5. #65
    Student
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Last Seen
    05-12-13 @ 01:51 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    251

    Re: Is partisan politics too partisan?

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    I consider myself to be human, and just as subject to the same foibles as the rest of humanity.

    Do you consider yourself to be completely emotionless?
    Not at all, but I do consider myself capable of making a rational decision based on all available information. I consider my own emotions, and I put in a good faith effort to consider the emotions of others and weigh them against my own. I place a high priority on that, which I think makes me more effective at coming to equitable solutions to problems, but I don't think that my ability to do so is anything particularly special, other than the fact that it not as common as I think it should be in the civil discourse.

  6. #66
    Student
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Last Seen
    05-12-13 @ 01:51 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    251

    Re: Is partisan politics too partisan?

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    Yes, they get hurt but not because their opponent is trying to hurt them. It's just an inherent risk relating to the nature of their work

    And there is no legal requirement for politicians to keep the collective interests of society in mind. It's up to the people to ensure that they do.

    We get the government that we deserve
    Unless the civil discourse is derailed by agitators for the purpose of disenfranchising the populace by the same interests who use their economic influence to influence public policy. Then we get the government AND civil discourse that those interests want us to have, even though we most likely deserve much more.

  7. #67
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    01-17-18 @ 09:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    60,111

    Re: Is partisan politics too partisan?

    Quote Originally Posted by SocialEngineer View Post
    Not at all, but I do consider myself capable of making a rational decision based on all available information. I consider my own emotions, and I put in a good faith effort to consider the emotions of others and weigh them against my own. I place a high priority on that, which I think makes me more effective at coming to equitable solutions to problems, but I don't think that my ability to do so is anything particularly special, other than the fact that it not as common as I think it should be in the civil discourse.
    Research indicates that we are all less rational than we think we are. They even have a name for the effect

    Dunning

    When it comes to keeping our emotions out of our decision making processes, we are all incompetent.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  8. #68
    Sage
    sangha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Lower Hudson Valley, NY
    Last Seen
    01-17-18 @ 09:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    60,111

    Re: Is partisan politics too partisan?

    Quote Originally Posted by SocialEngineer View Post
    Unless the civil discourse is derailed by agitators for the purpose of disenfranchising the populace by the same interests who use their economic influence to influence public policy. Then we get the government AND civil discourse that those interests want us to have, even though we most likely deserve much more.
    Disenfranchisement is an entirely different issue, and it requires laws to be passed. These laws are subject to judicial review, and recent attempts at disenfranchisement have failed due to such review. (note: I'm assuming that by "disenfranchisement" you are referring to efforts to make it impossible for some people to vote)

    I am not going to deny that it is impossible for our political system to be corrupted to such an extent. Even the Framers acknowledged the possibility. However, the people and their own self-interests are supposed to be a sufficient counter-weight to this possibility and, so far, has been proven to be effective. Reason would suggest that, absent a compelling reason to think otherwise, the system will continue to function at its' current level.
    Quote Originally Posted by matchlight View Post
    Justice Thomas' opinions consistently contain precise, detailed constitutional analyses.
    Quote Originally Posted by jaeger19 View Post
    the vast majority of folks that need healthcare are on Medicare.. both rich and poor..

  9. #69
    Canadian Conservative
    CanadaJohn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    27,292

    Re: Is partisan politics too partisan?

    Personally, I don't believe partisan politics divides people so much as it tends to clarify the ideological divide that exists in the country and puts serious issues in stark terms that help provide clear choice. Too often, bipartisanship is simply a tool to effect bad public policy.

    In a system of government such as the US has, partisanship isn't nearly as important as it is in a system of government like Canada's where members of a party are virtually trained seals who raise their flippers when the leader tells them to. In the US, you're far more likely to have rogues who vote with the other side on particular issues, which leads me to think that if government simply stuck to the important things that people want them to deal with, you'd find far more agreement/consensus.

    One last point I'd make is that American media have a vested interest in government not working, in conflict in congress and between congress and the President - it sells their nightly news and their cable talking head variety hours. Politicians who buy into that conflict get promoted/exposed on these network shows and establish a profile that helps get them re-elected.
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

  10. #70
    Student
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Last Seen
    05-12-13 @ 01:51 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    251

    Re: Is partisan politics too partisan?

    Quote Originally Posted by sangha View Post
    You're being a bit pedantic here. But if it helps, I'll agree - it validates or invalidates a hypothesis. That doesn't change my point which your post fails to respond to

    If 50 states pass 50 different laws relating to an issue (say abortion), what specific hypothesis is validated or invalidated?
    In the instance you cite, 50 different hypothesis would be tested at once. The experiment would fail to produce a valid result because there would be no control to observe.

    But I didn't say that all 50 states should each pass a different law, did I. When I cited gay marriage as a valid example of the scientific method, I cited the fact that a number of states have legalized gay marriage (representing the experiments), while the majority of states have not (representing the control). Citing imaginary and unlikely scenarios as instances that invalidate my point only serves to derail otherwise productive discussion. I'm sure that wasn't your intent, and I appreciate your contribution.

Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •