Threats for going against the party...

[agzg]

Originally Posted by a.e.B.O.T.

I find it SOO hard to believe that there is such a clearly defined divide...

I'd say that clear divide has existed since (at least) Reagan.

Politics as usual.

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by alphagamzetagam

I'd say that clear divide has existed since (at least) Reagan.

Politics as usual.

Before that...if you're talking about the modern parties, I think you can go back to the Goldwater Republicans (who inspired Reagan).

Honestly, though, there's been a big split between national parties since the days of the Democratic-Republicans and the Federalists.

[agzg]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

Before that...if you're talking about the modern parties, I think you can go back to the Goldwater Republicans (who inspired Reagan).

Honestly, though, there's been a big split between national parties since the days of the Democratic-Republicans and the Federalists.

Perhaps the "Gotcha" media just publicizes the divide more.

[KSigkid]

Originally Posted by a.e.B.O.T.

Well, I am a strong advocate of debate, but I really find it hard that 99 smart, education individuals come together, and have either one of two opinions... and those opinion (except for 3) line exactly with ones party... a little crazy to me... I think we are not debating enough with in our own respective parties, because you are right, due to the money involved and how that is money is being used...

Or perhaps it's a bit of a weighing game. Say you're a Senator who is opposed to most of the stimulus package, but supports a couple of the provisions. Are you going to risk angering your party leadership and your constituents over a couple issues that may be minor in light of the big picture? Same question if you're generally in favor of the stimulus but have problems with a couple of issues.

I think, short of the floor/committee debate and sound bytes with the media, Congresspeople are a bit limited in what they can actually do.

Originally Posted by alphagamzetagam

Perhaps the "Gotcha" media just publicizes the divide more.

True - but those conflicts have gone through history, from the one I referenced, through the Republican v. Democrat debates in the Civil War era, to the Republicans attacking Wilson during/after World War I, to the present day.

That's not to say that the divide is always a bad thing; there are times when it can be beneficial, when it really symbolizes the "checks and balances" ideal of the government.

[a.e.B.O.T.]

Originally Posted by KSigkid

Or perhaps it's a bit of a weighing game. Say you're a Senator who is opposed to most of the stimulus package, but supports a couple of the provisions. Are you going to risk angering your party leadership and your constituents over a couple issues that may be minor in light of the big picture? Same question if you're generally in favor of the stimulus but have problems with a couple of issues.

I think, short of the floor/committee debate and sound bytes with the media, Congresspeople are a bit limited in what they can actually do.

in my opinion, YES... it is not about party leadership or "constituents"... because that makes it a game, and it is not suppose to be...

and before you call me on it, yes, I am an idealist, and yes, I know it is never going to happen, but that does not mean I am not right