How much of political leaning is social/cultural rather than issue based?

[TGHusker]

Yeah, I've wondered about that too. I've always thought that Democrats were supposed to be socially responsible, and watch out for the poor and various minorities. And Republicans were supposed to be fiscally responsible, keeping an eye on the nation's pocketbook. (Not that this actually happens.) Given the supposed emphasis of each party, you'd think that poor rural folks would vote Dem. But they don't, mostly. From the rural people I know, I think they are opposed to all the (perceived) social program money that's poured into urban areas.

:

I don't think about it as economic or social-initiative thing, at least in person-to-person terms. I think individual dems and reps both want social justice and a healthy currency as much as the other group. Its just a different set of thought processes... I think social initiatives are great, and well intended, but I also I think that until the economy is fixed, that those social initiatives are no more than temporary fixes.

I see democratic policies like Obamacare as temporary fixes. Health insurance doesn't address the issue of unfair health-costs and pharmaceuticals, it actually perpetuates it imo. Sort of like how raising the minimum wage lends itself to (eventually) increased prices across the board..... With a healthy economy, health care costs would be affordable without insurance companies. There is no reason insurance companies should exist at all imo, they are part of the problem of overpriced health care - and autos, and homes, and so on.... Making sure everyone has health insurance is like a doctor giving you tylenol for a headache, and then a week later, giving you more tylenol for the same headache, and again a week later. At some point you have to realize that the headache isn't the issue. Its that you've had headphones in too much. Address the issue. The issue, imo, is the value and health of the dollar, and until that is fixed, then nothing the government does is more than a temporary solution.

Personally, generally, I think of conservatives as not wanting a high level of federal bureaucracy/regulations, but rather more state and locally driven law and regulation.

Pot being legalized in several states, but not at a federal level is a good example imo. Each state should have the right to legalize without federal/dea policing. That is a "conservative" philosophy imo, regardless of how individual dem/rep politicians currently align themselves.

Generally, I think of liberals as seeing the country more as one entity that should subscribe to the same laws and rules across the board.... But in my experience a rule that works well for rural America doesn't necessarily translate to urban America and vice versa, and normally I feel like new rules come at the expense of at least one group of the upper/middle/lower classes, regardless of rural or urban demographics (Obamacare for example).

I do think the more you travel the more global your views become, which has been a really great experience for me, but personally, I think the long-term success of America must be driven by individual city and state desires, not by national or global interests. That's not to say national interests or global equality should be ignored.

Good thoughts. I agree

 

[TGHusker]

That's not something a politician would do, that's something we the people would do.

Stop registering as a Democrat or Republican. Register Independent and send a message to these parties that they do not represent us.

Knapp you may be right but I still like the little influence I have in a primary. (Ok call be delusional to think I have some influence. Hey, I shook Ben Carson's hand at a political event and a few weeks later he got out of the campaign - maybe I had a lot of influence.

)

 

[Lil' Red]

Another reason I lean more to the republican side, although actually never voting in line with the republican nominee's (I've always written in a name or not voted at all), is simply because of the dictionary definition of the terms. Philosophically and personally I just associate with the term "Republic" more-so than "Democracy".

republic |rəˈpəblik|noun

A state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives, and which has an elected or nominated president rather than a monarch.

• archaic; a group with a certain equality between its members.

democracy |dəˈmäkrəsē|noun (plural democracies)

A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives: capitalism and democracy are ascendant in the third world.

• a state governed by a democracy: a multiparty democracy.

• control of an organization or group by the majority of its members: the intended extension of industrial democracy.

• the practice or principles of social equality: demands for greater democracy.

Republic(an): Government with equality between its members.

Democracy: Government by the majority vote.

Ruling by way of majority vote, although it sounds nice, would imply that there is also a minority vote (its funny how they leave that part out of the dictionary)... Yet having a majority/minority vote implies a certain amount of inequality that I don't believe is Constitutional.

Gay/lesbian rights, legalized pot, foreign policy/wars, and so on, should not be subject to a personal/emotional/special-interest's "majority/minority" vote it should be subject to the terms "Justice & Equality".

In theory I would agree but I don't believe either party makes an effort to adhere to those philosophies.

 

[knapplc]

TG, Democrats in Oklahoma allow Independents to vote in their primaries, but Republicans have closed primaries.

You should encourage the Oklahoma Republican party to allow more freedoms in the election process. Right now, you can't change party affiliation between April 1st and August 31st in even-numbered years in Oklahoma.

"Land of the free," indeed.

 

[knapplc]

In theory I would agree but I don't believe either party makes an effort to adhere to those philosophies.

Certainly neither party cares about the dictionary definition of either word. I've never heard of a person choosing a political party based on the dictionary. Seems ill-advised.

 

[TGHusker]

TG, Democrats in Oklahoma allow Independents to vote in their primaries, but Republicans have closed primaries.

You should encourage the Oklahoma Republican party to allow more freedoms in the election process. Right now, you can't change party affiliation between April 1st and August 31st in even-numbered years in Oklahoma.

"Land of the free," indeed.

Good Point. I'll look into that. I know some good legislators & party leaders - one was my family doc for years and I'll bounce it off of him. I sometimes have mixed feelings on the open primary - On one side, if the repub party allows independents to vote (I'd be opposed to allowing parties voting in each others primary- seems kind of self defeating/sabotage to me) it would be more representative of the state as a whole and give a better picture of how the GE may look. On the other hand, the party should live by (and die by) its distinctive policies. If they pick a extremist then they will have to learn to adopt to the defeats they may face. Of course, the party can still have distinctive policies and will draw independents who agree wt those policies - extreme or not. So, in the end, it is probably all good in that regard - just thinking out loud here - my wife is use to it.

 

[Enhance]

TG, I didn't pull that out of a hat. Perhaps I should rephrase my statement: significant amounts of research show the most educated Americans have grown increasingly liberal over the last couple of decades.

I didn't intend to paint that as a broad brush statement nor said it was true in all cases. You'll notice I used words like "often" and "tend." I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion I was trying to make a blanket statement.

The other parts of it are just my opinion, again relating back to rural v. urban areas. Rural areas tend to have larger conservative footprints - that's a fact. Urban areas tend to have larger liberal footprints - also a fact. There are a number of reasons for this outside of education, of course.

 

[Danny Bateman]

You could just be an Independent and do whatever you want without labels.

Yeah, whatever you want—except voting in a primary.

Depends on your state. Only 18 states have closed primaries. The other 32 offer a wide range of options for Independents. In Nebraska, I have more choices as an Independent than I would if I registered with a specific party.

Of course, if we abolish the parties by refusing to be affiliated, we could eliminate that stupid restriction and allow everyone to vote in every primary. But politicians aren't interested in that.

You can always register for the primaries if you're in a closed state and re-register as Independent/Unaffiliated afterwards as well.

 

[JJ Husker]

Social/cultural circles are probably the single greatest contributing factor to political lean and a lot of it comes down to experiences and exposure. That's why urban areas tend to be more liberal and rural areas tend to be more conservative. Education also plays a critical role. Research shows the more educated a person is the more liberal they often become.

I know this is 100% true for me. I leaned Republican in high school, but since graduating college (and spending several years in the media being exposed to a number of ideas and experiences) I'm now more liberal and often closely align with civil libertarians.

In Nebraska, I tend to believe the less exposed you are to different cultures and ideas the more you tend to lean right.

^^^This.

A persons political lean is almost entirely based on social/cultural issues. Since a persons position on the issues would obviously be influenced by these very things, it only stands to reason. It's probably pretty rare that a person would choose a side on an issue that wasn't aligned with their life experiences. I'm kind of wondering if I missed the point of the question.

 

[TGHusker]

TG, I didn't pull that out of a hat. Perhaps I should rephrase my statement: significant amounts of research show the most educated Americans have grown increasingly liberal over the last couple of decades.

I didn't intend to paint that as a broad brush statement nor said it was true in all cases. You'll notice I used words like "often" and "tend." I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion I was trying to make a blanket statement.

The other parts of it are just my opinion, again relating back to rural v. urban areas. Rural areas tend to have larger conservative footprints - that's a fact. Urban areas tend to have larger liberal footprints - also a fact. There are a number of reasons for this outside of education, of course.

Would you consider the majority of educational institutions more liberal or more conservative? I think it is pretty much a given that our ed establishment at its core is more liberal - especially in the areas where liberal/conservative matter - social sciences, political science, and similar. Thus one would expect the end product (the highly educated) to be more liberal. That doesn't mean that there weren't any conservative students (who are also highly educated) produced by the system. I have no disagreement wt the bold.

 

[knapplc]

A persons political lean is almost entirely based on social/cultural issues.

I don't know the answer to this, but what if it's the opposite? What if we seek out social structures that reinforce the beliefs we already have?

Me, for example. I live in a heavily red state, but I lean Left (no, really you guys, I do!). When I talk politics IRL, the people I talk with mostly agree with my stances. Is that because I've been conditioned to lean Left or because I seek out, consciously or unconsciously, people who reinforce my beliefs?

This is Nebraska - there's no shortage of Right-leaning folks for me to hang out with. But for the most part, I don't talk to any.

 

[knapplc]

TG, I didn't pull that out of a hat. Perhaps I should rephrase my statement: significant amounts of research show the most educated Americans have grown increasingly liberal over the last couple of decades.

I didn't intend to paint that as a broad brush statement nor said it was true in all cases. You'll notice I used words like "often" and "tend." I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion I was trying to make a blanket statement.

The other parts of it are just my opinion, again relating back to rural v. urban areas. Rural areas tend to have larger conservative footprints - that's a fact. Urban areas tend to have larger liberal footprints - also a fact. There are a number of reasons for this outside of education, of course.

Would you consider the majority of educational institutions more liberal or more conservative? I think it is pretty much a given that our ed establishment at its core is more liberal - especially in the areas where liberal/conservative matter - social sciences, political science, and similar. Thus one would expect the end product (the highly educated) to be more liberal. That doesn't mean that there weren't any conservative students (who are also highly educated) produced by the system. I have no disagreement wt the bold.

The stereotype is that college is way more liberal than conservative, and I would tend to agree, but I think it's more the age you are than the political leaning you have. No matter how conservative a kid grows up, at that 18-22 age you're experiencing a whole new world, constantly trying new things, exposed to stuff you weren't exposed to before (and even in the Internet age where Middle-Schoolers have easy access to the worst of culture, they're seeing it, not living it).

Kid leaves his rural town, goes to a university town where there's tons more to do, they tend to do that stuff. It's a more "liberal" time in their life.

Once they leave college they have bills, a mortgage, maybe kids, an 8-5 job... your liberalism begins to wane as your opportunities wane.

Going to college is like going back to kindergarten. Those tuition bills aren't hitting you yet, you have class maybe 20 hours a week, and the rest of your time is yours. You have SO MUCH freedom without parents, you're making your own living arrangements and having tons more sex, you're able to get ahold of alcohol or you're turning legal age. It's just a more liberal time.

 

[JJ Husker]

A persons political lean is almost entirely based on social/cultural issues.

I don't know the answer to this, but what if it's the opposite? What if we seek out social structures that reinforce the beliefs we already have?

Me, for example. I live in a heavily red state, but I lean Left (no, really you guys, I do!). When I talk politics IRL, the people I talk with mostly agree with my stances. Is that because I've been conditioned to lean Left or because I seek out, consciously or unconsciously, people who reinforce my beliefs?

This is Nebraska - there's no shortage of Right-leaning folks for me to hang out with. But for the most part, I don't talk to any.

I don't think the situation you describe would be considered the opposite. A person's social/cultural exposure gets us leaning the way we do and, after that, it is probably pretty natural to seek out social structures that reinforce that lean.

If I read the question correctly it's either social/cultural or issues. I really think a person's issue positions are derived from their life experiences. Just doesn't seem possible for issues to be the driving force. I'd sure be open to revising that if somebody could supply an example of how that could happen.

I suppose it might depend on what is meant by "lean". I would say I lean to the right generally, but there are specific areas or issues where I might lean a bit left. But I still feel it is my cumulative experiences that are causing the lean, no matter which direction, and therefore that is what determines my positon on issues.

You need to hang with more of those right leaners and come over to the dark side ;-)

 

[Oade]

A persons political lean is almost entirely based on social/cultural issues.

I don't know the answer to this, but what if it's the opposite? What if we seek out social structures that reinforce the beliefs we already have?

Me, for example. I live in a heavily red state, but I lean Left (no, really you guys, I do!). When I talk politics IRL, the people I talk with mostly agree with my stances. Is that because I've been conditioned to lean Left or because I seek out, consciously or unconsciously, people who reinforce my beliefs?

This is Nebraska - there's no shortage of Right-leaning folks for me to hang out with. But for the most part, I don't talk to any.

That's a good point.

From my experience, I definitely seek out people who share similar views in general, but I also lean right in a right state, so thats easy enough... It's not that I mean to dismiss my left leaning friends, but unless they have a specific question or something I'd rather just leave the subject alone. No need to start drama with someone you love.

My gf and most of her family lean left, so it's not as if I don't associate with strong-minded dems at all, but we do make an effort not to debate anything political. Just not worth it to us.

 

[knapplc]

One of my good friends is retired Air Force, super into guns & the military lifestyle. So I'm probably getting my dose of right-lean from him.

He's the guy who took me shooting on Monday. Good egg, as eggs go.