• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is There an Empathy Gap Between Democrats and Republicans?

Is There an Empathy Gap Between Democrats and Republicans?


  • Total voters
    31

aberrant85

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2013
Messages
594
Reaction score
209
Location
SF Bay Area
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Liberals are stereotypically "bleeding-heart" compared to conservatives, but the more I think about it the more it seems to me that there is simply an empathy gap between Dems and Repubs:

Health Care: Democrats passed Obamacare to address the millions of uninsured people across the country. Republican opposition never addresses those people and instead is framed as how it will effect those that have health insurance.

Gay Marriage: Biden, Obama, and other prominent Democratic figures have voiced their support for marriage equality. Republicans are almost lockstep against it. The only exceptions are usually Republicans like Dick Cheney and Rob Portman who have gay children. Of course that's not the same as empathy, that is rational self-interest that makes them pro-gay marriage.

There are other examples.

Is there a real difference between Democrats and Republicans in terms of empathy, and is that a good or bad thing?
 
Liberals are stereotypically "bleeding-heart" compared to conservatives, but the more I think about it the more it seems to me that there is simply an empathy gap between Dems and Repubs:

Health Care: Democrats passed Obamacare to address the millions of uninsured people across the country. Republican opposition never addresses those people and instead is framed as how it will effect those that have health insurance.

Gay Marriage: Biden, Obama, and other prominent Democratic figures have voiced their support for marriage equality. Republicans are almost lockstep against it. The only exceptions are usually Republicans like Dick Cheney and Rob Portman who have gay children. Of course that's not the same as empathy, that is rational self-interest that makes them pro-gay marriage.

There are other examples.

Is there a real difference between Democrats and Republicans in terms of empathy, and is that a good or bad thing?

Not really. A lot of liberals claim to be "bleeding hearts," but they really aren't. They simply direct their empathy towards different targets than Conservatives.

i.e. (And yes, I'm well aware that this is absurdly oversimplified) They've never met an "oppressed" minority they wouldn't go to bat for, but they basically view the unborn and those unable to survive without life support as being worthless parasitic lumps of flesh which can be justifiably eliminated at one's leisure, no matter how frivolous the reason.

The two groups do not noticeably differ in the amount they give to charity either.

Washington Post - Conservatives and Liberals are Equally Charitable but Give to Different Causes

In any case, it would ultimately appear that both sides are "empathetic." They simply differ in the manner in which they direct the impulse.
 
Last edited:
Not really. A lot of liberals claim to be "bleeding hearts," but they really aren't. They simply direct their empathy towards different targets than Conservatives.

i.e. (And yes, I'm well aware that this is absurdly oversimplified) They've never met an "oppressed" minority they wouldn't go to bat for, but they basically view the unborn and those unable to survive without life support as being worthless parasitic lumps of flesh which can be justifiably eliminated at one's leisure, no matter how frivolous the reason.

The two groups do not noticeably differ in the amount they give to charity either.

Washington Post - Conservatives and Liberals are Equally Charitable but Give to Different Causes

In any case, it would ultimately appear that both sides are "empathetic." They simply differ in the manner in which they direct the impulse.

Interesting article. It didn't offer many specifics, so its hard to say for sure, but I think this still says something about empathy. If conservatives donate more to religious charities, then presumably they give to the church of which they belong, which while still generous, probably goes towards indirectly supporting causes tied to their own religious and moral ideology.
 
Supporting government welfare, forced commerce and involuntary servitude is not a sign of empathy towards your fellow man.

As for gay marriage, the liberal position is just more government power in peoples lives.
 
Last edited:
Liberals are stereotypically "bleeding-heart" compared to conservatives, but the more I think about it the more it seems to me that there is simply an empathy gap between Dems and Repubs:

Health Care: Democrats passed Obamacare to address the millions of uninsured people across the country. Republican opposition never addresses those people and instead is framed as how it will effect those that have health insurance.

Gay Marriage: Biden, Obama, and other prominent Democratic figures have voiced their support for marriage equality. Republicans are almost lockstep against it. The only exceptions are usually Republicans like Dick Cheney and Rob Portman who have gay children. Of course that's not the same as empathy, that is rational self-interest that makes them pro-gay marriage.

There are other examples.

Is there a real difference between Democrats and Republicans in terms of empathy, and is that a good or bad thing?
If you're talking about politicians in Washington, there's no room for empathy. If you're talking about your average person and their leanings I would say they have equal empathy and apathy. The difference is how they go about it.
 
Liberals are stereotypically "bleeding-heart" compared to conservatives, but the more I think about it the more it seems to me that there is simply an empathy gap between Dems and Repubs:

Health Care: Democrats passed Obamacare to address the millions of uninsured people across the country. Republican opposition never addresses those people and instead is framed as how it will effect those that have health insurance.

Gay Marriage: Biden, Obama, and other prominent Democratic figures have voiced their support for marriage equality. Republicans are almost lockstep against it. The only exceptions are usually Republicans like Dick Cheney and Rob Portman who have gay children. Of course that's not the same as empathy, that is rational self-interest that makes them pro-gay marriage.

There are other examples.

Is there a real difference between Democrats and Republicans in terms of empathy, and is that a good or bad thing?

In all honesty I have had this thought very often myself. Dems do seem (sweeping generalizations of course) to have a higher level of empathy toward causes that do not directly effect their lives, people they don't actually know and groups that they are not personally involved with. I would also add that they seem to have a higher level of faith in human beings too. Seems as if Republicans need you to meet certain criteria whereby you prove yourself or your cause worthy first.

I do not believe that Republicans are not good people and do not care. I do believe that they are more cynical about human nature and they first assume you are taking advantage and leave it up to you to prove you are not before they assist. When confronted with what they consider an obvious victim, say abortion for instance, they are inclined to side with the unborn child who does not need to prove anything to them. Gun rights, a constitutional violation of gun owner rights etc.
 
Last edited:
Liberals are stereotypically "bleeding-heart" compared to conservatives, but the more I think about it the more it seems to me that there is simply an empathy gap between Dems and Repubs:

Health Care: Democrats passed Obamacare to address the millions of uninsured people across the country. Republican opposition never addresses those people and instead is framed as how it will effect those that have health insurance.

Gay Marriage: Biden, Obama, and other prominent Democratic figures have voiced their support for marriage equality. Republicans are almost lockstep against it. The only exceptions are usually Republicans like Dick Cheney and Rob Portman who have gay children. Of course that's not the same as empathy, that is rational self-interest that makes them pro-gay marriage.

There are other examples.

Is there a real difference between Democrats and Republicans in terms of empathy, and is that a good or bad thing?

I think you might want to read this op-ed it will enlighten you. you probably wont like what you will be enlightened to


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html?source=science20.com&_r=0

Liberals show tremendous compassion in pushing for generous government spending to help the neediest people at home and abroad. Yet when it comes to individual contributions to charitable causes, liberals are cheapskates.

I just love crushing a liberals belief system
 
Interesting article. It didn't offer many specifics, so its hard to say for sure, but I think this still says something about empathy. If conservatives donate more to religious charities, then presumably they give to the church of which they belong, which while still generous, probably goes towards indirectly supporting causes tied to their own religious and moral ideology.
feeding, clothing, and giving shelter to the poor domestic and abroad is an ideology of all Christian and Jewish faiths
 
Democrat talking heads and partisans TALK more empathy, but I do not believe they are more empathetic in reality. Wanting the GOVERNMENT to do things in exchange for votes isn't really empathy. It's political patronage.
 
Liberals are stereotypically "bleeding-heart" compared to conservatives, but the more I think about it the more it seems to me that there is simply an empathy gap between Dems and Repubs:
The pejoritive term "bleeding heart" applies to those who have a tendency to disingenuously use a fallacious appeal to emotion in lieu of sound logical reasoning to support their arguments. It has nothing to do with empathy.
 
What use is "empathy" in the business of the State, and how did we become so childish in our thinking as to believe that the two are related?

You can almost hear Adams, or Monroe, or Madison or Hamilton or Washington asking if we've taken leave of our senses.
 
I think you might want to read this op-ed it will enlighten you. you probably wont like what you will be enlightened to


http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/opinion/21kristof.html?source=science20.com&_r=0



I just love crushing a liberals belief system

You've got a 5 year old opinion article that says one thing, and there's the Washington post article above with numbers saying something else.

In either case, sympathy is not the same as empathy. Sympathy is one-sided. You feel sorry for the man on the street. You project your emotion onto them. You are judging their situation. You can still do good things out of sympathy, but the connection is very one directional.

Empathy requires you to put yourself in the person's POV. You do not have to feel sorry for a gay couple to ask yourself how you would feel in their situation if you were not allowed to marry the person you love. From their POV you can make conclusions you might not have on your own.

There is a cognitive leap between the two. With empathy you are able to recognize diverse viewpoints in order to question your positions and to foster negotiation and compromise.

In short, you sympathize for someone, you empathize with someone.
 
You've got a 5 year old opinion article that says one thing, and there's the Washington post article above with numbers saying something else.

In either case, sympathy is not the same as empathy. Sympathy is one-sided. You feel sorry for the man on the street. You project your emotion onto them. You are judging their situation. You can still do good things out of sympathy, but the connection is very one directional.

Empathy requires you to put yourself in the person's POV. You do not have to feel sorry for a gay couple to ask yourself how you would feel in their situation if you were not allowed to marry the person you love. From their POV you can make conclusions you might not have on your own.

There is a cognitive leap between the two. With empathy you are able to recognize diverse viewpoints in order to question your positions and to foster negotiation and compromise.

In short, you sympathize for someone, you empathize with someone.

what difference does it make if it empathy or sympathy if your goal is to help and that is what you do and the end result is the same it doesn't matter now does it

it doesn't matter where you been unless your looking for an excuse what matters is where you are going

also sympathy and empathy is a two way street how does the poor know how some one rich feels if that pool person has never been rich or how does a black man know what a write man feels or thinks because he never was write. how does a gay man know what a straight man is like if he never was straight so you cant use that as a one sided excuse like your implying

see you want to use empathy so to cause others to bend to your ideology but wont do the same in return so to come to a compromise
 
Last edited:
You've got a 5 year old opinion article that says one thing, and there's the Washington post article above with numbers saying something else.

In either case, sympathy is not the same as empathy. Sympathy is one-sided. You feel sorry for the man on the street. You project your emotion onto them. You are judging their situation. You can still do good things out of sympathy, but the connection is very one directional.

Empathy requires you to put yourself in the person's POV. You do not have to feel sorry for a gay couple to ask yourself how you would feel in their situation if you were not allowed to marry the person you love. From their POV you can make conclusions you might not have on your own.

There is a cognitive leap between the two. With empathy you are able to recognize diverse viewpoints in order to question your positions and to foster negotiation and compromise.

In short, you sympathize for someone, you empathize with someone.



I would like for you to step out of your shoes and do a little POV as you call it. I want you to show some empathy for this scenario
You have this business owner that stays up late at night worrying if he made the right decision on some new contract knowing his and his employee future depends on that decision to be the correct one.
lets say after he makes his car payment on two cars, his house payment, braces on his kids teeth, putting money away for the kids college fund and retirement not relying on the government for any of it and pays close to 50% of his income in taxes. is in line at the grocery store with a basket full of hamburger and not the steaks he wanted so not to dip into the kids college fond and the person in front of him has the basket full of steaks and whips out a snap card to pay for it. why don't you show A little empathy in that situation

republicans do show empathy but they show it to every one not just to the ones you want to label as oppressed
 
Last edited:
Ok, flame me.

I have often seen Republicans to act more "GOD" (read absolutes and Old Testament")

on the flipside

I have seen Democrats as more "Jesus" - clearly the more empathetic and understanding.

Yeah, big (bibical;)) empathy gap. Not sure that is bad. Just shows a need to work together for commonsense understanding.

:lamo Now let me go back to watching hour 18 of Ted Cruz blast healthcare reform-athon
 
Empathy isn't always a good thing.
 
what difference does it make if it empathy or sympathy if your goal is to help and that is what you do and the end result is the same it doesn't matter now does it

it doesn't matter where you been unless your looking for an excuse what matters is where you are going

If the end result were truly the same then it wouldn't matter if it were sympathy/empathy, but the end results between Repubs and Dems are different.

also sympathy and empathy is a two way street how does the poor know how some one rich feels if that pool person has never been rich or how does a black man know what a write man feels or thinks because he never was write. how does a gay man know what a straight man is like if he never was straight so you cant use that as a one sided excuse like your implying

see you want to use empathy so to cause others to bend to your ideology but wont do the same in return so to come to a compromise

The whole point of empathy is that you can't literally know how a person feels but that you use logic and imagination to try to.

I would like for you to step out of your shoes and do a little POV as you call it. I want you to show some empathy for this scenario
You have this business owner that stays up late at night worrying if he made the right decision on some new contract knowing his and his employee future depends on that decision to be the correct one.
lets say after he makes his car payment on two cars, his house payment, braces on his kids teeth, putting money away for the kids college fund and retirement not relying on the government for any of it and pays close to 50% of his income in taxes. is in line at the grocery store with a basket full of hamburger and not the steaks he wanted so not to dip into the kids college fond and the person in front of him has the basket full of steaks and whips out a snap card to pay for it. why don't you show A little empathy in that situation

republicans do show empathy but they show it to every one not just to the ones you want to label as oppressed

Listen, if you were that person and you practiced empathy, you might realize that a poor person who had no cars, no house, no health care, no education for their kids, and no savings would love to be in your position. That's how empathy works: you get to see their side of the picture and you get perspective about your own side.

The argument that people are living rich off of food stamps because of this straw man that buys lobster/steak/caviar in front of the struggling middle class man is a convenient way of avoiding empathy. Have people abused the system? Of course, any system has abuse. Your reasoning is that because some people abuse it, nobody deserves that program. You have displayed the lack of empathy towards the truly needy that I am trying to illustrate.
 
If the end result were truly the same then it wouldn't matter if it were sympathy/empathy, but the end results between Repubs and Dems are different.



The whole point of empathy is that you can't literally know how a person feels but that you use logic and imagination to try to.



Listen, if you were that person and you practiced empathy, you might realize that a poor person who had no cars, no house, no health care, no education for their kids, and no savings would love to be in your position. That's how empathy works: you get to see their side of the picture and you get perspective about your own side.

The argument that people are living rich off of food stamps because of this straw man that buys lobster/steak/caviar in front of the struggling middle class man is a convenient way of avoiding empathy. Have people abused the system? Of course, any system has abuse. Your reasoning is that because some people abuse it, nobody deserves that program. You have displayed the lack of empathy towards the truly needy that I am trying to illustrate.

see you want to use empathy so to cause others to bend to your ideology but wont do the same in return so to come to a compromise
 
Who is more*blank*? If it's a positive adjective people will vote for their team, if it's a negative they'll vote for the other team.
 
see you want to use empathy so to cause others to bend to your ideology but wont do the same in return so to come to a compromise

Yes to compromise! But compromise between someone with power and someone without power means giving more power to the latter. Otherwise it is simply widening the power gap.
 
Yes to compromise! But compromise between someone with power and someone without power means giving more power to the latter. Otherwise it is simply widening the power gap.

the middle class man that pays 50% of his income so the ones on snap can go buy steak and lobster if they so do choose doesn't have any more power then the poor he only has one vote just like the poor
he actually has less power caused by the decades of being brow beaten being called a racist, not caring, and greedy if he ever speaks up about any injustice has silenced him
 
the middle class man that pays 50% of his income so the ones on snap can go buy steak and lobster if they so do choose doesn't have any more power then the poor he only has one vote just like the poor
he actually has less power caused by the decades of being brow beaten being called a racist, not caring, and greedy if he ever speaks up about any injustice has silenced him

1. 50% of income goes to the poor? You have no idea how little of your taxes go to programs for the poor and how much goes to stuff like the defense budget.
2. You think the poor are responsible for the middle class struggling? You have totally misdirected your rage. It's millionaires and billionaires with business interests at stake that have f***ed over the middle class and created more poor.
3. On second thought, empathy is not enough. Empathy and enough objective common sense to be able to tell who has more power is what matters.
 
1. 50% of income goes to the poor? You have no idea how little of your taxes go to programs for the poor and how much goes to stuff like the defense budget.
2. You think the poor are responsible for the middle class struggling? You have totally misdirected your rage. It's millionaires and billionaires with business interests at stake that have f***ed over the middle class and created more poor.
3. On second thought, empathy is not enough. Empathy and enough objective common sense to be able to tell who has more power is what matters.

1 does it matter to the middle class man when the poor are allowed to buy what he doesn't for reasons of being responsible
2 why not you are allowed to blame the rich for anything with no evidence why cant the tables be turned
3 so result to personal attack when truth is reveled as it not being common sense liberal modus operandi
4 im done with you like im done with any liberal that results to those tactics it shows I have won the debate when you do so
 
Back
Top Bottom