How divided are we?

[Kurth]

Editing to add a consolidated list at the bottom for convenience

In one of the Trump threads, there were recently some comments and questions about how hard it will be for the U.S. to recover from the Trump presidency. I was also listening to some excerpts from Sen. McCain’s new book In which he encourages Americans to focus on the things that unite us rather than all the fractious things that divide us. His notion is that we can exist with ideaological divides so long as there’s enough we have in common to keep the socio-political national fabric stitched together.

So here’s an exercise: Replying from the perspective of someone who you believe to be 180 degrees opposite from you on the political spectrum, make one statement on a political/social issue you imagine that person (hypothetical or real) holds a firm conviction about that you agree with as well.

No explanations, critiques or defenses required. Really just looking to see how challenging it is to come up with such a list and what might be on it.

1. The freedom to practice the religion of your choice (or none) is an essential right, and theocracies are inherently bad forms of government.
2. Fiscally responsible government.
3. The 21st Amendment.
4. Economy. Everyone wants/needs a job and all the benefits that come from a strong economy. [X2]
5. People should enjoy liberties, rights, and opportunity so long as these don't harm others.
6. Marijuana should be legal.
7. Protect Social Security.
8. Children should be allowed to walk to school or go to the playground (or, really, wherever) on their own without some worry wort busybody with nothing better to do calling the cops on their parents. [clarified to mean that children should be safe to do so]
9. All children should have access to an education.
10. Drone strikes should not be used.
11. No amount of collateral damage is acceptable.
12. Nobody should have to decide between bankruptcy and seeing a doctor [or, the cost of healthcare is out of control] [X3]
13. Death penalty is sometimes the appropriate punishment.
14. Stealing is wrong.
15. Nuclear power is a responsible way to generate electricity with minimal carbon emissions.
16. Animals shouldn't be tortured.
17. A strong U.S. military is essential to both our national defense and the maintenance of stability throughout the world.

[Kurth]

The freedom to practice the religion of your choice (or none) is an essential right, and theocracies are inherently bad forms of government.

[GreenGoo]

Fiscally responsible government.

[LawBeefaroni]

The 21st Amendment.

[GreenGoo]

I love the idea that alcohol was contentious enough to amend the constitution twice in modern times, but guns are somehow untouchable because at one point hundreds of years ago a king wanted more money.

Sorry for the digression.

I'll add: Economy. Everyone wants/needs a job and all the benefits that come from a strong economy.

[YellowKing]

On a very basic level, we all want to be able to support our families. Which is why despite all the finger pointing and gnashing of teeth, it always comes down to "It's the economy, stupid."

[Holman]

Everyone on this forum believes that people should enjoy liberties, rights, and opportunity so long as these don't harm others. Where we differ is what constitutes harm.

[em2nought]

In one of the Trump threads, there were recently some comments and questions about how hard it will be for the U.S. to recover from the Trump presidency.

Personally, I would rephrase that to "recover from the Obama and Trump presidency's" and my statement would be

It's a woman's right to choose.

[Kraken]

I can think of two:

Marijuana should be legal, and
Protect Social Security.

While GOP politicians aren't necessarily on board with either of those, their voters are.

[Jeff V]

As a reminder, one party's base (the diametrically opposed view in my case) is highly supportive of a theocratic government (or aspects of one such as religion in schools) as long as it's their religion and highly in favor of curtailing rights of those not like them.

Otherwise, I think we can all agree the Packers suck.

[Moliere]

I can think of two:

Marijuana should be legal, and
Protect Social Security.

While GOP politicians aren't necessarily on board with either of those, their voters are.

Democrats have been just as terrible on marijuana enforcement. Like same sex marriage, most politicians are lagging the general population's views.

[NickAragua]

Children should be allowed to walk to school or go to the playground (or, really, wherever) on their own without some worrywort busybody with nothing better to do calling the cops on their parents.

[Sepiche]

I can think of two:

Marijuana should be legal, and
Protect Social Security.

While GOP politicians aren't necessarily on board with either of those, their voters are.

Democrats have been just as terrible on marijuana enforcement.

Really? So when AG Sessions rolled back the Obama era rule to not go after states with legal marijuana that's "just as terrible" as what Democrats are doing?

I'm sure you can dig up individual Democrats who are against legalization, but there's no equivalence between the Republican stance on marijuana and the Democratic position, wishful thinking of Libertarians not withstanding.

[Kurth]

Please focus on the task at hand! No

[Fitzy]

Please focus on the task at hand! No

They were demonstrating the answer to the question.

[msteelers]

Chic-fil-a is delicious.

[Skinypupy]

I had a disturbingly difficult time coming up with an answer to this question. In general terms, I suppose it would be that all children should have access to an education

We would then proceed to have wildly different answers on how both "education" and "access" are defined, the government's role in the process, the quality of that education, and on and on and on...

[Moliere]

Really? So when AG Sessions rolled back the Obama era rule to not go after states with legal marijuana that's "just as terrible" as what Democrats are doing?

Judging From Prosecutions, Obama Is 80 Percent Worse Than Bush on Medical Marijuana

According to a new report from California NORML, "over 335 defendants have been charged with federal crimes related to medical marijuana in states with medical marijuana laws." Despite Barack Obama's promises of prosecutorial restraint in this area, "153 medical marijuana cases have been brought in the 4¼ years of the Obama administration, nearly as many as under the 8 years of the Bush administration (163)." In other words, Obama is averaging 36 medical marijuana prosecutions a year, compared to 20 a year under his predecessor. And although Attorney General Eric Holder has repeatedly claimed the Justice Department is not targeting suppliers who comply with state law, "the DOJ has targeted many facilities that were in full compliance with local laws and regulations."

[Isgrimnur]

What were the corresponding California numbers during that time frame?

[LordMortis]

. Really just looking to see how challenging it is to come up with such a list

It's sad. I can come up with general statements easily enough but when I get down to specifics, coming up with a thing is difficult.

It's easy to say I believe in "state's rights", less government where possible, the 2nd amendments, Parents being allowed to be parents, etc... The list is long long long.

But the I put these generalities in to specifics. In to "see this thing here" and base on my real conversations, I'm hard pressed to come to terms. I'd like to at least end up at the Golden Rule. Just let 'em be, but even then I break down to this thing here and I can't understand how them is is doing is something they see as the golden rule.

For someone trying to stay out of "us vs them" traps for most of his adult life, the last six or ten years has totally left my sails sans wind.

Really? So when AG Sessions rolled back the Obama era rule to not go after states with legal marijuana that's "just as terrible" as what Democrats are doing?

Judging From Prosecutions, Obama Is 80 Percent Worse Than Bush on Medical Marijuana

According to a new report from California NORML, "over 335 defendants have been charged with federal crimes related to medical marijuana in states with medical marijuana laws." Despite Barack Obama's promises of prosecutorial restraint in this area, "153 medical marijuana cases have been brought in the 4¼ years of the Obama administration, nearly as many as under the 8 years of the Bush administration (163)." In other words, Obama is averaging 36 medical marijuana prosecutions a year, compared to 20 a year under his predecessor. And although Attorney General Eric Holder has repeatedly claimed the Justice Department is not targeting suppliers who comply with state law, "the DOJ has targeted many facilities that were in full compliance with local laws and regulations."

This is my memory. Obama sat on a podium and talked a game with Holder laughed and locked people away at an unheard of rate.

[Jaymann]

Drone strikes should not be used.
No amount of collateral damage is acceptable.

[Holman]

Drone strikes should not be used.
No amount of collateral damage is acceptable.

Honestly, I doubt we all agree on this.

Drones are just aircraft. They have a role like any other. The debate is over what that is.

And even the Pentagon says no amount of collateral damage is "acceptable." The challenge is to accomplish a mission with the best possible planning to prevent it.

[hepcat]

Children should be allowed to walk to school or go to the playground (or, really, wherever) on their own without some worrywort busybody with nothing better to do calling the cops on their parents.

I agree and disagree at the same time. Some proponents of free range parenting go too far. As with everything, there are abuses.

[Vorret]

Nobody should have to decide between bankruptcy and seeing a doctor.

[ImLawBoy]

Drone strikes should not be used.
No amount of collateral damage is acceptable.

Honestly, I doubt we all agree on this.

The exercise isn't to find something we all agree on. It's to find something that someone who is the political opposite of you likely agrees with you on. In practice, this likely means a liberal would espouse a typically conservative view, and a conservative would espouse a typically liberal view.

So here’s an exercise: Replying from the perspective of someone who you believe to be 180 degrees opposite from you on the political spectrum, make one statement on a political/social issue you imagine that person (hypothetical or real) holds a firm conviction about that you agree with as well.

[NickAragua]

Children should be allowed to walk to school or go to the playground (or, really, wherever) on their own without some worrywort busybody with nothing better to do calling the cops on their parents.

I agree and disagree at the same time. Some proponents of free range parenting go too far. As with everything, there are abuses.

Obviously, there are specifics, but the assumption should probably be that the streets of suburbia aren't filled with pedophile kidnappers/murderers and that you're not sending your kid out into a warzone filled with landmines.

edit: I mean, unless you're living in Homs or something, then you should probably keep your kid on a tighter leash.

[Jeff V]

Chic-fil-a is delicious.

Boycott against that hate-mongering company is still in full force.

[Jeff V]

Children should be allowed to walk to school or go to the playground (or, really, wherever) on their own without some worrywort busybody with nothing better to do calling the cops on their parents.

I agree and disagree at the same time. Some proponents of free range parenting go too far. As with everything, there are abuses.

Obviously, there are specifics, but the assumption should probably be that the streets of suburbia aren't filled with pedophile kidnappers/murderers and that you're not sending your kid out into a warzone filled with landmines.

edit: I mean, unless you're living in Homs or something, then you should probably keep your kid on a tighter leash.

You have to remember that hepcat lives in a perpetual state of shell-shock after his bike was stolen from his porch. He won't even leave the house without a national guard squad covering point.

While the odds of bad things happening in remote suburbia where I dwell are greater than zero, it's hardly worth being overly concerned about. If my 4 year old told me today he was going to the playground (approximately 2 city blocks distant, mostly along a bike path); I'd probably prefer to let him (then clandestinely spy on him the first time). But I don't yet know the neighbors well enough to determine if this would make me a pariah.

[Fitzy]

You have to remember that hepcat lives in a perpetual state of shell-shock after his bike was stolen from his porch. He won't even leave the house without a national guard squad covering point.

He only gets out of the house one weekend a month and two weeks a year?

[Jeff V]

You have to remember that hepcat lives in a perpetual state of shell-shock after his bike was stolen from his porch. He won't even leave the house without a national guard squad covering point.

He only gets out of the house one weekend a month and two weeks a year?

That sounds about right.

[Skinypupy]

Nobody should have to decide between bankruptcy and seeing a doctor.

Not sure which side you're arguing from, but I see very little evidence that any conservatives believe this.

Seems to be quite the opposite, actually. As far as I can tell, the prevailing opinion (based on what they're proposing) is that If your job doesn't provide benefits and you can't pay for it yourself, then tough shit. It's your problem to deal with.

[coopasonic]

Nobody should have to decide between bankruptcy and seeing a doctor.

Not sure which side you're arguing from, but I see very little evidence that any conservatives believe this.

Seems to be quite the opposite, actually. As far as I can tell, the prevailing opinion (based on what they're proposing) is that If your job doesn't provide benefits and you can't pay for it yourself, then tough shit. It's your problem to deal with.

I think the point of agreement would be that the cost of healthcare is out of control.

[Kraken]

Nobody should have to decide between bankruptcy and seeing a doctor.

Not sure which side you're arguing from, but I see very little evidence that any conservatives believe this.

Seems to be quite the opposite, actually. As far as I can tell, the prevailing opinion (based on what they're proposing) is that If your job doesn't provide benefits and you can't pay for it yourself, then tough shit. It's your problem to deal with.

I think the point of agreement would be that the cost of healthcare is out of control.

Well sure, but I think Kurth's question implies policy: what, if anything, should be done about it?

[gilraen]

Death penalty is sometimes the appropriate punishment.

[LordMortis]

I think the point of agreement would be that the cost of healthcare is out of control.

That's a perfect example of how difficult the question posed in this thread is for me. I see with eye to eye with the political generalization. 10 seconds of specifics and I find I am incapable of being part of the conversation with the "perspective of someone who you believe to be 180 degrees opposite from you". I'm worn down. I've lost, when I used believe "why is it a battle? Why do we even call it a debate? It's a conversation. A problem in search of a solution." I'm broken.

[Kurth]

Nobody should have to decide between bankruptcy and seeing a doctor.

Not sure which side you're arguing from, but I see very little evidence that any conservatives believe this.

Seems to be quite the opposite, actually. As far as I can tell, the prevailing opinion (based on what they're proposing) is that If your job doesn't provide benefits and you can't pay for it yourself, then tough shit. It's your problem to deal with.

I think the point of agreement would be that the cost of healthcare is out of control.

Well sure, but I think Kurth's question implies policy: what, if anything, should be done about it?

Actually, no. The idea is what common ideals/goals do we share at a high level. We're always going to have disagreements (deep disagreements at times) about what policies to implement to achieve those goals, but if we are so divided that we don't even have many goals we can agree on . . . it's all FUBAR and McCain is just whistling in the wind.

[hepcat]

Obviously, there are specifics, but the assumption should probably be that the streets of suburbia aren't filled with pedophile kidnappers/murderers and that you're not sending your kid out into a warzone filled with landmines.

I live in Chicago. That’s a Thursday.

[Combustible Lemur]

P

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[hepcat]

You have to remember that hepcat lives in a perpetual state of shell-shock after his bike was stolen from his porch. He won't even leave the house without a national guard squad covering point.

He only gets out of the house one weekend a month and two weeks a year?

Jesus, I can’t believe you remember that I had that happen.

Wait...you got a new bike around that time, didn’t you? AND a bunch of hair care products too, I believe.

[YellowKing]

The problem is not that we don't have a lot in common. We do. The problem is that the two political party platforms have told us what the issues are and how to believe on those issues.

Think about it - what are the chances, in a world of no political parties, that people would evenly divide among two different belief systems filled with dozens of issues? Astronomical. We've only become so divisive as a nation as the political party platforms did. The tail has been wagging the dog for years.

We are all victims of an artificial construct put into place to keep the powerful in power, suppress free thinking, and keep the sheep in line.

Until we wake up as a country and realize that, we're fucked.