Why do people criticize the sincerity of beliefs in the opposing party, but never, in their own party?

Answer 1

I am of the opinion that divisive, simplistic politics succeeds where the electorate is less informed. Back when the primary source of news was the daily paper, when the "Fairness Doctrine" was in place, and when people had a better opportunity to digest opposing viewpoints, the concept of compromise and seeing the other side of the argument was more acceptable. Now, with the Fairness Doctrine gone, and people relying more on quick snippets of spun and tailored news, the generally and politically uneducated masses have more of a tendency to choose an extreme side. When one chooses the extreme side without benefit of supporting data, it is less likely that one can see the flaws in the "side" one chose.

Answer 2

Im still trying to find "my party"!

For a long time I considered myself a Republican, supporting Reagan and Bush senior. I thought things could be better, but didnt think that things were all that bad, except the debt!

I voted for Clinton, once, then felt that he completely let me down. Where I thought he would bring an exciting new perspective on the way to handle government, he turned into "same old- same old" and accomplished very little. It seemed to me that he was only interested in his "legacy". I thought he could have been the "voice of my generation". Instead, Im not sure who he was trying to benefit other than himself.

I've always admired Al Gore, but I thought the country needed to shift back to the right a bit. And to be honest I couldnt stand Lieberman. So I voted for the next Bush...once. Now Im in the situation where I feel that I didnt leave the Republican party, the Republican party left me. Many negatives have been posted on George W and I agree with most of them, so I wont rehash them here. Suffice it to say Im embarrased for having voted for him. I didnt think much of Kerry or Edwards in the last election, but I thought they were the lesser of two evils.

Now Im not sure what to do or who to support. The Democrats dont have any cohesive vision for the country. They seem to be running on the platform that "its time for a woman in the White House". I think we need to elect a leader based upon something other than gender, such as experience or the ability to cross party lines. I like Obama, but he just doesnt have the experience either.
On the other side, Ive always admired McCain, but he seems dead in the water. There is no way I could ever support a scheister good-ol boy like Guiliani. Paul has some great ideas but is far too religious for my taste. Thompson seems like a decent leader, but feels a bit to close to the current regime for my tastes.
Alas, what is a moderate to do?
To sum up, I call everyone out when I see faults. I do not support any particular "party" but I vote for which individual candidates best represent my beliefs. I do not blindly follow anyone.

Answer 3

It is easier to criticize the sincerity of someone you will probably never support. I think during the political primaries, that is done(criticizing someone in your party). But , once the general election starts, all that "other" stuff gets pushed aside for the sake of whatever party you belong to.
The person being 80% your friend, not your 20% enemy.
If you watch, people also JUSTIFY hypocrisy in their party by pointing to hypocrisy in the other party.
It is actually funny.

Answer 4

It isn't the "sincerity of beliefs" that is criticized; it's the ideology itself. The supporters of the Iraq war, for example, really believe that it's a war on terror, a war to secure Iraq's independence, retribution for 9-11, etc. What is criticized is the legitimacy of that belief, not the sincerity with which they believe.

Answer 5

I beg to differ.

I question both parties, from top to bottom, since no one is standing up to the Patriot Act or the Military Commissions Act or torture or spying or dismissing Habeas Corpus....

We have no real parties anymore.

We need a REAL third party.

Let's call it THE LIBERTY PARTY.

And the platform will be the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence.

Anybody in?

Answer 6

Happens all the time. Its sad that we’ve too many people locked into a generalized view of anyone who doesn’t agree. Some of the printed attacks I’ve seen here go way beyond friendly banter and cross the line towards abusive, personal, and down right rudeness.

I'm a liberal, and I happen to think what TD said in the following post was WAY out of line

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Au2zpUZGiwew5E8mBhObdqjsy6IX?qid=20070705063739AAkozgX&show=7#profile-info-36c5d3c535bb7fd52bf3961508c09979aa

Answer 7

Now would you be talking about political parties, because I am a democrat that just discussed how wrong Al Gore is for flying around on his jet and getting into a prius. I will defend members of my party if I feel they are right, but when they are not, I chose not to justify there wrong doings because I feel like I am doing something wrong myself.

Answer 8

Because it can be considered a sign of weakness if your own followers question you publically. Don't think for a second that there are not arguements WITHIN parties...they just aren't public. People DO switch parties when they disagree so much that they cannot represent their side any more.

Answer 9

I don't affiliate with any one party. Also, I don't agree with every viewpoint. When ever I find some idea or view that I don't agree with, first I look into the arguments for and against it then try to come to an informed opinion.

The concept of simply following the party line is much to "sheep like" for me!

Answer 10

I do question the sincerity of beliefs in my own party. Mitt Romney is a great example. I don't believe he is sincere in any way, shape, or form.