• 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!

What's the biggest threat to America?

What's the biggest threat to America?

  • Total voters
    78
  • Poll closed .
Partisanship leads to polarization leads to balkanization leads to bloodshed.

Many people know the history of how the Blue and the Greens of ancient Constantinople were eliminated by an emperor who had finally had enough of their antics.
Less known is the role the ruling classes played in pitting them against each other and using them for political expediency, right up to the point where they butchered the lot of them.
But not before there had been generations of factionalism, where you had to take into account your 'color' when marrying, working, spending you wages, selecting a hairdo, choosing a safe route home, etc.
I am seeing some amusing similarities. (Amusing as of yet.)
 
radcen said:
What's the biggest threat to America? Of these three: Democrats, Republicans, Partisanship.
Click to expand...

The agenda of the radical corporate. They seek global hegemony and will use any means to get it.
 
Lovebug said:
You misunderstood. Obama didn't even have to say or do anything the the right went nuts. Ok, so Trump's hairstyle seems enough to set some people off.
Think back. Obama was a complete unknown and was hated on.
Click to expand...

You are correct. I misunderstood. I agree with your statement.
 
joG said:
While I totally agree that both sides have contributed significantly to the polarisation, I would certainly not absolve Obama of having been and still being a major proponent of this deterioration.
Click to expand...

Equal to his right wing opposition. More? No way.
 
None of those three options are the problem. The real problem is that we do not all think alike and that is never going to change.

The problem is the system. It pits the smart verses the not so smart, the young verses the old, the achiever verses the non achievers etc.

The system is one dependent upon never ending, continuous growth, something which is unrealistic and positively, absolutely unsustainable.

Once the Titanic had hit the iceberg it was going down. It didn't matter who the captain was.
 
Russell797 said:
None of those three options are the problem. The real problem is that we do not all think alike and that is never going to change.

The problem is the system. It pits the smart verses the not so smart, the young verses the old, the achiever verses the non achievers etc.

The system is one dependent upon never ending, continuous growth, something which is unrealistic and positively, absolutely unsustainable.

Once the Titanic had hit the iceberg it was going down. It didn't matter who the captain was.
Click to expand...

Having opposing ideas lead to discussion and allow people to see problems in a different light. Everyone thinking the same leads to tragedies like the Nazi regime or religious theocracy like that of Muslim countries.

The problem does come down to partisanship and people so ingrained in an ideology that they refuse to accept any divergences from that thinking.

I agree on your point about the system depending on continuous growth and is unsustainable. I think this ultimately is what drives the partisanship. The system was setup so that a common core of values was setup at a federal level and the states ultimately governed as they saw fit, the drive to have everything regulated at the federal level is where the problem comes in with us thinking differently. The values of someone in California is fundamentally different than someone in Mississippi. You would see less partisan divide if the consequences weren't so great.
 
radcen said:
What's the biggest threat to America? Of these three: Democrats, Republicans, Partisanship.
Click to expand...

Option 4, Donald Trump.
 
radcen said:
What's the biggest threat to America? Of these three: Democrats, Republicans, Partisanship.
Click to expand...

I agree with the current results of the poll except that your third answer should have been "both Democrats and Republicans"
 
Nap said:
Having opposing ideas lead to discussion and allow people to see problems in a different light. Everyone thinking the same leads to tragedies like the Nazi regime or religious theocracy like that of Muslim countries.

The problem does come down to partisanship and people so ingrained in an ideology that they refuse to accept any divergences from that thinking.

I agree on your point about the system depending on continuous growth and is unsustainable. I think this ultimately is what drives the partisanship. The system was setup so that a common core of values was setup at a federal level and the states ultimately governed as they saw fit, the drive to have everything regulated at the federal level is where the problem comes in with us thinking differently. The values of someone in California is fundamentally different than someone in Mississippi. You would see less partisan divide if the consequences weren't so great.
Click to expand...

Yet when the religious right turns a blind eye to science you can't expect us liberals to concede or compromise science. Physics does not care about what you or anyone thinks. The conservative base includes those religious fundamentalists. There will never be compromise.

When one state's environmental laws are weak and their pollution enters my state's air and water I have an issue with that. I will not compromise on the health of my people.

When conservatives pull the U.S. out of the Paris agreement they are negatively impacting the future of us all. I will not compromise on that.

When conservatives seek to limit healthcare options for millions of people I will not agree to that. Never.

I agree to the states having the ultimate say over what happens inside their borders. If someone doesn't like it they can move to another state. However, when what happens in one state directly affects another, then the federal government should have control over that issue.

The same should be applied to all nations if we are to be logically consistent. Nations should also be responsible partners in global affairs.
 
Russell797 said:
None of those three options are the problem. The real problem is that we do not all think alike and that is never going to change.

The problem is the system. It pits the smart verses the not so smart, the young verses the old, the achiever verses the non achievers etc.

The system is one dependent upon never ending, continuous growth, something which is unrealistic and positively, absolutely unsustainable.

Once the Titanic had hit the iceberg it was going down. It didn't matter who the captain was.
Click to expand...

You do know that, after saying it wasn't any of those three, that you went on to describe a form of partisanship, right?

1) As someone else mentioned, lockstep thought has its own problems, and 2) it's human nature for people to think independently. It's not realistic to expect people to think the same.
 
Russell797 said:
Yet when the religious right turns a blind eye to science you can't expect us liberals to concede or compromise science. Physics does not care about what you or anyone thinks. The conservative base includes those religious fundamentalists. There will never be compromise.

When one state's environmental laws are weak and their pollution enters my state's air and water I have an issue with that. I will not compromise on the health of my people.

When conservatives pull the U.S. out of the Paris agreement they are negatively impacting the future of us all. I will not compromise on that.

When conservatives seek to limit healthcare options for millions of people I will not agree to that. Never.

I agree to the states having the ultimate say over what happens inside their borders. If someone doesn't like it they can move to another state. However, when what happens in one state directly affects another, then the federal government should have control over that issue.

The same should be applied to all nations if we are to be logically consistent. Nations should also be responsible partners in global affairs.
Click to expand...

You seem to be under the impression that everyone on the Right falls under the "Religious Right" or "Conservative" label. The Right is far more fractured than the Left currently and has many different independent groups with different variations of views.

If you aren't willing to compromise then you have 2 choices, you can use mob rule to enforce your beliefs on others and thus further increase the partisan divide, or you can lead by example and show the merits of your argument and persuade others to follow.
 
Nap said:
You seem to be under the impression that everyone on the Right falls under the "Religious Right" or "Conservative" label. The Right is far more fractured than the Left currently and has many different independent groups with different variations of views.

If you aren't willing to compromise then you have 2 choices, you can use mob rule to enforce your beliefs on others and thus further increase the partisan divide, or you can lead by example and show the merits of your argument and persuade others to follow.
Click to expand...

You may be asking too much.
 
radcen said:
You do know that, after saying it wasn't any of those three, that you went on to describe a form of partisanship, right?

1) As someone else mentioned, lockstep thought has its own problems, and 2) it's human nature for people to think independently. It's not realistic to expect people to think the same.
Click to expand...

Ok, but this is nuanced. When seeking blame for a threat to America we can't blame human nature. Human nature is not going to change.

A system which accommodates the needs of most of the people is better than one which leaves 50% of the people as winners and 50% as losers as we now have.

We must adapt the system to the realities of human nature, rather than persisting with a system which is doomed to failure by the very nature of the human mind.

Simply because the system seems to have worked in the past is no reason to assume it always will. In fact our system both here in the U.S. and internationally is doomed to failure over time. In a world of finite resources, unending growth is an impossibility, yet that is what our system is based upon. We must continuously innovate to stay ahead of failure. Denial of the sciences will not get us there.

There are problems all right, but we can't even agree to what the important ones are. When world views clash, there can only be winners and losers. That's the way it's always been, but it had better not continue that way or we are ******.
 
Nap said:
You seem to be under the impression that everyone on the Right falls under the "Religious Right" or "Conservative" label. The Right is far more fractured than the Left currently and has many different independent groups with different variations of views.

If you aren't willing to compromise then you have 2 choices, you can use mob rule to enforce your beliefs on others and thus further increase the partisan divide, or you can lead by example and show the merits of your argument and persuade others to follow.
Click to expand...

All I know is that conservatives oppose the agenda that I support. I don't really care about how fractured conservatives are. They band together and elect right leaning ideology which defeats my agenda. My agenda is based upon science. Their agenda is not.

The way to win is to educate the public. Sadly education is deemed by conservatives to be controlled by distrusted and hated "elites" and liberals, so many reject public education and seek their own "alternative educations".

People are not going to compromise their religious beliefs and science is not going to compromise either without solid reasoning. That IS the major divide in this country. It's a divide based on world view. There will be no compromise. We can't change physics to suit our politics but we can deny it. That's what conservative ideology does. So what happens is that periodically the religious right beats down science....we are experiencing that today as we speak. One world view opposing another.
 
Russell797 said:
All I know is that conservatives oppose the agenda that I support. I don't really care about how fractured conservatives are. They band together and elect right leaning ideology which defeats my agenda. My agenda is based upon science. Their agenda is not.

The way to win is to educate the public. Sadly education is deemed by conservatives to be controlled by distrusted and hated "elites" and liberals, so many reject public education and seek their own "alternative educations".

People are not going to compromise their religious beliefs and science is not going to compromise either without solid reasoning. That IS the major divide in this country. It's a divide based on world view. There will be no compromise. We can't change physics to suit our politics but we can deny it. That's what conservative ideology does. So what happens is that periodically the religious right beats down science....we are experiencing that today as we speak. One world view opposing another.
Click to expand...

Your agenda has been defeated for over six years now. Maybe it's time to at least tweak your agenda before there is no agenda left.
 
justabubba said:
d. legal bribes ... in the form of campaign contributions to political campaigns
result: we now have the best government money can buy
until unregulated money is removed from politics, nothing else will change
Click to expand...

apologies for the bad form of quoting myself
notice the recent manner in which proposed legislation dealing with 1/6 of the nation's economy was dealt with
our elected senators were largely left out of the writing of the bill
however, the lobbyists from k street were present in large numbers

disabled people, the elderly in nursing homes, and the sick kids who rely on medicaid tend not to be able to hire lobbyists to spread legal campaign bribes - i mean contributions - around
and notice whose oxen got gored in this tRumpcare bill: disabled people, the elderly in nursing homes, and the sick kids

now notice who benefits from the prospective legislation: the insurance industry and the richest 1%

we have the best government money can buy. that needs to end
 
Moderate Right said:
Your agenda has been defeated for over six years now. Maybe it's time to at least tweak your agenda before there is no agenda left.
Click to expand...

There is no compromise to be had.

My agenda has been dominant for the past several hundred years. Because of that agenda you have the advanced human civilization you are part of.

Six years as opposed to hundreds? You take a step back from progress to your peril.
 
Russell797 said:
All I know is that conservatives oppose the agenda that I support. I don't really care about how fractured conservatives are. They band together and elect right leaning ideology which defeats my agenda. My agenda is based upon science. Their agenda is not.

The way to win is to educate the public. Sadly education is deemed by conservatives to be controlled by distrusted and hated "elites" and liberals, so many reject public education and seek their own "alternative educations".

People are not going to compromise their religious beliefs and science is not going to compromise either without solid reasoning. That IS the major divide in this country. It's a divide based on world view. There will be no compromise. We can't change physics to suit our politics but we can deny it. That's what conservative ideology does. So what happens is that periodically the religious right beats down science....we are experiencing that today as we speak. One world view opposing another.
Click to expand...

Not everyone on the Right is religious or base their political views on Religious tenets. So I disagree in that being the major divide. In the American political spectrum the Right vs Left divide largely breaks down into the individual vs the collective.

Again, without the ability to compromise there are only two options for you in achieving your agenda. By force or persuasion, only one of those options lead to civil discourse and the other only increases the unrest we see currently in this country. It doesn't take a scientist to figure out which.
 
Russell797 said:
There is no compromise to be had.

My agenda has been dominant for the past several hundred years. Because of that agenda you have the advanced human civilization you are part of.

Six years as opposed to hundreds? You take a step back from progress to your peril.
Click to expand...

Your history books leave much to be desired.
 
Nap said:
Not everyone on the Right is religious or base their political views on Religious tenets. So I disagree in that being the major divide. In the American political spectrum the Right vs Left divide largely breaks down into the individual vs the collective.

Again, without the ability to compromise there are only two options for you in achieving your agenda. By force or persuasion, only one of those options lead to civil discourse and the other only increases the unrest we see currently in this country. It doesn't take a scientist to figure out which.
Click to expand...

It depends upon what issues you focus on. Conservatives as a group tend to disavow certain sciences based upon ideology. That's what to me is of paramount importance. It's my personal perspective.

You say it's individual versus the collective. Sure it's that too, but we are a society, not just a group of individuals doing their own thing. We are totally dependent upon one another for our very survival. What you do as an individual does affect other people whether you intend it to or not. Unless you live as a hermit out in the wilderness your decisions and actions interact with other people (even then you affect our wilderness). That gives us a say in what you do.
 
Russell797 said:
It depends upon what issues you focus on. Conservatives as a group tend to disavow certain sciences based upon ideology. That's what to me is of paramount importance. It's my personal perspective.

You say it's individual versus the collective. Sure it's that too, but we are a society, not just a group of individuals doing their own thing. We are totally dependent upon one another for our very survival. What you do as an individual does affect other people whether you intend it to or not. Unless you live as a hermit out in the wilderness your decisions and actions interact with other people (even then you affect our wilderness). That gives us a say in what you do.
Click to expand...

The majority of Conservatives do not disavow certain sciences based on ideology. Conservatives and people on the Right tend to be more skeptical so require more data and real world examples in order to persuade them. Yes, the Religous Right portion are very unlikely to move unless you can point to scripture that either supports it or doesn't at least conflict with it.

While it is true there are freedoms that are necessary to give up in order to maintain a peaceful society it is how much one is willing to give up that is the issue. Many would prefer Anarchy opposed to an authoritative government though.

EDIT: Well you have a point in regards to sociology, many on the right do believe it is pointless
 
Last edited:
phattonez said:
Democrats displacing Americans from their country with their unhinged immigration policies are the biggest threat to America.
Click to expand...

Their is as little chance for common ground developing between factions as there is common ground
likely between Palestinians & Jews. It's almost as if the die has been cast.

The major divide in this country at this point in time does seem insurmountable. If Trump had been elected say in
1976 instead of Ford he would have had a better chance to 'MAGA" now no matter how hard he tries it's an obstacle
no one can overcome.

Until 1965 immigration laws were written with one goal;
to preserve the European character of this country.
T Kennedy chairman of the committee was passionate in his
reassurances that the new law would not break with tradition
or alter the nations ethnic character, he was persuasive, he lied, & the disastrous
outcome is more obvious at this time than ever.

Norman Thomas & Eugene Debs were the noted Socialist speakers in the days before Lyndon Johnson, they made little
headway. Bernis Sanders has the mantle now & has made great inroads.
His & fellow liberal coalition is strong with more allies than those Debs & Norman could have ever imagined:
1) Utopian thinkers divorced from reality. Diversity is a religion for them
2) Public Unions who have a stranglehold on the leftwing
3) New arrivals from 3rd world hellholes who need the free stuff
4) The socialist base that has also been here
5) The young, now taught US history as a series of crimes against non-whites
6) Blacks who under left wing doctrines have not made much advances
7) The power of the 'FAKE NEWS' left wing press

They appeal to the direct interests of individuals who are bent on escaping
inequalities not in their favor, & setting up new inequalities that will be in their favor, the latter being their chief concern;' There fore friction between two waring sides is inevitable until one sides wins.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
You didn't vote for partisanship, probably since, based on your post, partisan is what you are.
Click to expand...

I never make the claim to be non-partisan....and obviously by your political tag neither have you. I voted for Trump and you must have voted for Hillary....I would rather be on the winning side than wiping away tears for voting for a loser like Hillary or for another loser in BS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom