democrats vs republicans?

Question

Why is the US so divided into 2 extremes that waste their time bashing the other side?
I mean, I'm not from there, and they way I see most of the questions on here, and things I read in the papers or watch on TV, it makes you guys look so ridiculous.
has all political thought been reduced to us vs them and black vs white?

i don't understand why everything has to be lumped into two sets of generalities. nothing is ever that simple. nothing.

I just think you guys should spend less time quarreling, and more time trying to fix and run your country correctly.

Answer 1

This is really a good question and deserves a good answer. So here goes.

The political bickering is based on 2 very basic principles of government and economics.

Democrats believe in big governments and governmental control over virtually all aspects of the private citizen's life. Basically, we call that liberalism.

Republicans believe in small government that allows the people deside what the do with their lives, and that includes the economy. People will make the best choices for themselves, not government.

I understand that compromise is always useful to settle disputes and differences of opinion. However, in today's American political system, the democrat party has totally and completely refused to acknowledge reality of both the world and the economy. There are a tremendous number of examples of this, so I won't waste time displaying them. You can just simply listen to what they say and what reality is.

As for the republicans, they too are not without problems. Most of the people in the republican party want a stong America through our traditional conservative values. Our elected republicans seem to be selling us out on that view. Bush's push for illegal alien amnesty is a good example of that.

And yes I agree that this is really stupid. The people of this country need to take it back through electing competent, conservative representatives. When we do, this country will return to the greatness it has enjoyed in the past. And note, we will return to those values.

Answer 2

The U.S. is too geographically, demographically, and philosophically diverse to come up with a rational and sane debate at the national level. With 330,000,000 people and 50 unique political divisions and no real constitutional basis for most of our national government, it doesn't surprise me that the debate is reduced to such a low common denominator.

Just imagine in 50 or 100 years if the E.U. has gone from a trade-zone to a complete top-down government controlling medical law, moving toward a completely unified code of criminal law, selecting industries to survive or fail, and rationing out subsidies based on which state helped elect the current government. Issues and industries of interest in Romania won't be the same issues of interest in Ireland or Spain but they'll be stuck in the 'national' debate together. They'll have to band together and create sides not just to simplify the complexity of such a extended system, but also to give the smaller states some sort of leverage to cash in on the tax dollars.

I expect the same sort of devolution of political debate will continue the larger nations become.

Answer 3

That's the 10th Federalist paper for you in a nutshell. When this country adopted it's constitution, it was argued that the greater the difference of opinion between various groups, the better off we would be because people would be forced to compromise in a manner that served everyone. Of course, Madison probably didn't realize that we'd be stuck with hundreds of millions of people only being represented by two parties. Since we're supposed to think that somehow one party is better than the other, we have to demonize the other side in order to garner votes. This is exacerbated by our media who try to make it seem like Americans are only interested in a few so-called "hot button" issues (Abortion, Gay Marriage, etc.) and that they will vote accordingly. The whole thing IS rather silly, but since we're afraid to vote large numbers of third party candidates into office, not much is going to change any time soon.

Answer 4

We know we look ridiculous. It comes from being passionate. The problem is we cannot agree. Things aren't necessarily lumped into two sides out of convenience, but the two parties tend to share the same types of beliefs. I know a lot of people who are middle of the road, but there is not a group that represents them so they side with the party that tends to fit the majority of their beliefs.. It seems simple to say that things should just be fixed, but until people can agree on an outcome, the path to the solution is going to be divided. - Signed, a crazy, passionate, Democrat

Answer 5

I'm an American citizen and I concur with your assessment of American politics. What everyone needs to realize is that everyone is not going to be satisfied with every issue, and needs to compromise. If each side would just give a little than we can find a middle ground on each issue instead of leaving problems for the next generation to fix. We must not forget that the color gray exists in the light spectrum and that inaction is worst than no action. Little things can be fixed later.

Answer 6

no longer in all threat, that's extra like this Democrat vs. Republican= critical government administration of your existence to the smallest element vs. very own duty. additionally, i comprehend a terrific variety of Democrats who're prosperous exterior of Hollywood. What you're spouting is the left wing mantra that has been around for some years.

Answer 7

Both sides are corrupt. There are two sides because they have to make it seem like the people are making a decision. I know that Hilary Clinton is going to be president of the United States in 2008, and she's not going to do anything different than the president before her. Its a fake wrestling match, thats what politics is all about. I wish they would stand up and elect leaders that are just and honest. However, people are too concerned with Paris Hilton to care or understand what's going on. My 2 cents :)

Answer 8

We have a multi party system in which voters are free to choose. History will show that they have wisely chosen the republican party for some time and there is pretty much no chance that the undistinguished senator from New York will be within smelling distance of the white house.

See you soon Rudy!

Answer 9

You are seeing only the two extremes, very loud but extremes none the less.
The U.S.A. has a long history of moderation in politics and the greatest part of the voting public does not speak unless at the ballot box.
The bickering makes for a good show, don't you think?

Answer 10

You said, "I just think you guys should spend less time quarreling, and more time trying to fix and run your country correctly." We're quarreling over HOW to fix and run our country correctly. We can't do the latter without doing the former.