Which party's electoral/demographic coalition is more unstable? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 27, 2024, 09:32:38 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Which party's electoral/demographic coalition is more unstable? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: Which party's electoral/demographic coalition is more unstable?
#1
Democrats'
 
#2
Republicans'
 
#3
Don't know
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 36

Author Topic: Which party's electoral/demographic coalition is more unstable?  (Read 1521 times)
Tetro Kornbluth
Gully Foyle
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,846
Ireland, Republic of


« on: October 15, 2012, 09:15:30 AM »
« edited: October 15, 2012, 09:18:03 AM by Iatrogenesis »

Republicans. Soccons are not going to keep sharing the same party with libertarians. One or the other has to crack.
libertarians don't actually exist outside of the internet

And university economics departments. But apart from those places... yeah.

I'm not America o/c so this opinion can be taken with a grain of salt but I'm not sure that I totally agree with those saying the Republicans simply on the grounds that while the current Republican coalition is obviously unstable and potentially fissiparous, it obviously has not done so yet and it has not done so for a particularly obvious reason: The belief in the existence of a widespread left-wing 'threat' (which is o/c partly a hold-over from anti-communism, but not only that). This is why when you read contemporary republican discourse much of it is actually really about 'the left' (or liberals, the two terms are used interchangably but always imply a uniform, united 'enemy') and largely why political discourse is as shrill as it is. This is what managed after all to unite the Republican party so quickly after the decendance and ideological emptiness of the Bush years. The Republican party is currently an organization united to fight a threat which, at least in the political sphere, is mostly imaginary. But they have been very successful at this for 25 years now and the perception of this threat is only likely to increase (due to the changes aforementioned in American society) in the near future.

The Democratic Party on the other hand is essentially now a technocratic liberal conservative party that has to put on a progressive gloss for its voters and to differentiate it from the Republican Party. Its actual policies are if anything far more antagonistic to its voters than those of the Republicans once you exclude the goober social issues that are currently being used to create obvious divisions between the two parties which don't clearly exist on other, often much more important, issues (which doesn't mean I believe that the DEMs and the GOP are now identical apart from social issues. They're not but the believed differences and the actual differences on, say, economic policy have now long divorced each other).
Logged
Tetro Kornbluth
Gully Foyle
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,846
Ireland, Republic of


« Reply #1 on: October 15, 2012, 11:58:57 AM »

The Democratic Party ... Its actual policies are if anything far more antagonistic to its voters than those of the Republicans...

I have no problem with believing both parties to be controlled by capital and hostile to the interests of the working class, but could you elucidate how Democrats policies are 'far more antagonistic' than those of the Republicans? In what details?

I said to their respective voting bases not to the working classes in general.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.027 seconds with 15 queries.