Party Line Votes

[PhantomAgony]

I really don't post in here, but I follow these threads. I just do not understand politics and humanity really. Party A wont vote for something Party B proposes, regardless if they think its a good idea or not, or it happens to be better for the country as a whole. Has it ever been this bad (at least in the United States)? Does it simply boil down to Control and Money? I feel we are crippling progress as a species. Id figure there'd be some outliers and say "you know what, I don't agree with this, I am going to vote against my own party, because this is the right thing to do" Its just shocking and disgusting to me, that it is this way, and I cant wrap my head around it. Hopefully some of you political veterans can explain this or at least give some insight on this.

[Kaleredar]

I really don't post in here, but I follow these threads. I just do not understand politics and humanity really. Party A wont vote for something Party B proposes, regardless if they think its a good idea or not, or it happens to be better for the country as a whole. Has it ever been this bad (at least in the United States)? Does it simply boil down to Control and Money? I feel we are crippling progress as a species. Id figure there'd be some outliers and say "you know what, I don't agree with this, I am going to vote against my own party, because this is the right thing to do" Its just shocking and disgusting to me, that it is this way, and I cant wrap my head around it. Hopefully some of you political veterans can explain this or at least give some insight on this.

In the United States, the only party so hung up on strict party line votes despite the validity or necessity of the legislation is the Republican party. Democrats are more than willing to vote on sensible legislation. Now, that the GOP proposes so little sensible legislation is another issue, but this, like so many things in US politics, is not a "both sides" thing.

So, to more accurately answer your question: Why is the GOP so obsessed with party lines? Because they're not interested in governing, at least, not in any magnanimous sense. As a party they do things basically for one of three reasons: to push for an evangelical state, to line their pockets/the pockets of their wealthy donors, or to further their interests in obtaining power. Now, because they aren't interested in governing, the only way they can really remain/keep getting into power is by convincing people that the democrats are terrible and evil and that you need to vote for the GOP and just keep voting for them.

If democrats propose legislation that is good, then the democrats will get credit for it, which means people are less likely to vote for republicans. So Republicans oppose it. If democrats propose legislation that is effective, then the republican talking point that "the government/democrats can't do anything" goes out the door. So the Republicans oppose it. The other sensible things that democrats push for... a less evangelical state, shifting the tax burden to the ultra wealthy, or things like increasing access to voting and making it less restrictive for voters, directly conflict with the three things the GOP actually wants. So they then oppose them as well.

And all of their excuses to dress up their utterly partisan actions are hypocritical hang-wringing. Oh, infrastructure spending/free school lunches/tax reform might have a "negative effect on the GDP/economy/national debt/whatever?" When the GOP is in power, you'll note they don't give a single concern or mention about their little pet projects or the economic toll wrought by tax brakes and regulation reforms will have on those same things they were willing to block legitimate legislation over. (The blank check they were willing to sign for the great wall of Trump being a prime example.)

And part of dealing with the problem is the cessation of using "both-sides" type language. In order to deal with a problem, you have to identify it as directly as possible.

[Endus]

I really don't post in here, but I follow these threads. I just do not understand politics and humanity really. Party A wont vote for something Party B proposes, regardless if they think its a good idea or not, or it happens to be better for the country as a whole. Has it ever been this bad (at least in the United States)?

The fight for civil rights in the '50s/'60s. Prohibition. Women's Suffrage. Jim Crow. The US Civil War.

The USA's always been like this.

Does it simply boil down to Control and Money?

No, intentional bigotry is at the core of most of these. If it were just power and control, the Dems and Repubs have shared power quite nicely for ages. That's not what they're fighting over.

I feel we are crippling progress as a species.

You wildly overestimate the necessity of the United States to global success.

Id figure there'd be some outliers and say "you know what, I don't agree with this, I am going to vote against my own party, because this is the right thing to do"

If they feel that way, they switch parties or go Independent, generally. That's why there's generally little fighting within parties; they're opt-in.

[Doctor Amadeus]

My first vote was for Bill Clinton in 96 and I have been a registered Democrat ever since. Even as a kid, I watched elections and supported Democrats all the way back to Walter Mondale who got destroyed LOL.

That said do I always vote down party lines? Eh No!

But like 99% of the time I do.

Notable exception was when Ventura ran for Governor of Minnesota, I remembered him briefly for his time as Mayor of Brooklyn Park, MN. So to me he was more than just one of my favorite announcers, he had a record to run on, that more than anything qualifications are the most important.

It isn't about who, I like or even always who I agreed with, unless they were completely morally bankrupt. So in that vein I've always voted party line.

However if said candidate weas a Democrat, but they were NOT qualified, No matter how much I liked them I might not vote for them. The fortunate thing until more recently, whether I liked or disliked anyone, regardless to party most if not all elections I have voted in the candidates were qualified. Even if I disagreed with them ideologically and or politically.

Keep in mind just because someone is famous, I wouldn't discount them, but if they aren't qualified, NO, not even if the are a Democrat. But generally it's typically been more about who's policy and philosophy I agree with.

I have NOT liked every Democrat I voted or who's run.


I am also Canadian, but, I have never lived there long enough to vote. But In Canada I would likely vote Liberal, but there are some NDP in Manitoba, I liked.

[Templar 331]

As far as politicians go, the reason why they don't vote for the betterment of the country is because it doesn't benefit them personally. If it doesn't get them votes it isn't worth pursuing. Especially if it's a solution that was conceived by the other side. In that situation the politician would gain more political clout by opposing the solution even at the cost of the good of the country.

Like you have pointed out, the only way these types would vote for an idea from the other side of the isle is when the politician is on the way out.

[unfilteredJW]

As far as politicians go, the reason why they don't vote for the betterment of the country is because it doesn't benefit them personally. If it doesn't get them votes it isn't worth pursuing. Especially if it's a solution that was conceived by the other side. In that situation the politician would gain more political clout by opposing the solution even at the cost of the good of the country.

Like you have pointed out, the only way these types would vote for an idea from the other side of the isle is when the politician is on the way out.

It goes beyond that: causing pain and suffering IS the goal, not a side effect of some other goal.

[tehdang]

I really don't post in here, but I follow these threads. I just do not understand politics and humanity really. Party A wont vote for something Party B proposes, regardless if they think its a good idea or not, or it happens to be better for the country as a whole. Has it ever been this bad (at least in the United States)? Does it simply boil down to Control and Money? I feel we are crippling progress as a species. Id figure there'd be some outliers and say "you know what, I don't agree with this, I am going to vote against my own party, because this is the right thing to do" Its just shocking and disgusting to me, that it is this way, and I cant wrap my head around it. Hopefully some of you political veterans can explain this or at least give some insight on this.

I think you're overinflating the problems with joining an opposite-party bill. It's whether one party can swallow all the negatives in the opposite party's bill. The best recent case is the DC Crime Bill rejection in the US. Many Democrats thought, for reasons of DC home rule or their personal preferences on crime policy, that they could not join with Republicans. Others did vote with the opposite party in enough numbers to get the bill passed.

On the opposite end, sometimes the political party's platform calculations involves promising to oppose something they view as important no matter what else could be gained if they compromised on that one issue.