Scyobayrynn wrote:Tyrandel wrote:By identifying foremost with a political party, you are supportive of that party's political views. If you disagree, you should not identify with that party. There is a difference between voting for a political party and being a part of a political party. I vote Democrat but would not call myself a Democrat due to disagreements over nuclear energy, GMOs and foreign affairs.
Also, I never got a receipt for this bill of goods and refuse to pay for them.
So you presume that one must support all the stances of a party if they are a member, you will vote Democrat, thus empowering ALL of their views, but you arent one.
But someone who says "I am a Republican" is automatically holding ALL views associated with the Republican party no matter how radical.
Thats what you are saying? I want to be clear.
Saying 'I am a Republican' means one supports the views of the Republican Party, saying 'I vote Republican' does not.
It is a matter of picking the best out of the available options while not actually agreeing with any of them. I vote Democrat because the views I agree with them on are more important to me than the views I agree with the Republicans on. However, because I vehemently disagree with Democrats on some views I would never identify as one and would happily vote for another political party that better matched my views if one appeared. So far, none has and the Democrats remain the party I oppose the least.
Northwest Slobovia wrote:Tyrandel wrote:By identifying foremost with a political party, you are supportive of that party's political views. If you disagree, you should not identify with that party.
This is a fascinating view of party politics. Do you believe that all people who identify with any party* entirely support their party's views? I don't believe anybody does, and...
(*: Not just the American parties, but foreign ones as well.)
My idea on party politics actually works a lot better with foreign countries, as they usually have more parties and parties split more often.
I consider anyone who identifies with the British Labour Party to beclosely aligned to it in the same way someone who identifies with the UKIP identifies with it. The British Labour Party may have a bit more wiggle room, such as what policy best supports Labour, but the same principle applies. Identifying with it also identifies you with its goals and viewpoints. If a party does not have an overriding ideal that it strives for, then it really shouldn't even bother to remain intact. Better to split up into different, more ideologically unified, parties and form a coalition government or something. American politics makes this difficult, as the Democrats and Republicans consume any new political movements before they can form parties, which is why the two political parties act so erratically.
Tyrandel wrote:There is a difference between voting for a political party and being a part of a political party. I vote Democrat but would not call myself a Democrat due to disagreements over nuclear energy, GMOs and foreign affairs.
...you hit the nail on the head for why. But,
wow, that looks like a lot of special pleading on your part. Are you registered as a Democrat? Do you vote in party primaries?
I am not registered as a Democrat and do not vote in party primaries.
This may become a threadjack. If anyone would like, I could create a new thread on the topic.