anniej is offline anniej Post #1  July 11,2009, 3:16pm
anniej's Avatar

is at work.

Quick Study

Joined: Mar 2008

Jamaica

Posts: 105

See profile

When did the US become so antagonistic about politics?
 
  Reply With Quote
neardc is offline neardc Post #2  July 11,2009, 3:44pm
neardc's Avatar

Kumbaya, people!

Power Poster

Joined: Jun 2008

Near DC (duh!)

Posts: 7,738

See profile

It's been going on pretty much forever, really, if you look back through some of the historical stuff. But, I noticed a real change following the 1994 elections when it certainly became more antagonistic in Congress. And, the advent of the internet has surely made it all uglier, providing a platform for a lot vitriolic extremists from both ends of the spectrum to spew their particular brand of "discourse" (even on the eHA boards...lol). There is no longer any kind of gatekeeper to keep that sort of ugliness at bay and that has made it more difficult for areas of agreement to even be seen or acknowledged, much less capitalized upon to move policy forward. The now 24-hour news cycle is another factor, coupled with the proliferation of partisan talking heads and pundits who are now required to keep talking whether they actually have anything to say or not.

At some point, I hope we can better comes to terms with how these new technologies impact how we acquire, process, and use political information and participate in the political process, but at this point it seems a bit like the Wild West...
 
  Reply With Quote
bigfincat is offline bigfincat Post #3  July 11,2009, 3:51pm
bigfincat's Avatar

Virtuoso

Joined: Nov 2008

Posts: 4,077

See profile

I think that it has always been so. At least in my lifetime.

It reached a peak after the 2000 election when Repubs. embarassed us beyond belief when they made hourly personal attacks on all Dem. politicians. They stopped just short of saying things about their mothers. Actually, I think they did that a few times as well.

I don't know if Dems would have gone there had the roles been reversed & Al Gore actually had the lead in the first vote count.

The fight was really ugly & made our politicians look like id iots. Think Trent Lott. His mouth at that time was the start of his fall.
 
  Reply With Quote
Bandmate is offline Bandmate Post #4  July 11,2009, 5:59pm

Enthusiast

Joined: Oct 2008

Posts: 950

See profile

neardc wrote :
It's been going on pretty much forever, really, if you look back through some of the historical stuff. But, I noticed a real change following the 1994 elections when it certainly became more antagonistic in Congress. And, the advent of the internet has surely made it all uglier, providing a platform for a lot vitriolic extremists from both ends of the spectrum to spew their particular brand of "discourse" (even on the eHA boards...lol). There is no longer any kind of gatekeeper to keep that sort of ugliness at bay and that has made it more difficult for areas of agreement to even be seen or acknowledged, much less capitalized upon to move policy forward. The now 24-hour news cycle is another factor, coupled with the proliferation of partisan talking heads and pundits who are now required to keep talking whether they actually have anything to say or not.

At some point, I hope we can better comes to terms with how these new technologies impact how we acquire, process, and use political information and participate in the political process, but at this point it seems a bit like the Wild West...

Yes ...it's all so ugly people not going along and doing as they are commanded...oh the ugliness of it all ...everyone should be as respectful and courteous as the left is with those they disagree with
Last edited by Bandmate; July 11,2009 at 6:03pm.
 
  Reply With Quote
neardc is offline neardc Post #5  July 11,2009, 6:19pm
neardc's Avatar

Kumbaya, people!

Power Poster

Joined: Jun 2008

Near DC (duh!)

Posts: 7,738

See profile

Bandmate wrote :
Yes ...it's all so ugly people not going along and doing as they are commanded...oh the ugliness of it all ...everyone should be as respectful and courteous as the left is with those they disagree with
What is the point of your remark (other than to provide us with a handy example of antagonism)?

As I said, the ugliness comes from both ends of the spectrum.
 
  Reply With Quote
Wonderwoman402 is offline Wonderwoman402 Post #6  July 11,2009, 6:38pm
Wonderwoman40…'s Avatar

L'Chayim!

Virtuoso

Joined: Jan 2009

Omaha, NE

Posts: 4,376

See profile

I had a boyfriend who LOVED to argue politics. Mostly he liked to put down others' beliefs. We actually agreed on most everything, but he'd still argue politics and put down my positions, however minorly different from his.

Some PEOPLE are just antagonistic!

I have differing political views from the vast majority of my family, yet we disagree respectfully and get along great otherwise.

Personally, based on that past boyfriend experience, I will steer clear of anyone who has antagnonistic personality characteristics when it comes to politics, no matter which side of the political fence they sit on. I could easily be with someone of the opposite political party from which I am registered, as long as they aren't frothing at the mouth about their opinions.
 
  Reply With Quote
graceventually is offline graceventually Post #7  July 11,2009, 8:06pm
graceventuall…'s Avatar

was married Nov.28, and is no longer active on this site.

Virtuoso

Joined: May 2008

Posts: 3,056

See profile

I can agree with that, wonderwoman, to an extent. I have no problem with people of different political views when we share the same essential values. I have conservative friends who are very interested in helping the poor, for example; and while we might differ on the details of whether we support/don't support specific government programs to serve that population, we all agree that there are those who need help. Some of them volunteer extensively and do great work. That leaves us plenty to talk about, even when we aren't supporting the same candidates. And of course, people's views can change. I have a good friend who voted for Bush in 2004 when I voted for Kerry, but by 2006 she was just as negative about Bush as I, if not more so.

neardc, I think your point about cable news and its influence is well taken. Public officials are often called upon to give opinions and to respond to other people's statements with little or no time to discuss and/or reflect before having to fill time and make news on the latest interview show. I think it leads to overstatements and rash statements by members of both parties that then have to be walked back (the charges of racism against Judge Sotomayor being just one recent example, but almost every week brings more). This can't lead to much thoughtful deliberation, and it puts many on Capitol Hill in a near-constant mode of being reactive rather than proactive.

I also wonder if the incessant cycle of political fundraising is having a corrosive effect on civil dialogue in Washington? There was a time when members of the House and Senate and their staffs could relax together at the end of a long day. They'd see each other at various DC restaurants, clubs, and other watering holes (not to mention golf courses, country clubs, etc.), where they had a chance to converse and get to know each other socially. Sometimes, in an earlier generation, fierce political opponents were close personal friends (Bob Dole and George McGovern, for one example). Nowadays, a member of congress is much more likely to spend evenings in DC in the company of lobbyists or at PAC events and other partisan fundraisers. Often that means they spend their time hearing the extreme wings of their respective parties demonizing the other side, as opposed to sitting down to a drink with a member of "the other side". It's got to affect them after a while; how could it not?
Last edited by graceventually; July 11,2009 at 8:11pm.
 
  Reply With Quote
neardc is offline neardc Post #8  July 12,2009, 12:12am
neardc's Avatar

Kumbaya, people!

Power Poster

Joined: Jun 2008

Near DC (duh!)

Posts: 7,738

See profile

graceventually wrote :
I also wonder if the incessant cycle of political fundraising is having a corrosive effect on civil dialogue in Washington? There was a time when members of the House and Senate and their staffs could relax together at the end of a long day. They'd see each other at various DC restaurants, clubs, and other watering holes (not to mention golf courses, country clubs, etc.), where they had a chance to converse and get to know each other socially. Sometimes, in an earlier generation, fierce political opponents were close personal friends (Bob Dole and George McGovern, for one example). Nowadays, a member of congress is much more likely to spend evenings in DC in the company of lobbyists or at PAC events and other partisan fundraisers. Often that means they spend their time hearing the extreme wings of their respective parties demonizing the other side, as opposed to sitting down to a drink with a member of "the other side". It's got to affect them after a while; how could it not?
True. Members have even been "forbidden" from that kind of socializing with members of the other party (or at least strongly discouraged). The change in norms of comity in the Senate is one important reason that some longstanding "senior statesmen" Senators have resigned over the years (Alan Simpson, for example). It just became an upleasant place to be and work... I can't attribute all of those changes to pressing fundraising needs, but it makes sense that it's a contributing cause...

BTW, another "odd couple" of very close friends is Orin Hatch and Ted Kennedy. They are at near opposite ends of the political spectrum, and yet they have found that they have much common ground, too, through which they can relate.
 
  Reply With Quote
Bandmate is offline Bandmate Post #9  July 12,2009, 3:36am

Enthusiast

Joined: Oct 2008

Posts: 950

See profile

neardc wrote :
What is the point of your remark (other than to provide us with a handy example of antagonism)?

As I said, the ugliness comes from both ends of the spectrum.
You are more polite about your bias than most,i will give you that,but it's still clear most of the time that your side can do no wrong and the other side can do no right...as government gets more intrusive,demanding and becomes the tool of special classes of people who want what they want from other people you can expect it to get uglier...it's called freedom and America was supposed to be all about that...you call me antagonistic because i disagree with you 95% of the time and say so not using the submissive and deferential lanquage you would prefer.
Last edited by Bandmate; July 12,2009 at 4:22am.
 
  Reply With Quote
Bandmate is offline Bandmate Post #10  July 12,2009, 3:46am

Enthusiast

Joined: Oct 2008

Posts: 950

See profile

Wonderwoman402 wrote :
I had a boyfriend who LOVED to argue politics. Mostly he liked to put down others' beliefs. We actually agreed on most everything, but he'd still argue politics and put down my positions, however minorly different from his.

Some PEOPLE are just antagonistic!

I have differing political views from the vast majority of my family, yet we disagree respectfully and get along great otherwise.

Personally, based on that past boyfriend experience, I will steer clear of anyone who has antagnonistic personality characteristics when it comes to politics, no matter which side of the political fence they sit on. I could easily be with someone of the opposite political party from which I am registered, as long as they aren't frothing at the mouth about their opinions.

Tell me why i should respect you or anybody else who seeks to take away my freedom or property just because they think it should be that way.I genuinely and sincerly don't care how anyone else lives their life,i have enough trouble trying to live my own without blowing it,yet i'm surrounded at times by little do gooders,busybodies and crusaders who think people should do this or not do that,most of the time trying to protect them from themselves which is neither their responsability or right...if not that then they are trying to find ways to transfer the consequences of the choices people make to others...always and forever busy trying to force their perspective of life on others...usualy on someone else's dime...so why should i have anything but contempt for such people ?
 
  Reply With Quote
Reply


« Quote | Politics | Alec & Toonces 2012! »
Topic Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new topics
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Similar Topics
Topic Topic Starter Board Replies Last Post
Let us talk politics WOS Intelligent Conversation 46 November 7,2009 12:00pm
Why is understanding history important to understanding politics? outlaw1 Politics 16 June 20,2009 5:55am
Politics and Dating beatlejuice72 Dating 30 May 25,2009 12:18pm

Looking for a Great Relationship?

Get started now. Fill out this form and take the questionnaire to receive your matches.

First Name:

I'm a:
seeking

Postal Code:

Country:

Email:

Confirm Email:

Password:


How did you hear about us?


Latest on our Dating Advice Discussion Boards

“It's important to understand the way a site works. Rigidly assuming / insisting that eH works likes all the others you're used to isn't utilizing the site functions to your best advantage. No.... ... ” –  Wiseman2

Join the “First contact on eHarmony, smile, questions, email?” discussion

“ If you have yet to meet, you don't know him or whether you two will form a connection. Connections formed over e-mail tend to be fantasies. You will see this echoed over and over by experienced ... ” –  shapeShifter79

Join the “How do i recoonect with him again?” discussion

“ Then it's a bit premature to worry about being friend-zoned. The first step is to go out on dates! What specific steps did you try? How many women did you ask out in person? Did you buy a ... ” –  shapeShifter79

Join the “For women to answer: How to avoid the friend zone” discussion

“ This is an old thread. She asked this in 2010. By now they are likely very exclusive or very over. ” –  shapeShifter79

Join the “is there a reason to ask if we're exclusive?” discussion

“ I'm sure he wouldn't get that. And I can't be sure that was the actual message. But it sems kind of likely to me.” –  boomer_gal

Join the “Why am I not successful?” discussion

“Hi eccemuliere and welcome to eHA.On an internet forum like eHA, you're going to get a wide variety of responses; some you'll like and some you won't. It's best to focus on the ones that speak to ... ” –  Sassafras54

Join the “Being blown off, or something else?” discussion

“ Although I have ignored my gut at times, in hindsight it's always been right, in terms of recognizing bad choices. QUOTE] But once we realize our past mistakes, we can use our reason to clue us ... ” –  eccemuliere

Join the “Is Your Gut Leading - or Misleading You?” discussion



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:18am.

Discussion Boards Archive

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0