Defining the Parties (was [thechat] US Elections)

[Erika Meyer]

Jonathon Isaac Swiderski wrote:

>  > What are the major philosophical, ideological, and policy differences
>>  between Democrats and Republicans?
>
>Many people will tell you there aren't any.

of course this is too simplistic, but it's not so off as you might think.

What a lot of mainstream people don't seem to see is that most
democrats and most republicans come from the same stock and play the
same game with similar assumptions about what people need and want
out of life.

Based on these similar assumptions, the republicans support the
business interests while the democrats try to stand up for social
issues (while still playing nice with business interests).

It's like the Iraq policy.  Republicans want to bomb Iraq, democrats
maybe just want to continue starving them to death.  Is it so fricken
radical to say let's stop beating up on Iraq and find some more
constructive activities?

Apparently, it is.

I prefer to support a party that doesn't advocate murderous policies
and/or warmongering.

I think democrats and republicans both suck at foreign policy.

>  These are the same people who
>said we should vote for Ralph Nader to 'protest' Gore & Bush and 2000, and
>are, I think, in substantial part responsible for Bush's 'win' then and the
>gains this week.

Here in Portland the Libertarian vote was significantly stronger than
normal and if it hadn't been, the Republican slickster Mannix may
have been elected.  So it cuts both ways.

I'd like to see the democrats quit whining about Ralph Nadar and
whatever they are whining about this time, and grow some backbone.
But it won't happen; they have to keep chasing that almighty dollar.
They got to keep trying to please everybody.  To be supportive of
Mister WarBucks while still trying to look like democrats.  We need
serious reform of our election process, or SOMETHING.

Erika

--