Politcal motivation

[Citizen James]

Pick the one that fit most closely why you think people who differ signifigantly do so.  I't your choose.  Choice wisely.

[Gabu]

Depending on the issue, either option 2 or option 3.  I went with option 2, because that's what it usually is.

[opebo]

Obviously the religious right hates freedom. 

[Cubby]

Option 3

People's beliefs reflect what is important to them, they don't make something a high priority unless it affects them.

[John Dibble]

2 and 3, depending on the issue and the individual. Everyone's got their own priorities, and thusly they'll have different plans. Sometimes these plans are informed and well thought out, other times they are the result of ignorance and misguided good intentions.

[afleitch]

Again I'd say 2 or 3. I do genuinely believe some people are misguided when it comes to holding views on certain issues (particularly views that would take away individual freedoms) but most people I have met here or elswhere and I have disagreed with do happen to just hold different and equally valid opitions and solution.

[Speed of Sound]

#2 fits best for me, except when Im having a bad day, or a day when my ego is larger than normal (thats not easy at its size ), in which case its #1.

[MasterJedi]

Option 2, usually at least.

[PBrunsel]

I am a religous prude intolerant who hates freedom, so I beleive that everyone who does not aggree with mre will burn in Hell and be sodomized by Satan for all eternity.

[Michael Z]

Option 3. The first two statements are incredibly arrogant and presumptous.

[J. J.]

Option #2 on most things.  If I felt the point was valid, I probably wouldn't disagree. 

[A18]

They hate freedom and America, but not democracy.

[Jake]

It's almost always 2, very rarely 3, and sometimes 1 (especially with some foreign policy votes).

[angus]

That's a very good question James.  I'm inclined to vote for either the second or third option, but I can't decide.  Maybe I'll vote later.  I know that there are those with dramatically different economic circumstances than mine, in some cases more grave and in other cases more carefree, and of course they'll have different views.  There's also the obvious and omnipresent consideration of population density.  If I live in New York City, gun control is important for obvious reasons.  If I live in Wyoming, I need my gun because the nearest cop, and the nearest supermarket, may be seventy miles away.  If I live in New York City, I'm willing to pay a high premium for someone to just make the trash disappear.  If I live in Wyoming, I'd really rather keep that money in my pocket, because after all I can burn my trash without any real harm to the ecosystem.  Now, like most Americans I don't live in either of those extremes, and it's a bit hard for me to see eye to eye with either the Cowboy or the City Slicker. 

Okay, I've decided by now.  The more I think about it, the more I think it's option three.  Except when they're confused.  Which they often are.  Oh, nevermind, I've talked myself out of option three again.  I'll get back to you once I've decided, but I'm quite sure it's either the second or third option.

[Gabu]

I am a religous prude intolerant who hates freedom, so I beleive that everyone who does not aggree with mre will burn in Hell and be sodomized by Satan for all eternity.

Deep breaths, PBrunsel, deep breaths...

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

A mix of 1 and 2

[GOP = Terrorists]

I choose They mean well, but they are confused, misguided.

But only because they follow the George W Bush Republicans.

I think the Ron Paul, Pat Buchanon, or Barry Goldwater Republicans would be a lot closer to the last option.

[jokerman]

A mix of 2 and 3.

3 for the CEO's and the ruling elite who are just propogating their own welfare.

2 for all of the working class and middle class Americans that are supporting them.

[TeePee4Prez]

Option 2 or 3 dpending on the issue.