Who's side are you on?

[plazul]

Most of the people I know describe themselves as apolitcal with a weak political affiliation or they may have chosen a party because of family tradition and the influence of friends. A relative handful of citizens get involved in local and state politics, attending city council and county board meetings religiously. They control the political caucuses and select our political candidates. I'm one of those. Almost all of my political activity is in municipal government (property taxes, zoning, economic development, etc.) and I have become rather influential over the years.

If you are a Democrat, what drew you to the Party? What are it's strengths and weaknesses? I'd like Republicans to weigh in on this too.

[Warsai]

For the most part, I'm far left. I am drawn to the Democratic party because it is in support of the underclass. The republicans aim to cut affirmative action, but my mother wouldn't have gotten her job without it. My family wouldn't be where it is without welfare, and free health clinics. And I know there are many families back in my community, that still need these things. However, the party's weaknesses is the fact that not every voice within the Democratic party gets counted. But that's just the fallacy of a two-megaparty political system. Another bad thing about the party is it's foreign policy. During the war for Eritrean independence, the Clinton Administration gave money to the Ethiopian government (which strikes me as a bit ironic seeing as that many of the ones who want to revolutionize and start a different form of government are within the Democratic party). Why wouldn't the Democratic party want to help the underdog? Doesn't that clash with the basic philosophy of the party?

[plazul]

The truth is Warsai, the two parties aren't that far apart on foreign policy and defense though I am hoping that Kerrry, if elected, will be a little more diplomatic in dealing with intransigent allies.

The Democrats do give lip service to minorities and underdogs and when it comes to giving them power in the party there's a whole ot of room for improvement. Big money gives to the dems too and most wall street CEOs are Democrats.

But when it comes to social spending and the graduated income tax there are real differences between the parties. I tell people to follow their gut and don't try to be a Democrat or a Republican to please other people. It will eat you up inside.

[anastrophe]

warsai wrote:

The republicans aim to cut affirmative action, but my mother wouldn't have gotten her job without it

i'm not sure that's strictly a republican aim. there are a lot of people who recognize that affirmative action was a good - even great - idea at the time, but it has outlived its usefulness. you sort of make the case - *your mother* wouldn't have gotten her job without it, but do *you* really need it? affirmative action was started to try to help counter the incredible forces working against minorities from the time of the civil rights movement in the fifties and sixties. by giving a preference to minorities, it 'jump started' the process of bringing balance and equality to all. but it's 2004 now - it's been 30 to 40 years since there were drinking fountains for 'coloreds only'. there are laws that are enforced that mandate fairness in hiring. a helping hand can become a crutch when it is expected to be there.


in terms of 'which side am i on', i have no clue. i know i definitely do not want to vote *for* john kerry, but i'm less than enthusiastic about voting for the bushmeister. the problem with this year's election (well, it's a recurring theme) is the absurd polarization. here's what we're faced with:

j o h n k e r r y g e o r g e b u s h

far left left left-of-center center right-of-center right far right

+--------+--------+-------------+-----------+------------+-----------+

very few people very few people

a few more people a few more people

even more people even more people

T h e M a j o r i t y

[edit: - can't get it to format right. sigh!]

not sure how well that lines up, hopefully you get the idea. we have these two chowderheads bulging out towards the extremes, while the overwhelming majority of 'plain folk' are crammed up in the middle, bulging out towards the sides.

most of us are left choosing the lesser of two chowderheads. as a choice, it stinks. 'do i cut off my left index finger, or my right index finger? hmmmmm'

[plazul]

We need public campaign financing across the board like Maine and Arizona. In one case it was instituted by referendum and in the other it was legislated (forget which order). Which goes to show that even lawmakers want to be able to concentrate on the process instead of endless fund raising.

Almost every facet of our lives is influenced by special interest legislation. But most people never stop to look at the process and how it impacts their own little world. I heard somebody on the radio talking about how public opinion polls consistently say that roughly 80% of the American people favor raising the minimum wage. It comes up in Congress on a regular basis and you'd think lawmakers would follow the wishes of the majority of their constituents but what happens? You guessed it. Big money outweighs little money every time.

Campaign finance reform wont get all the corruption out of politics but it will give a whole lot more people an opportunity to be corrupted.

[Warsai]

Anastrapohe: Yes, you have a point, affirmative action is less needed but still needed in poverty-stricken neighborhoods. My mom got her job only recently with affirmative action, before this we use to live in Southeast DC, not a very rich neighborhood. There are many who can use affirmative action to live a good life.