Political Oppo

grip · Feb 3, 2018

This kind of campaigning using 'dirt' to smear the opposition is as old as politics itself. Former FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover was once considered the most powerful man in DC, because of all the secrets he had on the political leaders from decades of info gathering. And now partisanship has gotten so out of hand and so ridiculous that each side wastes more energy, time and effort trying to win public approval by disgracing their opponents that little effective governing or legislating is occurring. We have all kinds of issues that could be worked on and addressed but our system is stuck in political turmoil and gridlock.

Over the years I've tried to decide what solution was best for the majority of people based on fairness, rather than being 'on a side'. Let me tell you that makes you popular with very few when you don't blindly follow the party line rhetoric. But I care more about what works best for the whole country and world than being liked for being biased towards one affiliation or the other. And naturally neither side has all the right answers, all the time.

I thought at one time Independents were the rule, with maybe a slight lean towards the Left or Right. Now, I believe they've become the exception and are being turned or silenced by the extremists on the sides who shout the loudest, because they let emotion cloud their reason. Fear of being rejected for being sensible or fair should not diminish our courage to do what is right and just.

As a successful and prosperous nation, we will never climb out of this hole of national debt, income disparity and increasing division as long as we let the politics of personal destruction rule our system. We're all using only the facts that suit our narrative, instead of laying down all angles of views for consideration with a spirit of cooperation and unity. Yes, we should have differences and be passionate about our opinions but not to the point of being irrational and stubborn. Our ultimate goal should be a civilization built on common principles, values, fairness and the rule of law, not self righteous, idealistic and impractical dogma.

As I see it, you're either part of the problem or part of the solution. That's as easy as realizing the difference between mob rule and individuals coming together and creating a consensus for the common good. Words are important and ideals reflect values but in this environment of hypersensitive politically driven causes we're losing sight of the objective, a better life for us all.

Perotista · Feb 3, 2018

grip said:
This kind of campaigning using 'dirt' to smear the opposition is as old as politics itself. Former FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover was once considered the most powerful man in DC, because of all the secrets he had on the political leaders from decades of info gathering. And now partisanship has gotten so out of hand and so ridiculous that each side wastes more energy, time and effort trying to win public approval by disgracing their opponents that little effective governing or legislating is occurring. We have all kinds of issues that could be worked on and addressed but our system is stuck in political turmoil and gridlock.

Over the years I've tried to decide what solution was best for the majority of people based on fairness, rather than being 'on a side'. Let me tell you that makes you popular with very few when you don't blindly follow the party line rhetoric. But I care more about what works best for the whole country and world than being liked for being biased towards one affiliation or the other. And naturally neither side has all the right answers, all the time.

I thought at one time Independents were the rule, with maybe a slight lean towards the Left or Right. Now, I believe they've become the exception and are being turned or silenced by the extremists on the sides who shout the loudest, because they let emotion cloud their reason. Fear of being rejected for being sensible or fair should not diminish our courage to do what is right and just.

As a successful and prosperous nation, we will never climb out of this hole of national debt, income disparity and increasing division as long as we let the politics of personal destruction rule our system. We're all using only the facts that suit our narrative, instead of laying down all angles of views for consideration with a spirit of cooperation and unity. Yes, we should have differences and be passionate about our opinions but not to the point of being irrational and stubborn. Our ultimate goal should be a civilization built on common principles, values, fairness and the rule of law, not self righteous, idealistic and impractical dogma.

As I see it, you're either part of the problem or part of the solution. That's as easy as realizing the difference between mob rule and individuals coming together and creating a consensus for the common good. Words are important and ideals reflect values but in this environment of hypersensitive politically driven causes we're losing sight of the objective, a better life for us all.

One of our biggest problem when it comes to solving problems is neither party wants to solve them. Whatever the issue, the problem, both parties can utilize it to fire up their base and try to use the problem to get others to vote for their party. Solving the problem be it immigration, guns, healthcare, whatever, would eliminate that issue, problem as a campaign issue.

The politics of negative personal attack or personal destruction works or both parties wouldn't use them. The idea is to get the voter to hate the other guy more than they hate you. To vote against the other guy, not necessarily for you.

Independents are being pulled left and right by the extremes of each party. They sided with the left in 2006 and gave congress to the Democrats, in 2010 independent reversed course and gave the House back to the Republicans or the right. In 2008 Obama won the independent vote and the presidency, in 2016 Trump won independents and the presidency.

The problem with being an independent is one is usually forced to choose between candidates from the extreme left or right. 54% of independents disliked both major party candidates, they didn't want either one to be their next president. But they were forced to choose one or the other or vote for a third party candidate. The problem with being an independent is they have no or little say in whom the parties nominate, but have a huge say in the general election. But by the time the general rolls around, it is usually a choice between extremes.

What this country needs is a lot less ideologues and more pragmatist. Folks will to give a little to get a little and to keep this country moving forward instead of being in ideological gridlock in which neither side is will to give an inch even if it meant they could get a mile.

grip · Feb 3, 2018

Perotista said:
One of our biggest problem when it comes to solving problems is neither party wants to solve them. Whatever the issue, the problem, both parties can utilize it to fire up their base and try to use the problem to get others to vote for their party. Solving the problem be it immigration, guns, healthcare, whatever, would eliminate that issue, problem as a campaign issue.

The politics of negative personal attack or personal destruction works or both parties wouldn't use them. The idea is to get the voter to hate the other guy more than they hate you. To vote against the other guy, not necessarily for you.

Independents are being pulled left and right by the extremes of each party. They sided with the left in 2006 and gave congress to the Democrats, in 2010 independent reversed course and gave the House back to the Republicans or the right. In 2008 Obama won the independent vote and the presidency, in 2016 Trump won independents and the presidency.

The problem with being an independent is one is usually forced to choose between candidates from the extreme left or right. 54% of independents disliked both major party candidates, they didn't want either one to be their next president. But they were forced to choose one or the other or vote for a third party candidate. The problem with being an independent is they have no or little say in whom the parties nominate, but have a huge say in the general election. But by the time the general rolls around, it is usually a choice between extremes.

What this country needs is a lot less ideologues and more pragmatist. Folks will to give a little to get a little and to keep this country moving forward instead of being in ideological gridlock in which neither side is will to give an inch even if it meant they could get a mile.

Extremely astute analysis of the political landscape and it's pitfalls. The last paragraph emboldened is the highlighting part of the discussion. How do 'we the people' get the pragmatists in power and heard through all the screaming of the ideologues?

Perotista · Feb 3, 2018

grip said:
Extremely astute analysis of the political landscape and it's pitfalls. The last paragraph emboldened is the highlighting part of the discussion. How do 'we the people' get the pragmatists in power and heard through all the screaming of the ideologues?

I think it is getting harder and harder to get a pragmatist into office. One reason is a lot of moderates, the center, center right and center left are leaving the two major parties. Both major parties are shrinking. If Gallup is to be believed, as of December 2017 those who affiliate with the Democratic Party make up 27% of the electorate, Republicans 25 and independents 46%. Go back to 2012 the numbers were Democrats 35%, Republicans 30%, independents 32%. In 2000 only 25% identified themselves as independents. We seen a 20% shift from the parties into becoming independents in the last 18 years.

What is happening is more and more of middle America are deserting the two major parties. They are becoming too extreme, too ideologue. In so doing that is leaving the hard core, the more ideologues who choose their candidates without a moderating influence from middle America. You get a Trump vs. Clinton where a quarter of all Americans disliked both of them and wanted neither as their next president. You get a McConnell and a Schumer as party leaders in congress. Ideologues who only loyalty is to party, not country.

How to turn this around, probably for the independents, the center, center right and center left, those ideologies, the ones willing to work across the aisle and who don't think compromise is a four letter word. You get them to return to the party they lean towards. To dilute the left over hard core ideologues and perhaps we start getting better nominated candidates. The problem is the hard core of each party which is left don't want those moderates or compromises back. They love being able to nominate a Trump or a Moore or a Hillary Clinton.

So who is going to return to a political party that doesn't want you anymore. To a party that only wants your vote in November and not before. Definitely not during the primaries as they want to have their own hard core ideologue nominated.

grip · Feb 3, 2018

Perotista said:
I think it is getting harder and harder to get a pragmatist into office. One reason is a lot of moderates, the center, center right and center left are leaving the two major parties. Both major parties are shrinking. If Gallup is to be believed, as of December 2017 those who affiliate with the Democratic Party make up 27% of the electorate, Republicans 25 and independents 46%. Go back to 2012 the numbers were Democrats 35%, Republicans 30%, independents 32%. In 2000 only 25% identified themselves as independents. We seen a 20% shift from the parties into becoming independents in the last 18 years.

What is happening is more and more of middle America are deserting the two major parties. They are becoming too extreme, too ideologue. In so doing that is leaving the hard core, the more ideologues who choose their candidates without a moderating influence from middle America. You get a Trump vs. Clinton where a quarter of all Americans disliked both of them and wanted neither as their next president. You get a McConnell and a Schumer as party leaders in congress. Ideologues who only loyalty is to party, not country.

How to turn this around, probably for the independents, the center, center right and center left, those ideologies, the ones willing to work across the aisle and who don't think compromise is a four letter word. You get them to return to the party they lean towards. To dilute the left over hard core ideologues and perhaps we start getting better nominated candidates. The problem is the hard core of each party which is left don't want those moderates or compromises back. They love being able to nominate a Trump or a Moore or a Hillary Clinton.

So who is going to return to a political party that doesn't want you anymore. To a party that only wants your vote in November and not before. Definitely not during the primaries as they want to have their own hard core ideologue nominated.

So, you're basically saying that until average working Americans, who're more involved in day to day living, rather than voting politics start to get seriously pissed from the misdirection of the ideologues, nothing much will change? I agree that once the sleeping masses sees that their wallet's are being raped by political avarice, they won't rise up and take over from the loud minority of emo driven idealists.

Perotista · Feb 3, 2018

grip said:
So, you're basically saying that until average working Americans, who're more involved in day to day living, rather than voting politics start to get seriously pissed from the misdirection of the ideologues, nothing much will change? I agree that once the sleeping masses sees that their wallet's are being raped by political avarice, they won't rise up and take over from the loud minority of emo driven idealists.

That's one way to put it. It's the hard core ideologues who follow politics on a daily basis. Most Americans don't. Most Americans are too busy working and living their lives on a daily basis to follow politics. Yes, when the masses get mad or angry at something, we get change. The Democrats peeved off Americans with tax increases and raising the amount of social security to be federally taxed from 50% to 85%. In 1994 those angry Americans kicked out the Democrats from congress and for the first time in 40 years you had a Republican congress.

In 2006 with the receission beginning, the Iraq war dragging on and on and on. Voters got mad at Bush and the Republicans and replaced them with Democrats. Then in 2010 the voters got mad again when most were opposed to the ACA and the Democrats passed it anyway. Viola, a republican house. so it takes something to get the voters mad at the party in power to enact a change.

But still, a lot of folks don't care what goes on in Washington or who is in power. Unless they get angry. 45% of all Americans don't vote even in presidential years on average. 65% don't bother to vote on average in a mid term and in some special local elections, turnout could be in the single digits.

The only way it seems to get everyone's attention is for those in power in Washington to do something that gets them mad. We sit back and let the ideologues run both parties. We sit back back and let the ideologues take their parties further and further left and right. Once we determine the party we supported has gone too far left or right, we say to heck with it and leave. We don't try to fix it or bring the party back to middle America. Then we bitch and moan about there being no decent candidates to choose from come general election time.

grip · Feb 3, 2018

Perotista said:
That's one way to put it. It's the hard core ideologues who follow politics on a daily basis. Most Americans don't. Most Americans are too busy working and living their lives on a daily basis to follow politics. Yes, when the masses get mad or angry at something, we get change. The Democrats peeved off Americans with tax increases and raising the amount of social security to be federally taxed from 50% to 85%. In 1994 those angry Americans kicked out the Democrats from congress and for the first time in 40 years you had a Republican congress.

In 2006 with the receission beginning, the Iraq war dragging on and on and on. Voters got mad at Bush and the Republicans and replaced them with Democrats. Then in 2010 the voters got mad again when most were opposed to the ACA and the Democrats passed it anyway. Viola, a republican house. so it takes something to get the voters mad at the party in power to enact a change.

But still, a lot of folks don't care what goes on in Washington or who is in power. Unless they get angry. 45% of all Americans don't vote even in presidential years on average. 65% don't bother to vote on average in a mid term and in some special local elections, turnout could be in the single digits.

The only way it seems to get everyone's attention is for those in power in Washington to do something that gets them mad. We sit back and let the ideologues run both parties. We sit back back and let the ideologues take their parties further and further left and right. Once we determine the party we supported has gone too far left or right, we say to heck with it and leave. We don't try to fix it or bring the party back to middle America. Then we bitch and moan about there being no decent candidates to choose from come general election time.

Geezus son, you're almost out of my league to discuss the subject with.

I'll tell you my truth is that big money has too much control through special interests and pork barrel spending. It's all about the money and when they get into peoples pockets deep enough, the populace will awaken to the great crime that's occurring. We can all try and let each party control the electorate through meaningless knee jerk, emotional issues but that's not ultimately what carries the day. It's never been about Right or Left but rather about who controls the purse strings and it's not the Moderates. But in time there will be a tremendous awakening of the masses to the truth that our society is not built upon the great principles of our forefathers but upon the deception of patriotism for individualism and loyalty towards erroneous idealism. This incredible lie will not continue much longer, because 'we the people' are about to seize control.

Perotista · Feb 4, 2018

grip said:
Geezus son, you're almost out of my league to discuss the subject with.

I'll tell you my truth is that big money has too much control through special interests and pork barrel spending. It's all about the money and when they get into peoples pockets deep enough, the populace will awaken to the great crime that's occurring. We can all try and let each party control the electorate through meaningless knee jerk, emotional issues but that's not ultimately what carries the day. It's never been about Right or Left but rather about who controls the purse strings and it's not the Moderates. But in time there will be a tremendous awakening of the masses to the truth that our society is not built upon the great principles of our forefathers but upon the deception of patriotism for individualism and loyalty towards erroneous idealism. This incredible lie will not continue much longer, because 'we the people' are about to seize control.

View attachment 67228063

Yes, I have always said that both parties owe their hearts and souls to corporations, wall street firms, lobbyists, special interests, mega, huge money donors like Koch's and Soros. That is where both parties get most of their money and you can bet neither party is about to bite the hand that feeds it. You'll find out if you dig in further into the money trail that those I mentioned above donate their millions to both parties with usually the incumbents getting the higher percentage as they usually win. But they make sure the challengers get some money also that way they're covered regardless of who wins. Both candidates, parties owe them.

Want to know who is going to win an election, follow the money, the donations. From January of 2010 until June the folks I mentioned above were giving more to the Democrats. Beginning in July almost all their money went to the republicans. Those moneyed folks can read the tea leaves and when it became clear 2010 was a GOP year, that was when the GOP started to receive most of their donation.

Most Americans don't get into the donation game and when they do, its small change. I did donate some to Richard Ray and Sam Nunn, but you're talking 5 and 10 dollars. Not thousands, tens of thousands, millions as the folks I mentioned above do at times. But that was 25-30 years ago. Back when I thought I was making a difference.

I don't like the term moderates, I prefer middle America and most of us aren't ideologues one way or the other. We may back one issue fully from the right and totally oppose another issue from the right. Or left. I think on most issues we really don't care much about them if they don't effect us. Example, I was asked in a poll if I supported the Dreamers staying. I answered yes. But that issue meant nothing to me, whether a candidate supports the dreamers staying or not is irrelevant when it comes to my support for a candidate or whether I vote for him or not. It's not a hot issue for me. It doesn't affect me or my family or community.

I think most Americans are pretty much the same unless something, an issue affects them and theirs. Unless that is the case, they let Washington do Washington's thing and most Americans do theirs, living their life and taking care of their family etc. Politics remains a battle between the hard core until general election time when the hard core on each side try to get middle America to side with them or at least to oppose the other side.

sangha · Feb 4, 2018

grip said:
This kind of campaigning using 'dirt' to smear the opposition is as old as politics itself. Former FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover was once considered the most powerful man in DC, because of all the secrets he had on the political leaders from decades of info gathering. And now partisanship has gotten so out of hand and so ridiculous that each side wastes more energy, time and effort trying to win public approval by disgracing their opponents that little effective governing or legislating is occurring. We have all kinds of issues that could be worked on and addressed but our system is stuck in political turmoil and gridlock.

Over the years I've tried to decide what solution was best for the majority of people based on fairness, rather than being 'on a side'. Let me tell you that makes you popular with very few when you don't blindly follow the party line rhetoric. But I care more about what works best for the whole country and world than being liked for being biased towards one affiliation or the other. And naturally neither side has all the right answers, all the time.

I thought at one time Independents were the rule, with maybe a slight lean towards the Left or Right. Now, I believe they've become the exception and are being turned or silenced by the extremists on the sides who shout the loudest, because they let emotion cloud their reason. Fear of being rejected for being sensible or fair should not diminish our courage to do what is right and just.

As a successful and prosperous nation, we will never climb out of this hole of national debt, income disparity and increasing division as long as we let the politics of personal destruction rule our system. We're all using only the facts that suit our narrative, instead of laying down all angles of views for consideration with a spirit of cooperation and unity. Yes, we should have differences and be passionate about our opinions but not to the point of being irrational and stubborn. Our ultimate goal should be a civilization built on common principles, values, fairness and the rule of law, not self righteous, idealistic and impractical dogma.

As I see it, you're either part of the problem or part of the solution. That's as easy as realizing the difference between mob rule and individuals coming together and creating a consensus for the common good. Words are important and ideals reflect values but in this environment of hypersensitive politically driven causes we're losing sight of the objective, a better life for us all.

The way I see it, you are as much a part of the problem as anyone else. Or, more accurately, your way of thinking is.

It is the tendency of people to view themselves as noble and well-intentioned while viewing those who disagree with them as being evil and having bad intentions that is the problem. This type of black and white thinking, as demonstrated throughout your op --see bolded text-- that make compromise impossible

You know, some people take a side because they believe that side has a solution that would benefit us all. And the only difference between a mob and people coming together is whether or not you think their desires will promote the common good.

grip · Feb 9, 2018

sangha said:
The way I see it, you are as much a part of the problem as anyone else. Or, more accurately, your way of thinking is.

It is the tendency of people to view themselves as noble and well-intentioned while viewing those who disagree with them as being evil and having bad intentions that is the problem. This type of black and white thinking, as demonstrated throughout your op --see bolded text-- that make compromise impossible

You know, some people take a side because they believe that side has a solution that would benefit us all. And the only difference between a mob and people coming together is whether or not you think their desires will promote the common good.

You may be right that 'my way of thinking' is part of the extremist problem of bitter partisanship. But I don't really see that in your explanation.

Grim17 · Feb 11, 2018

grip said:
This kind of campaigning using 'dirt' to smear the opposition is as old as politics itself.... And now partisanship has gotten so out of hand and so ridiculous that each side wastes more energy, time and effort trying to win public approval by disgracing their opponents that little effective governing or legislating is occurring. We have all kinds of issues that could be worked on and addressed but our system is stuck in political turmoil and gridlock.

I agree.

Over the years I've tried to decide what solution was best for the majority of people based on fairness, rather than being 'on a side'. Let me tell you that makes you popular with very few when you don't blindly follow the party line rhetoric. But I care more about what works best for the whole country and world than being liked for being biased towards one affiliation or the other. And naturally neither side has all the right answers, all the time.

The word "fairness" is a very subjective and politically charged term, and one I try to stay away from.

Me personally, I care about the prosperity of the nation and the well being of the people in our society, and the well being of the countries and people of the rest of the world comes in a very distant third. We have to take care of ourselves before we can try to take care of others. When I say I care about the nation and our people, I'm not talking about today, but most importantly, how things will be 10, 20, or even 50 years down the line. What our government does now, the laws they pass and policies they implement, can and will have a profound effect on the nation's prosperity and health in the not too distant future. In recent years, it seems like more and more people in Washington are opting for the instant fix, (you know, the reelection boosters) while fewer and fewer are taking the countries future into consideration. The way I see it, doing what's necessary to secure the country's future prosperity should be the biggest priority, because if the nation's wealth significantly declines, it will take everyone living here down with it. We need the politicians in Washington to stop playing partisan politics and stop pandering for votes. They need to put their big boy pants on and start making the hard, and often politically unpopular decisions that will ensure that America doesn't end up in financial ruin in the decade to follow.

Governing is like raising a child... A good parent often makes decisions their kids don't like and think is unfair, because they know those decisions are necessary for the future health and well being of their kids when they become adults.

I thought at one time Independents were the rule... Now, I believe they've become the exception and are being turned or silenced by the extremists on the sides who shout the loudest, because they let emotion cloud their reason...

I hope you are wrong. Independents are the electoral arbitrators. They help keep the peace by standing between the 2 sides.

(continued)

.

Grim17 · Feb 11, 2018

As a successful and prosperous nation, we will never climb out of this hole of national debt, income disparity and increasing division as long as we let the politics of personal destruction rule our system. We're all using only the facts that suit our narrative, instead of laying down all angles of views for consideration with a spirit of cooperation and unity. Yes, we should have differences and be passionate about our opinions but not to the point of being irrational and stubborn. Our ultimate goal should be a civilization built on common principles, values, fairness and the rule of law, not self righteous, idealistic and impractical dogma.

National debt comes down to simple math. The government is handing out far more money than it's bringing in. We have to find a way to lower spending across the board, in every category including military and entitlement spending, and find a way to increase government revenue without damaging the economy. I don't have the answer, but I think it's time for those big boy pants to come on in Washington and our elected officials begin making those unpopular decisions I talked about before.

As I see it, you're either part of the problem or part of the solution. That's as easy as realizing the difference between mob rule and individuals coming together and creating a consensus for the common good. Words are important and ideals reflect values but in this environment of hypersensitive politically driven causes we're losing sight of the objective, a better life for us all.

One of the major thing that's changed over the last several decades that's had a profound negative effect on the political landscape, is the attitude of our society. In the past, people were much more willing to support actions that were for the good of the nation as a whole, even when doing so wouldn't benefit them personally. Today far too many people only care about personal benefit (gimme, gimme gimme) and have no regard what so ever about the future effects the things they support might have on both society and the nation as a whole. The reason this attitude continues to spread is because many politicians in Washington choose to give credence to these types of attitudes so they can win elections. The nation will always take a back seat and suffer, when politicians choose to play Identity politics.

.

Political Oppo

grip

Slow 🅖 Hand

Perotista

grip

Slow 🅖 Hand

Perotista

grip

Slow 🅖 Hand

Perotista

grip

Slow 🅖 Hand

Perotista

sangha

grip

Slow 🅖 Hand

Grim17

Battle Ready

Grim17

Battle Ready