Is there a middle ground or are we destined to become a society of left versus right?

2014-06-10T22:39:14-04:00

I have seen more and more of people who lay claim to being a Republican (AKA conservative, right-wing, etc.) or Democrat (AKA liberal, left-wing, etc.). I have a hard time understanding why people feel the need to identify with a specific political party and will ALWAYS vote that way, regardless of a better idea. What draws someone to identify with either black or white ideologies instead of being politically/ideologically open? Is there a middle ground or are we destined to become a society of left versus right? Why do you choose to affiliate with a particular party?

The inspiration behind this question can be found in the response I received on a similar RP discussion (https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/next-presidential-election?page=3&sort_by=votes&urlhash=)

Do you think Hillary Clinton would make a good President? If so, why? | RallyPoint

Do you think Hillary Clinton would make a good President, if you vote yes, why? Who do you think would be the best, front running candidate? Note: Image added by RP staff of past Hillary campaign

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Jun 11 at 2014 12:01 AM

2014-06-11T00:01:06-04:00

I don't affiliate unconditionally...I simply vote for the least worst candidate.

Response by CWO4 Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 11 at 2014 10:25 AM

2014-06-11T10:25:00-04:00

Response by SGT Ben Keen made Jun 11 at 2014 10:35 AM

2014-06-11T10:35:46-04:00

As human beings, we like to identify ourselves as something. We then like to gather with others that share those same thoughts and ideals. Identifying yourself with one of the political parties is just part of that. For some, they do the research on the different topics and learn about the situation but sadly, with the attention span of most people not exceeding 160 characters at a time when reading something; most just go with what they see. That's why you are seeing groups true to things like Instagram to get their point out there. Don't have time to read about the issue? Well here is a picture for you to look at showing you the issue...well at least one side of it anyways.

Personally, there are a few issues that I really like to stay in the loop about. When it comes to my political views, I identify myself as an Independent and while I'm not an expert in all the different things each election period, I do tend to vote for the person that supports those issues that I do care about.

Response by CPT Richard Riley made Jun 11 at 2014 10:39 AM

2014-06-11T10:39:15-04:00

Ideology has as much to do with how you embrace your belief or opinion of the subject as it has to do with your core value system. In this day & age, opinion can just be another term for belief in some situations. A belief you cannot sway because it is rooted internally and has no dependence upon any fact. A belief (not necessarily opinion) is based in the same manner as faith - where you do not need to have any fact established to embrace it. Faith exists in each of us because we want it to or choose to embrace it without a specific fact to bolster it. Politics today, in a sense, has become somewhat of a ‘religion’ for many people. Once you ‘buy into’ several basic plank ideals that the party puts forward, it becomes an easy walk to coop the ideology as a whole and swallow the brine with the water if you will. Today’s thought processes are so wrapped around sound-bites and half-truths and sheep following each other that few people today make a conscious effort to think for themselves because the ‘cause’ sounds right and you ‘sorta’ agree so it must be OK. It’s not often that we have the option to deal with bare facts anymore. By the time information filters to us, the hard facts have been molded, skewed, and tweaked to fit a specific narrative and we’re left to try and figure out what part is valid and which other parts are tainted. This has evolved over a long time and sadly many have become accustomed to this pitch.

Whether we like it or not, a proven fact is undeniable. Much of what we are forced to deal with these days falls into the category of opinion or belief and has very little to no bearing on facts. That, in itself, is a utopia of sorts because there is no fact for the discussion to establish in the first place. Right wing, left wing, conservative, progressive, uber either side -- the spin most often has nothing to do with a fact, but is solely rooted in a personal opinion where it is unfortunately immune to factual persuasion.

It's more about belief -vs- fact. Some here, and other places have entrenched belief's that, regardless of the facts presented by an opposing view, will not vary or venture away from their long held belief. That belief has been embraced and engrained in their person and holds the position of a fact absent the basis to back it. Evidence, facts, and truths are not the same as conjecture, opinion, and thought. Everyone agrees that each is entitled to have their opinion, but that opinion is only accurate for the person that holds it.

Unfortunately politics & religion are just two of the subjects that are little swayed with concrete facts because the emotional string that attaches to a belief is not severed. Those that follow any thread of philosophical thought mostly view it from their individual perspective, irrespective of the facts at hand.

Response by SFC Michael Hasbun made Jun 11 at 2014 10:40 AM

2014-06-11T10:40:11-04:00

I belong to neither party. To me, it's this simple. Most politicians come from a law background. They're mostly lawyers. Lawyers argue for a living. That's what they do. Our government is run by people whose primary skill is endlessly arguing with each other. That is just not a recipe for success....

We need some engineers, doctors, scientists, businessmen etc... In office.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 11 at 2014 11:49 AM

2014-06-11T11:49:01-04:00

Political parties mean nothing. The south used to vote democrat - but go ask the post civil war folks if they would consider themselves "liberals".

Response by MSG Brad Sand made Jun 11 at 2014 12:42 PM

2014-06-11T12:42:03-04:00

I dislike both parties...but feel the Progressives in the Democratic Party are the most dangerous and damaging to our culture and Nation. I just had to commit to a party for our primary...and now I am doing the paperwork to be an Independent again.

I am ready to see the Democratic-Republican Party or the Anti-Federalist Party arise from the ashes of history like political Phoenix! Sorry, one of the problems of being a History major is actually knowing what we should have for a government. This even more painful when we see what we have.

Response by MCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 11 at 2014 12:50 PM

2014-06-11T12:50:10-04:00

Dan, are you saying that if the US military just sent Dan Rosploch overseas, all of our wartime woes would be over?

Why not?

Could it be because there is both safety and a synergy in numbers? THIS is why we have political parties - so a HERD of us can gang up and defeat "those idiots" that oppose us. This is why the independent parties are so lost - they don't have enough of a 'gang' to defeat the main-party candidates.

You will find that MOST of us may lay claim to a particular party, but there are fundamental planks in the platform with which we disagree. I know Repubs that support the freedom of choice, and I know Dems that support the death penalty. We just choose a particular party to add our weight to their fight and their weight to our opinions. This way, it's not ME that thinks XXX - it's _US_ that thinks it - and there is support there.

Response by SSG Robin Rushlo made Jun 11 at 2014 12:58 PM

2014-06-11T12:58:39-04:00

I want to start the BROOM PARTY. Sweep them ALL out of office and start over.

Response by LCpl Steve Wininger made Jun 11 at 2014 1:18 PM

2014-06-11T13:18:17-04:00

Great discussion topic SGT Rosploch. I sense some frustration in your opening, and I can relate. I claim to be a conservative which means I do not lay claim to any political party. I will vote for the person, regardless of party affiliation, that best represents my views and that I think will be the best for the public in general. This is usually where the grey gives way to black and white for the majority of people.

We all have differing points of views, ideologies, and opinions about what is best for the majority. This is where division creeps in, and the two party system actively drives the wedge of division in further. If voters would, 1. become active, and 2. become informed, then the party system will loose some of it's grip on the citizens. I generally vote Republican on the national level as they best represent what I feel, at least in theory. On the state and local level I have been known to vote democrat. I have no problem voting for a democrat on the national level if I felt they would be best for the job.

I have learned that the only difference between a republican and democrat is the side of the isle they sit on in Congress. They are both self seeking, and are mostly concerned about the special interests that bought them and not the people that voted them in.

The two party system does nothing but serve as a driver of division. Political parties are nothing more than an agenda looking for a place to keep from dying. Until voters become active and quit rewarding bad behavior by reelecting bad politicians then We the People can take back our government from certain self destruction. In order to do this the voter needs to quit allowing the media and governments talking points to dictate their decisions.

We have an opportunity in this country that did not exist ten or fifteen years ago. With the internet, and access to the source of major decisions, we can be the most educated voters in history. Sadly, we are the least educated.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 11 at 2014 1:52 PM

2014-06-11T13:52:07-04:00

Political parties are a vulgar part of society.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 11 at 2014 3:28 PM

2014-06-11T15:28:34-04:00

I register as a Republican to vote in primaries that require it, but I don't swear blind allegiance to any party. I research the candidates to see who appears to support the same values that I desire. I have voted democrats and independents. I don't see the world, and I teach my children to not see the world, as black and white but for what it truly is...multi-colored, bright and full of promise.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 11 at 2014 7:09 PM

2014-06-11T19:09:00-04:00

George Washington was a very intelligent leader. The words of his Farewell Address regarding parties:

"The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction [party], more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another. "

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Jun 11 at 2014 7:28 PM

2014-06-11T19:28:42-04:00

I think as we grow older we change, our opinions and attitudes change. Before I joined the Military I was Revolutionary Left Winger, Hell I had a SLA Multi-Headed Snake Poster in my Bedroom. As a 3rd Class PO I was Registered Republican and most definitely a Reagan/Dole Compassionate Conservative. As I grew older I became disgusted with the Hypocrisy of that group and Morally Offended in 1996 with the Advent of FOX which I see no different than Radio Moscow when I was in Adak, AK. Having Lived on and off for several years as a guest of the Brits I see myself more of a European Style Social Democrat. I'm with SGM Quick I vote for Whoever Offends me the Least.

Response by SPC Charles Brown made Jun 12 at 2014 12:47 AM

2014-06-12T00:47:24-04:00

First let me say that I am unequivocally an independent voter. I vote my conscience each election and I am sorry to say that this last election I took a chance and voted to reelect the incumbent. If that choice were to be made today, well let me just say we would have seen me vote for Mickey Mouse or maybe Goofy as either one would have been a better choice besides the ones offered by both "parties".

I believe that the word party is the problem with our current political system. Too many people believe that these two organizations have creditability because they are "organized", this is definitely not the case. Neither party is organized and as such should be blindly followed. Wrong!

My personal belief is that we should question authority, within reason, although what they have been doing lately pretty much eliminates any reason they may deserve from us as citizens. Coming after the very document that our great nation has been founded and built upon then I believe we should all shout from the highest point we can reach ENOUGH!

Samuel Adams said it best in my opinion with this quote "If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin."

What do you say my comrades in arms?

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 13 at 2014 11:57 PM

2014-06-13T23:57:49-04:00

SGT Rosploch,

I don't feel that I always have to vote for a Republican.

If you show me a non-Republican candidate who promotes fiscal responsibility, social conservatism, welfare reform, non-socialized healthcare, reduced income tax rates, free markets, our 2nd amendment rights and the elimination of labor unions, who is also pro-life and anti-gun control, then I will consider voting outside of the party lines.

Response by SSG Daniel Rosploch made Jun 14 at 2014 1:06 AM

2014-06-14T01:06:57-04:00

Based on all the comments (which I appreciate greatly), it seems that the general consensus here is that military folks don't really subscribe to a particular political party. Obviously, a bigger sampling of individuals would verify this theory, but nonetheless, it is good to see that "my people" really are much more ideologically open to new and better ideas. I'm sure it has a lot to do with the situations and experiences that a person gains through military service.

I would love to see all federal government representatives be required to have some type of military service before being eligible for election, but that would eliminate 98% of the population from being able to run for office. BUT, would it be so bad to have a requirement of some type of service (Peace Corp, Red Cross, firefighter, police officer, X number of hours of community service, etc.) in order to run for office? If it were actually possible for us to enact a requirement like this, wouldn't it create more well-rounded community conscientious individuals? Isn't that what we're really aiming for in the first place?

Response by SSG Daniel Rosploch made Jun 14 at 2014 1:17 AM

2014-06-14T01:17:27-04:00

Speaking of political parties and the lack of choices, I just ran across this in another thread. I am not advocating or supporting them as of yet, but I'm curious if anyone has anything to say about this?

http://www.veteranspartyofamerica.org/

Veterans Party of America

Being a Veteran is not required. A desire to fix America is required. We are founded by Veterans, for ALL Americans. Join with us.

Response by SSG Daniel Rosploch made Jun 17 at 2014 9:03 PM

2014-06-17T21:03:56-04:00

On issues of a "controversial" scientific nature (IE: stem cell research, climate change caused by humans, pollution, petroleum depletion, etc) it seems all reasoning and logic go out the window and something based solely on scientific research and facts turns into a what reads like a political party's "talking-points." Instead of arguing about the topic based on intelligent research and fact finding, it turns into name calling, religious blasphemy, and downright ignorant statements.

When someone doesn't understand the science behind a particular issue, do they just chug down a gallon of their favorite political party's "kool-aid" and spout whatever is on their website? Is it a fear of being seen as uneducated on the subject? Why is it so hard to have an intelligent, intellectual debate on a scientific subject? I'm not even a college student or graduate, but I think science is awesome, even if I don't completely understand the mechanics behind everything. And to me, it is one of the most apolitical subjects out there. Completely based on experiments, logic, research, common sense, etc...all of the things that seem to be lacking when someone starts calling you a commie liberal when you appear to "believe" in science. Are some people just naturally ignorant and determined to stay that way???

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 18 at 2014 1:23 AM

2014-06-18T01:23:41-04:00

Pretty much sums me up. I believe in true freedom.

Response by SSG Daniel Rosploch made Jul 8 at 2014 1:59 PM

2014-07-08T13:59:23-04:00

Just found this link and I figure it would apply pretty well to this, even though this discussion has died.

http://www.iflscience.com/brain/political-religious-identity-more-influential-scientific-literacy

Response by SSG Mike Angelo made Jul 18 at 2014 5:10 AM

2014-07-18T05:10:46-04:00

IMO there are strengths and weaknesses in the 2 party system, which some are interesting. Civilian Republicans are far more different than Veterans who have served and are Republicans. This goes for the Democratic party as well. Why? When it comes to global positioning, an American citizen/civilian that has no military background is at a disadvantage due to their lack of international literacy.

When it comes to education, the Democratic civilians are more vested in local, State and National education at the pre K and K-12 levels. While the Republican civilians want to get rid of the Department of Education all together. Veteran Republicans know that their GI Bill, Troop to Teacher programs are sponsored by the DoEd.

I affiliate with the MN GOP because I have a vested interest in 100% Americanism with core principles relating to limited government, gun rights for the able bodied, sane, and good law abiding citizens. I believe that human life begins at conception, and accountability of best practices be enforced to protect life in the womb.

In our American public school system, I want to see structured steps in educating our children, yet empowering teachers to do their best, be creative, innovate and replicate. Bring back the Pledge of Allegiance in the classroom. Bring kids back to nature and outside activities; balance technology with outdoors teaching methods/curriculum.

On Immigration, I like to see change with a sound and realistic Bill, also I challenge its cost to reinforce the program.

The hyphen in Latino-American, African-American etc...is so divisive, we are all Americans and the hyphen should be removed appropriately.

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made Jul 18 at 2014 6:57 AM

2014-07-18T06:57:34-04:00

IMHO, everything boils down to the "haves" vs. the "have nots". As long as 5% of the country runs it through, "economic endorsement" of government officials, they become the majority while the other 95% of us become outvoted. As long as this ageless dichotomy exists, there will always be political division. The division isn't about what's best for the country but what's best for special interests.

Political parties need to go because they amount to nothing more than peer pressure groups. You're a member of THIS party so we expect you to vote OUR way regardless of how the people who elected you want you to vote - really?

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 18 at 2014 7:25 AM

2014-07-18T07:25:28-04:00

The problem I see is that the right has gone WAY right, in the house in particular. Examples:

- Affordable Care Act, a republican proposals in the 90's, now called socialism.

- Cap and Trade, originally a republican proposal, now called government imperialism and a market destroyer.

- Top tax rates under Reagan were around 10% higher than now, but any tax increase now is called "wealth redistribution" or punishing the rich, as if the rich didn't do just fine in the 80s.

The gerrymandering of congressional districts is driving this. Districts are drawn to cover extreme demographics in order to protect far left and far right members of congress, so the people elected are extreme by default.

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Jul 18 at 2014 6:38 PM

2014-07-18T18:38:43-04:00

While the political parties may be more polarized, outside of the lunatic fringe, I believe most Americans are somewhere in the middle in the first place (although they may lean left or right).. The problem si that we don't have a whole lot of choice when it comes to voting. Either way you're hosed, so go with who hoses you less.

Response by CPT Gary Wilkins made Oct 31 at 2014 1:22 AM

2014-10-31T01:22:34-04:00

I am not affiliated with any particular party, but I lean more Right than Left. Both sides have major negative issues. The Left is creating an American society based on entitlements (because that buys them more votes), and the money spent on entitlements is absolutely unsustainable in the long run--and it is never ending and will one day spend us into oblivion. Leftists are liberal in everything except issues regarding the 2nd Ammendment, and seem to feel that citizens should be fully dependent on the government handout (this eventually bit the Roman Empire in the posterior), and have no means of ever changing the Status Quo. The Right, on the other hand, has no understanding of how to respond to the frequent "morality" claims that the Left likes to make against it, and the Right likes to do what we did to the Soviets (i.e., overspend them into oblivion) by getting us involved in more wars than we can competently manage in terms of both lives, or money (no thanks to George W.). Our desire to be the world's policeofficer and "nationbuild" is likely to destroy us sooner or later, since our financial house, between war expenses and ever increasing entitlements, is now a house of cards. However, at least wars usually (?) have an end at some point (thank heavens for small favors); entitlements, on the other hand, are endless once set in place, and debilitating.
Where are the news questions about that? There never are any.
I have lived in Korea. I have lived in Japan. I majored in German culture. I have observed other systems and seen things that work, and things that don't. Our system, IMHO, is currently mired deep in the "don't work" (i.e., dysfunctional) category.

I remember a city (Cambridge) in my intensely hypocritical home state of MA (decidedly Left) that made big news when it offered sanctuary from the INS to illegal aliens--but what the news did NOT cover was the fact that Cambridge made no accompanying public offer to cover the related social welfare expenses of any of the people they offered to harbor; no, Cambridge instead expected MA citizens to handle that and pick up the tab, of course; the "We say okay, but you can pay" philosophy. I despise Massachusetts, and I despise that attitude. I say, put your own money where your mouth is. Things like this are why I lean Right, despite my strong dissatisfaction with some parts of their agenda.

In the first 75 years of United States history, there were multiple parties and, to some degree that helped to dilute the potential deadlocks that can spring up in a 2-party system (which is absolutely what the US has become). Look at how many parties there are in England, in Germany, etc. Question: Do their governments function more efficiently/effectively under multiple party systems with coalitions, than ours does, or not? -- i.e., I mean, without the polarization prevalent in American politics?

Another, perhaps more critically important question (and one that is never asked) is -- do those cultures allow lobbyists to impact their politicians? In my opinion, one of the greatest scourges in the American political system was that Congress never expressly and decisively FORBID the practice of special interest lobbying. A massive, and grievous mistake that has greatly (negatively, in my opinion) impacted the success of our system--yet a mistake that NO ONE ever talks about.
I found SSG Mike Angelo's assessment to have some intriguing points regarding differences in take for former military personnel as democrats/republicans and for non-military vet civilians.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 31 at 2014 2:05 AM

2014-10-31T02:05:00-04:00

Folks that vote a straight ticket do because that is where they are aligned. Not because they are uninformed. Do you sit on the fence on every issue or do you have some straight forward philosophies, ideas, values and principals you believe in. Where do you stand on abortion, gun rights, foreign policy etc. I do not vote for Demoractic canidients over Republican canidents. I am a conservative so why would I vote against my own ideology. So for me there is no lesser of two evils. And I get my information from many sources and research facts. If a person chooses to vote what they believe is the lesser of two evils more power to you and good luck.

Response by COL Jon Thompson made Nov 25 at 2015 10:06 AM

2015-11-25T10:06:06-05:00

In many cases, what you see is candidates running to the left or right to get votes and then once in office, there is not a lot of difference between the two. Look at the Republicans who were elected the majority in both houses of Congress. Yet, our government is as stalemated as it was before. I think some like to see the division because it allows them to stay in power. IMHO, it would take a severe outside our nation event to bring us back together. We were like that for a few weeks after 9-11-01 and then back to the same old ways.

Response by SGT James Murphy made Jul 3 at 2019 1:56 PM

2019-07-03T13:56:21-04:00

Hell of a question. I think there will always be a division of some sort but the current crises of the Socialist attack on our Nation must be seen through a clear lens and that used to be our press but we are not blinded by the very instrument that was supposed to help keep us a free and fair nation so I am very concerned that this will end badly. For all have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God. Now if you don't like THAT particular phrase then you can understand where the problem Starts!

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 3 at 2019 2:57 PM

2019-07-03T14:57:23-04:00

I am a registered independent, consider myself to be moderate, but I find the left to be going beyond anything I could even support. I try not to when possible label liberals as far left, I think there is a difference. The same way I don't think you can label most conservatives far right. I wish we had more than two parties like most European countries have, and George Washington warn against people picking political parties over what he considered the good of the Country.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jul 4 at 2019 3:10 PM

2019-07-04T15:10:15-04:00

Our politicians are making a polarized country with their vitriolic drivel.