How do we heal the political divisions in America?

Your entire thesis is based on the assumptions that both sides share common ground, and that both sides can live under the "rule" of the other side. Both assumptions are false.

Beyond the trivial, there is no common ground. The fundamental principle each side believes in are mutual exclusive - "progressives" believe in the government over the individual and want to greatly expand the govt; conservatives believe in the individual over the government and want a greatly reduced government. There is no middle ground.

Neither side can live under the other. That's obvious from the fact there is no common ground. Its a zero sum game.

 

I'm not, but it's clear you want to become emotional over this instead of discussing it reasonably and with logic. Have a nice day, Gif.

 

Today's politics IS a fight for the middle. In face, that's been the case forever.

I think what you are calling for is a party that stands for a different methodology, not a different ideology.

Today the methodology of the right wing has been winning. In many cases, not even the right wing agrees with the ideology that won - but they do see the methodology of scorched earth politics as a requirement for winning, with winning as being the required precursor to progress on policy.

 

You are the one who started it

The only difference here is that what you said is complete nonsense and what I said is demonstrably true.

 

The two major parties, and their supporters, are not fighting for the middle. They are fighting for their individual, often extreme, agendas.

Most Americans are in the middle; about 40%. Probably more are in the middle even though the 30ish% on either side belong to a major party.

 

That's a difficult question to answer seeing that America has over 1.002 billion persons with the US having over 325 million of them..

California 39,250,017
Texas 27,862,596
Florida 20,612,439
New York 19,745,289
Illinois 12,801,539
Pennsylvania 12,784,227
Ohio 11,614,373
Georgia 10,310,371
North Carolina 10,146,788
Michigan 9,928,300
New Jersey 8,944,469
Virginia 8,411,808
Washington 7,288,000
Arizona 6,931,071
Massachusetts 6,811,779
Tennessee 6,651,194
Indiana 6,633,053
Missouri 6,093,000
Maryland 6,016,447
Wisconsin 5,778,708
Colorado 5,540,545
Minnesota 5,519,952
South Carolina 4,961,119
Alabama 4,863,300
Louisiana 4,681,666
Kentucky 4,436,974
Oregon 4,093,465
Oklahoma 3,923,561
Connecticut 3,576,452
Puerto Rico 3,411,307
Iowa 3,134,693
Utah 3,051,217
Mississippi 2,988,726
Arkansas 2,988,248
Nevada 2,940,058
Kansas 2,907,289
New Mexico 2,081,015
Nebraska 1,907,116
West Virginia 1,831,102
Idaho 1,683,140
Hawaii 1,428,557
New Hampshire 1,334,795
Maine 1,331,479
Rhode Island 1,056,426
Montana 1,042,520
Delaware 952,065
South Dakota 865,454
North Dakota 757,952
Alaska 741,894
District of Columbia 681,170
Vermont 624,594
Wyoming 585,501

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_population

 

There are two things they do in the fight. They try to hold their base while they try to capture the center.

 

Disagreed.

Disagreed.

Dude, you're the one being Chicken Little here. I'm just a calm Minute Man.

 

True, but they can't capture the center by being extremists.

 

republicans have to stop being my way or the highway, they have to be willing to work together with the other side
sadly republicans were against even things they supported under Obama and they think now they still should get whatever they want, which means they do not get all they could of got had they gave a little to get a little

 

The effort is to capture enough of the center in order to win, of course. Neither side has to capture the whole center to achieve its objectives.

So, we have individual congressmen presenting a view that will appeal to their local demographic. They can deviate from the national party agenda by some amount. They can promote the parts that are more appealing locally. They can make promises to work to modify the national level agenda in specific ways, etc.

At the level of the president, we watched Trump win significant parts of the middle by telling each crowd pretty much exactly what they wanted to hear.

That was an effective approach to winning the middle.

 

Why? We are at complete odds with each other, so there is only my way or your way. We duke it out in the voting booths and in the streets, and we'll just have to see who wins. I think the progressives will win until the government collapses under it's own weight, and then we conservatives will be here to say "I told you it was getting too big".

All democrats will be able to say is that the SHTF because there wasn't enough government, and if only we had agreed to a few more laws and a few more dollars paid in taxes, and a few more government bureaucracies, then things would have been perfect.

Nobody will believe them except for the choir.

 

Well, that would be good.

But, they certainly do NOT "have to".

They've won by being scorched earth.

And, they're easily smart enough to go for what wins.

 

I don't actually believe we're that divided in terms of policy.

There are certainly differences, but there is large room for moving together if there were any desire to do so.

Polls show Republicans back Democratic ideas on health care, on keeping families together, on not deporting DACA kids, on tax reform that actually helps the middle and lower income earners, on not using government position for personal gain, on trade policy that doesn't include trade wars with our allies, etc., etc.

 

Rubbish.

 

So far, IMHO, they are losing. Game Theory: if the middle doesn't like either end, their best option is to play the ends against each other. I.E. Always vote for the challenger, never the incumbent.

Continue to do this until the ends come to the middle.

 

The different methodology would be actually taking into account the legitimate values of both conservatives and liberals. But the ideology would be different from strident right wingers and left wingers, giving Americans a third choice.

Let me give you six examples ...

Fiscal responsibility: If we spend it, we pay for it. And the higher the federal deficit, the higher go personal income taxes on the upper incomes of the top 5%. Want to see an end to federal deficit spending? Try that. Rich Republicans and Democrats would hate that idea. But middle America would be fine with it.

Health care: How about a blend of government mandate and capitalism. Essentially, the elderly would be covered by Medicare. The unemployed would be covered by Medicaid. The employed, and their dependents, would be covered by private insurance paid for by their employers. Something there for both the Progressives to hate and the establishment Republicans to hate, but the outcome would be that the entire nation was covered. Middle class Americans would no longer be paying premiums for health insurance. Businesses, large and small, would be able to reduce their tax liability down to zero by deducting the cost of insurance for their employees.

Wars: A strong military, but we only fight in our own self-defense and the defense of our closest allies, and only with the consent of Congress. On the progressive left "a strong military" is a turn-off, and on the right, where "any war is a good war", this is also a turn off (Think Lindsey Graham/John McCain). But to regular middle-of-the-road Americans, this is what they want.

Immigration: This one is an "easy". Secure the border. Institute nationwide e-verify to work. Civil or criminal penalties for employers who violate the rules. Allow otherwise law-abiding illegals who are already here to self-report without fear of deportation. Document them and make their status "legal". Not citizens, but legal visitors. Of course, criminals, gang members, and illegals refusing to self-report would be subject to arrest and deportation. The Progressive left will cry about this because they don't want secure borders. The far right will cry about "amnesty". (In my opinion, neither side really wants a solution.) And yet, "Rational America" will accept this solution, and we can pretty much put it all behind us. With no way to work, illegal immigration will drop off.

Guns: The right of sane, law-abiding citizens to "keep and bear" should be protected. But some measures that do not intrinsically impose on that right can be implemented. Again, something for both the left and right to hate, but which "Rational America" will accept.

Political discourse: Respect for each other would be an absolute requirement for a party in the middle. And, once again, regular Americans want this too. They are sick to death of the rhetoric of hate from both sides. And they are disgusted with the gridlock and partisanship. The majority of Americans also want members of Congress to be term-limited.

So, you see, this third party I'm thinking of would actually provide a third choice in its methodology and ideology. I believe the Progressives and many right wingers would not like this party, and that would be fine. Most of America is in the middle. Those progressive left wingers and the far right wingers and Republican establishment types would find themselves left behind by this deliberately "Middle" party.

Seth

 

I am not sure that being a one minute man is something to be proud of

That post was not to you ... and and everything stated in the post was true. We are living in a propaganda state. It is not like this is some big secret.

Our MSM is a joke. When you figure out how a functional democratic process is possible without fair and free media ... let me know.

Regardless- if you are going to call names - you should at least say do something other than cover ears eyes nose mouth - and any other orifice that might let the bad news in ... and go running around in denial crying "Disagree .. NO NO NO NO .. Disagree" followed by name calling " chicken little"

 

Why? Wouldn't you simply rant and fabricate things about me regardless of what I posted? When a person makes false accusations as a reaction to a disagreement that the "MSM" isn't an evil propaganda machine, I fail to see how they can be expected to discuss a topic rationally.

 

Well -

A Republican smoking a big blunt.

That's a first.

I thought only long haired, dirty, hippies smoked Marijuana.










...

 

Deep.

 

Getting duped into that stupid Roseanne / Samantha crap

What a bunch of suckers ...

NOBODY IS WATCHING

TELEVISION IT'S A TRICK

TO PUT HOLLYWOOD

BACK ON THE MAP ... !​

​

...​

 

They cant

We are witnessing the death of Western civilization

 

This Samantha Bee incident was a publicity stunt.

How else is a Democrat comic going to attract viewers?

It is a sad truth about America and the truth about media.

Ivanka Trump is a very nice person, and one w/ impeccable character like Meghan McCain.

Samantha Bee is floundering - she has this VERY tired, mean girl, schtick no one buys it.





...​

 

It can't be healed since the Left collectively is engaged in a long term ideological war against established national customs and traditions generally that are generally based on OLD western world standards of culture. The Left represents licentiousness and cultural anarchy and thus are collectively enemies of this nation. The nation is engaged in ideologically based warfare. Eventually one side or the other is going to win and then the 'healing' can begin.

Personally I think that the Left is ultimately going to win since everything they do is based on destroying what already is and it is ALWAYS much easier to destroy than it is to protect and preserve and build.