political personality types

[MaC]

It seems to me that the main difference between the two parties is not ideology, but personality differences.  The conservatives (Reagan and W. Bush) are very black and white types of decision makers and the more liberal types (Kerry and Bill Clinton) are more easily swayed by public opinion.  What if these personalities were reversed?  Would you still vote for your party if your candidate had a different way of working with people or seeing things?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

What do you mean by black and white?

Bush was against a Homeland Security Dept. before he was for it.
Bush was for caring where OBL was before he was against it.
Bush was against campaign finance reform before he signed into law.
Bush was against big government before he got a $1.2 trillion Medicare bill that he claimed cost only $350 billion passed
Bush was for war as only a last resort before he was for it.

The list goes on and on.

[Frodo]

yeah, could you clarify what you mean in your poll, M&C?  i am assuming by 'black and white' you mean those who are ideologically driven and fiercely partisan (aka, Keystone Phil and Jfern, among others), and by 'relativist', those who consider themselves pragmatists (Joe Republic, Peter Bell, Angus, perhaps some others). 

[MaC]

well, to me it seems as if the conservatives are more of get an idea, run with it, don't let anyone in your way.  And democrats try way to hard to please everyone. 

As for examples, I'm not sure that jfern is factual, but there's only one clear thing that I can think of that would qualify George W. Bush as a flip-flopper and that is that he said in one of the 2000 debates that he was against the idea of nation building, when it's obvious that Iraq and Afghanistan are clear examples of it.  However George Bush does have a clear stance on abortion, social security reform, and tax cuts.

As for the Democrats, you have John Kerry whose relativism made it unclear what his stance on abortion, or what his long term plan for Iraq is.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

well, to me it seems as if the conservatives are more of get an idea, run with it, don't let anyone in your way.  And democrats try way to hard to please everyone. 

As for examples, I'm not sure that jfern is factual, but there's only one clear thing that I can think of that would qualify George W. Bush as a flip-flopper and that is that he said in one of the 2000 debates that he was against the idea of nation building, when it's obvious that Iraq and Afghanistan are clear examples of it.  However George Bush does have a clear stance on abortion, social security reform, and tax cuts.

As for the Democrats, you have John Kerry whose relativism made it unclear what his stance on abortion, or what his long term plan for Iraq is.

Republican bullsh**t. Like a large fraction of the population, is personally opposed to abortion, but favors that it be legal, safe, and rare. John Kerry's long term plan for Iraq was to rebuild the country.

[MaC]

let's not start a partisan battle.  I certainly don't want to side with Republicans.  It's not even a Bush v. Kerry thing, I'm just saying the Republican mindset is more of a black/white thing where Democrats see things as more of a whats relative to what.  I mean, historically, even Carter didn't know what to do about hostages, Reagan knew what he wanted and went for it and hardly listen to anyone who didn't support him.  Now you'll probably say Reagan had some plan to release the hostages upon being elected, but that's irrelevant to the discussion....

[minionofmidas]

You already did.
I would not vote for a candidate who framed anything as a black-and-white question because such a candidate is not sane. Well, I might for Congress, but I wouldn't for the highest office.