Political Party Loyalty: Is it just about supporting your favorite team?

[IdaBriggs]

I'm an Independent. I'm contrary, and have publicly admitted to voting for a woman on the ticket if I don't know enough about a candidate to influence my vote one way or another. My social views are Liberal / Progressive, while my fiscal policy is pretty much "conservative." I fully support Big Government (teachers, police, firemen, meat inspectors, etc.), and support my military, while being horrified at the thought of any member of my family serving in it. (I don't like careers where killing people is part of the job.) I like the idea of unions, but get concerned about the actual implementation of it, probably because of hearing too many family stories about union corruption.

I find the current crop of National Republicans to be despicable worms who should be publicly flogged; there is nothing good to be said about these vile and corrupt degenerates. The National Democrats appear to be one step above useless, as they at least periodically present the illusion they give a damn. The third parties have earned my gratitude, but haven't proven they can govern.

I never got involved politically until 2004; as an Independent, I always believed it was the responsibility of the two parties to find the best candidates, and present them for my viewing pleasure. I did my homework before 2000, and voted for Gore; by 2004, I was a Precinct Captain for Kerry.

But I'm still stuck. I won't blindly support ANYBODY. I don't cheer for someone just because they are a Democrat, or a Republican. I want good ideas from a lot of different sources, and I want to believe that despite differing opinions, all the folks in Washington are looking out for the long term best interests of my country, and by extension, the rest of the world.

Note the key words: WANT TO BELIEVE. Obviously, reality is different from what I want to believe, and I am well enough informed to have figured that out.

But not everyone else has. I think at some level that membership in a political party is almost more of a social event for some people; they pledge their loyalty to the Party, and they don't care if the values of the Party match up with their own. They spout platitudes about "strength and courage" and actually pretend to believe them, because learning differently is too much work.

George W. Bush has far more in common with Charles Manson than Jesus Christ, and yet, the Republicans really don't seem to notice. Perhaps they think this is simply an off year, and their team will get better, so they'd better keep cheering them on.

I don't know, and frankly, I don't care. I know some people who profess to being believers in the ideals spouted by the Republicans, and my respect for them is darn near nil; I consider them ... delusional, and view their ongoing support of their party in a contemptuous fashion.

And I still struggle to understand them. My latest analogy is that of a sports team.

There are teams that win play offs and championships once a century, if they are lucky, and yet they still have both fans, and a sizable profit from their merchandising. The "loyalty" is something to be respected, because heaven knows its not always earned.

Is this the "magical explanation" for Republican AND DEMOCRATIC Party loyalists? A "true fan" will not turn his back on his team no matter what scandals surface; he will simply hope for things to get better.

I'm not a fan of Party Politics; I'm too practical for such blind loyalty. I want results. I'm not going to jump on your bandwagon if I think you are wrong just because someone else says I should. If you don't support the things I want, I'm not going to vote for you, and I'm not going to give you money, either.

Right now I want George W. Bush and his Corrupt Cabal IMPEACHED, IMPRISONED & IMPALED. I'll settle for two out of three, but if I'm not hearing someone promise to do everything they can to make those things happen, I'm not going to play along "just because putting Democrats in charge is good." If I can't tell the difference between the two parties, then why bother?

But then again, I've never been a sports fan, so perhaps I'm missing something.

Comments?

[MadMaddie]

1. It should be America before Party....

I will chose carefully who I vote for ....the majority of the candidates will be Dems or Independents. In the case of the Presidency in 08 it will only be a Dem.

I want to hear our candidates talk about country before party...What is best for America...how they are going to help change the path of the country.....remove religion from politics.....equal rights for all Americans...jobs for Americans....health care for Americans...

Country before Party!!!

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

2. If you can't tell the difference between the two parties right now

you simply aren't paying enough attention. Sorry.

[IdaBriggs]

4. On some issues, there is a clear difference. On others, NONE.

The "Patriot Act" seems like a big deal to me. A bunch of Democrats stood up, and publicly fussed about it; then, when no one was looking, they voted for it with minimal changes.

Remember the last Supreme Court Justice? How many voted to support the only thing that would stop him -- a filibuster? But afterward they were able to say "we voted against him" (even though we knew it was only an empty gesture)?

Yes, Pro-Choice Democrats say so publicly; and then they don't do EVERYTHING IN THEIR POWER to stop abominations like the rider that was aimed at Planned Parenthood.

The list goes on. If its useless to be a Democratic Senator because you can't fight against a Republican majority, then what is the fricking point???

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

7. The "fricking point" is that they won't be in the minority forever.

The fricking point is that the Democrats you complain about are the same ones that will eventually help put the Kennedys and Boxers into power in a Democratic majority. The fricking point is that in a lot of cases, it's downright suicidal to take up those positions, yet if Democrats were in power, those circumstances wouldn't come up in the first place.

Do you think Alito would've been nominated by Kerry? No, no, and hell no. If they were in the majority in the Senate, do you think he'd have been nominated by even Bush? Probably not.

If Democrats were in power, do you think the Patriot Act would be on the table, or at a minimum, do you not think it would be vastly different?

You're thinking way too short-sightedly.

[radio4progressives]

14. "if Democrats were in power, those circumstances wouldn't come up"...

in the first place" ...

This is the height of delusion for anyone claiming to be paying close attention..

Furthermore, if the Democrats are victorious in regaining control of either or both Houses in Congress in the up coming mid term elections, they will have a weak majority, and if you or anyone else thinks there will be dramatic changes on all of these concerns, have not been paying attention.

The Patriot Act was largely crafted by Democrats. That's why they supported it they ignored the Constituional challenges that have been cogently made by respected Constitutional scholars all over the country, and in the end, they ignored their own constituents strong opposition to the reauthorization of the act when it came up last month.

The list is endless of actions and non actions that our own party is chiefly responsible for either supporting or enabling by their own appeasment through their spokespeople like Joe Biden (this morning's rediculous bloviations on the judiciary committee regarding the President's Domestic Spying programs is a perfect example and c/should be made as a campaign poster to unseat Biden with a progressive (which is sorely needed)...

I think the amazing willingness to deny, overlook or apologize for our own party leaders complicity, duplicity and enabling of this administrations abhorent policies is the absolute height of utter stupidity, both in terms of integrity and in terms of strategy to win back Congress in the mid terms.

I'm personally holding a bit of hope for a Gore/Feingold in 2008, but at the moment am highly pessimistic there will be any significant changes in the House or Senate come November given the rediculousness of our party elected officials in general, with a few exceptions of course.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

17. I think the only amazing thing is the number of inaccuracies in your post.

Quite frankly, it's not even worth starting to respond to.

[radio4progressives]

21. Please point out the inaccuracies.. I'm not to proud to stand corrected...

[lyonn]

20. Wasn't Lieberman the main force in the Patriot Act?

We got snookered by him. Apparently Gore did too.

Yes, dems too often in Congress gave that weak yes vote on many repub. issues. It appeared they didn't want to be the party of "no." Bless them, now they are the party of "yes." Ugh.

[radio4progressives]

23. Not Sure, Probably .. But Senator Leahy Stated that he was one of the

chief crafters of the original Senate version of the Patriot Act in 2001..

I believe Sensenbrenner, co authored and introduced the House version in 2001..

[RufusEarl]

9. Indie here

and i'm paying attention! I'm old enough to remember when democratic spoke they had the ability to separate themselves from most republicans, to be honest i neither hear democratic speak or hear that much difference.

Both parties have sold their souls to corp america, and thats a fact! But still we have differences in the two parties, and the simple truth is i don't like republicans.

I really can't think of one republican that i consider honest or cares about their country, and i do hear this from democratic. Not all of them but enough to no the difference.

As much as i dislike this admin, i haven't been able to find one present democratic that i want to win the nomination in 08. I keep hopping that someone will come along that the whole country will support, i know it's far fetched but it would certainly heal this broken country.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

11. You want to know why you haven't heard it lately?

Because it's a lot easier to speak fire and brimstone while you're in power than it is when you're not. Fire and brimstone didn't start with the GOP until 1994, which is exactly when ours ended. This is not a coincidence. It's how politics work in this country.

[radio4progressives]

16. which party was in control of Congress in 2000-2002?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

18. Neither.

Got another question?

[radio4progressives]

25. Feingold stands out for me, as far as Washington leadership goes..

but that's just about the extent of it.. i'm so disgusted with the entirety of the party right now i can hardly see straight, except for Feingold. Kennedy and Boxer does ok for the most part.. but damn i sure would love to see the MAJORITY of the party speaking clear, strong, cogently and with courgage - like Feingold.

[kurth]

3. What it will boil down to: Corporations vs. working Americans

It is clear that the GOP is a bunch of greedy corporate fascists. And Democrats care much more about the working poor and the middle class.

Unfortunately, there is always that failure to communicate.

[Warpy]

5. Group identification has been a surivival instinct for a very long

time in human history, and identification with a "winner" group is even more strong (except for Red Sox and Cubbie fans). Yes, for most unskeptical loyalists, it IS rather like identifying with their favorite sports teams, their favorite cars, their favorite cigarettes. It means they're part of something bigger than they are, and they feel stronger for it. Their life choices are confirmed and they have friends in high places who think like they do and so on.

Yes, we skeptics know it's all an illusion, a dangerous one in most cases. Don't expect loyalists of any flavor to listen to us, though. We're party poopers, flies in ointment, nuisances and they all wish we'd just go away and stop reminding them that their choices endanger their health, that their friends in high places are really out to get them and so on.

It's the old analogy of the sheep and the goats. The sheep seek safety in numbers and rely on the men who fleece them. The goats pretty much go where they want (although they'll take advice on pasturing)and eat everything and are quite capable of returning to the wild.

[lyonn]

24. Silly story but

My youngest son struggled to get a masters degree (he partied better than he studied) and then greated the world and looked for a job. This was during bush 1 era. He pronounced at election time that he was pulling the roosters tail, no repubs for him! He got a good repub education on who is really important in this country and it wasn't him. Oh, he finally can support a family now but not because of this idot administration.

[Tyler Durden]

6. In a Republic, it's Winner Take All.

That's why there's Party Loyalty, and that's why some of us on the FAR LEFT (I personally consider myself a Socialist) would vote for the Democrats if they nominated a 1971 Candy Apple Red Pontiac GTO.

Kudos to the OLD National Lampoon for that one, but I think you get my point. NOT voting for the Democrats helps the Republicans, and I've never figured out why everyone else CAN'T figure that out.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

12. I'd love to nominate this for Post of the Year.

Thank you. A thousand times over, THANK YOU!

[Tyler Durden]

19. Vash, I just don't see why EVERYONE doesn't GET IT.

Where do they think we LIVE? ENGLAND? FRANCE? I haven't seen any PARLIAMENT here, have you? Got a PRIME MINISTER? How about a Coalition Government? The PARTY with the most votes, WINS. if the rePukes got 35%, the Dems 30%, the Greens 25% and the rest to "Indies," Guess who WINS?

The REPUKES DO.

I would think some folks would have figured it out by now, ESPECIALLY with BOLTON, ROBERTS, ALITO. But NOOOO.

Am I that smart, or are THEY that STUPID?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

22. It's an issue of zealotry.

They are blinded by the "cause" and fail to see either the system or any hint of pragmatism. If they don't see someone screaming at the top of their lungs exactly what they're screaming, that person is the enemy, plain and simple. We have them, just as the Republicans do too.

[trackfan]

30. Excellent Post

I am very far to the left on most issues, but have often found myself enthusiastically supporting centrist candidates. If you do nothing but lose elections, you can't get anything done.

[mmonk]

8. For some, it is. Not for me.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

10. I'm a lifelong Dem who will be voting selectively in '06.

I owe the Democratic Party, or any other party, zip, nada, zilch. When the Dems vote with the repugs as my senator (Cantwell) did on the IWR, she can kiss my vote goodbye because of her vote.

It's called democracy.

[Tyler Durden]

27. We do not live in a DEMOCRACY.

We live in a Federal REPUBLIC. England and Canada are PARLIAMENTARY DEMOCRACIES. That's why more than 2 parties flourish there.

if we had 12 parties and the rePUKES got 25% and the next party 24.5% THE REPUKES STILL WOULD CHAIR THE COMMITTEES.

We live in a 2 PARTY, REPRESENTATIVE FEDERAL REPUBLIC, not a democracy. Your vote only really counts in a BLOC. Otherwise, you and yours are shit outa luck.

No offense, but this shit is Civics 101.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

29. Tell it to the Whigs.

Other than that, I agree that we don't live in a democracy, or a "Federal republic". We live in an oligarchy bought, paid for, and run by the wealthy and powerful.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

33. Tell it to a political party that hasn't existed in over a century?

:rofl:

[Tyler Durden]

35. Give up Vash.

Next someone will cite the "Know Nothings" or the "Bullmoose" party.

[dmkinsey]

13. First, I believe that everything is political,

That means that everything is partisan.
My party and the other party will have different ideas about every issue that comes up.
One must consider the basic ideology of the two parties and choose the one that most reflects one's own beliefs and then stick with that party.
Anyone who votes for Dems and Republicans on the same ballot is a fool. You'll inly succeed in sending two representatives who'll work against each other.

Of course one need not vote for every Dem every time.
If there's a Dem on the ticket that you find especially odious or obviously unqualified then don't vote for that candidate. Write in yourself or leave the spot blank but don't vote for the other party.

[lyonn]

15. More than ever I think party does matter

even tho many dems in high places lack fire power. They have the politics of at least attempting to care about the masses. From the beginning I registered as a repub. and then immediately voted for Kennedy. Johnson pissed me off with the VN war when he kept repeating the domino theory. Voted for (sorry, so Dumb, but was so young) Goldwater as he convinced me that he could end our presence in VN. Surely he would never really use the Bomb?? Voted for Nixon twice, was glad when he was impeached. Voted for Carter, was disappointed, the public got snookered on the repubs lying about what he was attempting to do. Voted Reagan, twice, and was glad to see him go too. Damn I'm dumb, but, did vote for Clinton. Best I can figure out is that when you are raising a family and working part of the time and trying to have a life you miss the big picture. That is my excuse. But in the times when Reagan and Nixon ran for pres. our Dems appeared wishy washy and many wondered if they could lead the country. I know what my problems was then and that was I agreed with what they said but wasn't convinced they could accomplish the task. So, wonder if that is not what is going on now with so many people thinking George is better or the same as the Dems? The Deans, Finegolds, Clarks, Murthas, etc. who speak out and make waves on tv impress me. Kerry said the right words most of the time but lost the audience. We need a dem. candidate for Congress and the Pres. that is an attention getter and smart. Which makes me wonder how bush ever got the nomination in the first place. The most he could say is he didn't get a blow job. Right? He loved jesus. Right? Even I got severely spooked by him and wrote to some blog about how bush scared me and the guy writes back that I might be going to extremes, and he appeared to be a liberal. It was 2000 so don't remember the blog.

Blathering on because we all wonder why this idiot is still in office and can get by with breaking every law that is possible. Mostly going to war under false pretenses. He appeared harmless but stupid until 9-11. Don't get me wrong, there is no way a repub. gets my vote now or an independent unless he has a real chance and that is not possible at this time.

Another thing, I get absolutely obsessed with what is going on now in this country but it has got to be because I have the time to Read. When working while husband got his degree, then raising kids it was an absolute treat to read a book in less than months and to see a whole movie at once on tv. So, this no doubt is what is wrong with the voting crowd - throw in the damn voting macines. Meet you at the Boston Harbor for the dumping.

[spag68]

26. party loyalty

is something I have had for better then 50 years. Do you honestly believe those of us who are loyal to the dems. are so shallow as to not have valid reasons. There are some few repubs. I have voted for on a local level, but the stated positions of the repubs. preclude me from being anything but a dem. I am a labor liberal and I think we should be proud of our views like we used to be.

[lyonn]

28. Spag, some of us thought we were liberal because

we thought we were looking at both sides! Just explaining some repub votes that people make. When the south went repub because of civil rights and the righteous took over the repub party that is when I called it quits. A few friends and in-laws in this State made comments to me when I started ranting about the repubs and wondered when I would "get it." Who could imagine a party that would take over and make our country a ?? fiefdom?

Our history books in grade school explained how great our country was due to agriculture, minerals, corporations (what? corporations) as they were the backbone of this country. Little did we know then how they would control. Monopolies were not allowed so that was our protection from the corps. Wrong. Our media is one big monopoly. Insurance. Pharmacies. Oilies.

[IdaBriggs]

31. I am glad you are loyal; I am not. If the Repugs start sounding like

"Real Democrats" and doing things like a) standing up for labor; b) standing up for civil liberties; c) taking care of our country; and d) quit trying to run my personal life, I would be voting for them so fast it would make the Dems heads spin. As it is, I think we just get the worst of all possibilities: Republicans, and the folks who don't stand up to them.

Is what I'm asking for so impossible? Can't they DO SOMETHING about the craziness the Republicans are inflicting? Instead, they just seem to go along to get along.

[sandnsea]

32. That's how Bush got elected, congratulations

People who can't connect political ideology for 100 years and give themselves a good thwack on the head and say "oh, that's what I'll get if I vote Republican again".

I gave up any notion of "independent" politics when I saw what a disaster Reagan was. It's bullshit. People belong to a party for a reason, they support the party's political agenda and there's strength in numbers.

Pick a side.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

34. ...

:thumbsup: :yourock:

[NaturalHigh]

36. I've voted for Democrats, and I've voted for Republicans.

In 1992 (when I was a naive 21-year-old kid), I voted for Ross Perot. I don't believe in voting the straight party. This is not a football game. Each party puts forth its share of dumbasses.

[Tyler Durden]

37. I'm sorry, but you are WRONG.

Like so many others, you seem to think that we live in a Parliamentary Democracy or a Straight Democracy.

We don't. I'd prefer it. Democrats would win hands down most of the time, and then they could stop worrying about pleasing the "welfare Red Staters."

I repeat: We live in a REPRESENTATIVE FEDERAL REPUBLIC. That means, the PARTY with the most votes (not even the MAJORITY of all the votes) picks the Speaker of the House, the Senate MAJORITY leader, the HOUSE Majority leader, and ALL of the committee chairs. THESE are the people who make the laws, therefore THEY are the people who run most of the government: Budget, Purse Strings, all live and die by these assholes.

Michigan has a Nurse Deficit. They also have a Nurse Scholarship fund, where every student who will take a Registered Nurse course, pass the registry, and work in Michigan can get $4000.00/YEAR for college. FREE. No Strings.

WHY is no one getting it? BECAUSE THERE IS A REPUBLICAN MAJORITY IN THE MICHIGAN HOUSE AND SENATE, AND THEY TAKE IT OUT OF THE BUDGET EVERY YEAR SO THEY CAN GIVE MORE TAX CUTS.

EVERY Democrat votes for it. ZERO Republicans vote for it.

You get a choice in this country: join a team and WIN, you get to run things. Play it SOLO, and you FUCK your side.

PERIOD. Unless you're with ME and would rather have democratic SOCIALISM. Fat chance.

[NaturalHigh]

38. Sorry, Tyler, I can't agree with your thinking.

Simply voting the straight ticket every time encourages politicians to be less responsive to the will of the people. If politicians know they have a certain district locked up due to past party voting habits, why would they really care to represent the will of their constituents? Why not just hang out with the lobbyists and enjoy the perks of the office? I think it is my obligation as a citizen to vote for the person that I believe represents my interests.