Sarah palin doesn't matter

O.k. bit of a long one here, but I wanted to hit all the bases.

Well, first off...surprise, surprise, I'm not a Democrat!
Independent for the last 17 years, thanks.
I just enjoy paying attention to politics, and the consequences.
I'm not even particularly fiscally liberal, beyond public education and basic infrastructure. Luckily, most American so-called "liberals" are not really all that far to the left, if you haven't noticed!

As I thought I made clear before, I don't think that Democrats are blameless, or miracle workers, or pure as a newly-fallen snow. I did say that I think that most liberals(Most)are more intelligent, better educated, more humane, less hypocritical and less tribalistic than (most) conservatives. Nowhere did I say that the opposite qualities were overflowing from conservatives...an unfavorable comparison is not automatic demonization. This is my experience, my opinion based on twenty years of talking politics with both, and just as many years of observing their policies.
I do not vote completely democratic, but the monolithic, tribalistic, and downright reactionary elements of republican policy, and their current unconstitutional and criminal methods, have made it impossible for me to vote for them on the national stage at this point in time. In local politics, I can base the decision on more local issues.

I supplied, how many was that, a nice round ten examples of republican hypocrisy and boogeyman tribalism tactics used almost every election in the last two decades. Undeniably true, and completely ignored. Where are the liberal examples? Where is the fearmongering and wagon circling? You completely ignored the content of my post, and made no effort whatsoever to show where I might be mistaken. You keep asserting your absolute horseshit claim that democrats are "just as bad" with nothing to back it up. Even in matters that Democrats have shared in heavily, like say Iraq, there has been at least some dissent, some debate, some risk of unpopular opinion, while the right wing marches on in near unanimous lock step, politicians and (most) voters alike... Oh yeah, there were those two (2) repubs who voted against Fisa...
I guess that amazing show of individuality makes everything else equal in your mind...And I call Horseshit! I know that many republican voters may feel quite independent in their choices, and quite rational, but the election strategies and corresponding wins show that this simply cannot be true for all of their constituents, and I don't think there is near as big a knee-jerk reaction among liberals on any issue, at least not at this point in time.
Please feel free to enlighten me, and show me where Democrats have been as monolithic and us/them oriented as Republicans are every election!
Since you cannot seem to find any facts to fit your bullshit equivalency, your entire point seems to be that the Dems will lose votes because their constituents aren't willing to lie enough to please you! So you and they might just stamp your feet and go...join the tribe! What a surprise!

I do understand that there are people who do study the issues and vote for the candidates that match their choices on the issues as far as possible...I do it every election! But judging from what I see all over television, the internet, and from my more conservative-leaning friends and family, I just don't see that among most conservatives. I hear a lot of "Protect Marriage!" "Tax and Spend Liberals!" "Damn Immigrants!" I hear claims of careful thinking, yet comparatively few republicans, politicians or voters, seem willing to deviate from the party line at all...ever...yet I know of(and the records show) plenty of democrats who occassionally vote other than their party line...most notably, many of the ones in congress! How often does that happen on the other side of the aisle lately? Even when republicans disagree in a single debate, the conscience seems to disappear quickly afterward, and the party line gets towed.

You can judge liberals by their refusal to lie to you as much as republicans if you wish, but why not judge them on their actions, instead?

Sorry to go on so long, but I just think that you, and in part Steve, are wrong on this. Yes, a two party system increases the negative effects of tribalism in politics. I would rather have several smaller parties, who could provide more options, more views, and make working together a necessity instead of a cynical tactic.
But it is plainly observable, provable by congressional votes, campaign tactics, constituent voting patterns, discussion of issues vs. sloganizing(which you credit Obama with yourself)that the republican party is, at least at this time, much more monolithic, and depends much more on plain old tribalism, than the Democratic party.(I'm not saying this describes you personally.)
It follows from this unwillingness to debate or compromise that those who are most opposed to current republican policy, whatever their party or single-issue views, will be unanimously against a republican candidate, unless that candidate shows a true willingness to break from the party line which sure as shit isn't happening with "the maverick." While anti-republican sentiments may seem monolithic, it is only on that ONE angle. There are still plenty of debates to be had, as long as the policy is ANYTHING OTHER than current neo-con philosophy. Some of the attitude you hear that is anti-republican right now is not necessarily Democratic or overly liberal-there are some Libertarians planning to vote for Obama, because he's closer to them on some issues than current republican leadership! While this may seem equivalent in tribalism at a glance, there are some differing views among old-school conservatives(not that you hear much about them) and many different views on almost every issue within the democratic party itself. The republican party's lock-step attitude of the last 8 years, focused on destructive neo-con policy, crude manipulation of the religious, and expanding executive power, has solidified many areas of opposition, including many moderate democrats, that could find much more common ground with some individual republicans.

I'm offended by false stereotypes against those groups. As I said earlier, I'm not a Democrat and I get offended by those stereotypes. Maybe it's because I know, and like, people of all kinds of groups, and see first hand that the stereotypes attributed to the group don't usually apply in great quantity to the individuals

It's odd, though, that your principled objection to stereotypes is being asserted in a post that's about peoples' behavior in groups. It's also odd that you don't notice that precisely the same stereotype applies to D voters as R voters. It's simply that I happen to be a D. I demonstrate the stereotype, just as you are doing, even if your personal affiliation is differently self-described.

Of course, I'm fine with it if they vote D. That's my Us right now. Your Us seems to be that group of people who claim not to be one or the other, but to a D or an R, your manner of expressing it simply shouts R (Democrat Party? Liberal bloggers and media? I'm surprised you didn't invoke 'tax and spend'.)

If blame is irrelevant, why are so many of you so quick to point the blame at (R)s? And by the way, I ask the (R)s the same thing about the blame they give the (D)s. You and they both heap blame on the other side and ignore the culpability your own side has.

Bingo! The only part you've missed is your own similar actions, regardless of the reason for justifying them.

Here's the thing, Rob: For better or worse, the system is a Two Party one. You may think you're neither R or D, but I'm afraid that if you vote, you simply are not allowed to be. You can't vote for the best candidate or the one that agrees with your positions because that person isn't on the ballot. By the time they reach the top of the ticket, they no longer are even if they ever were.

It's ludicrous to think that you've examined the positions and made a rational choice because the positions you've examined have been carefully constructed out of whole cloth for that purpose. You're examining the rationalizations and images created for your consumption by the functionaries of the R and D organizations.

I'm sure that you personally, individually make the best choice you can on the basis of the information you're given, independent of letter, but are you so sure that you have no disposition to be convinced by one or the other, especially when the choices are so limited?

And even if you do, one or a hundred or a thousand cows make no difference in a herd of three hundred million. If everyone voted like you, the herd might change direction, but the relevant point is that most people already think that they do.

My own political views aside, you must recognize that both party organizations accept what I'm saying as a matter of course and bend every effort to exploit it for their own gains.

In terms of my own views at present, I suppose I'd say that anyone who thinks D's have clean hands is a fool, but anyone who thinks blame can be laid equally is a dupe. But not really too much more of a dupe than the rest of us.

Steve "Or maybe just not paying attention." James