Do you ignore certain parts of platforms?

[KSig RC]

Having just read nittanyalum's interesting post about worry about Sarah Palin's ability to enact social change based on her very conservative, religion-based policy stances (specifically with regard to things like abortion and gay marriage), I realized something I found pretty interesting:

I don't pay attention to Republican or Democrat social policies on a "sweeping" level, because I assume they will never be enacted.

For instance, my personal feeling after fairly extensive study and analysis is that the Supreme Court would have to undergo significant change to even reconsider Roe v. Wade, not to mention overturn it. For that reason, I just don't pay attention to abortion stances, because I don't find them important (and the fact that I'm staunchly pro-choice may play a role in that, as a biasing agent). Many social policies seem like the hands-off status quo is quite sustainable, and that most politicians seem more interested in getting a sound bite than actually working toward a "fix" or a change. For that reason, I assume most social change promises are blowing smoke up our collective asses - there just hasn't been much traction on anything at a national level, although I do worry somewhat about the anti-gay marriage bans at a state level (even while I concede that is probably the "correct" way for it to be handled under the Constitution).

However, I find economic or foreign policy issues to be far easier for one party to force through. A classic example is the UIGEA legislation, which essentially attempted to choke off internet poker - while insanely stupid, the Republicans were able to attach it to a port security bill with the solid and nearly unanimous support of Democrats. I find that the "dominant" party (and also the President, even with an opposition Congress) can often make significant and strong changes on economic or foreign policy issues - see: the buildup to an awkward war in Iraq, Clinton's awkward balanced budget, or even Reaganomics. For this reason, I focus much more strongly on Obama's spending promises versus McCain's inconsistent history - this has an interesting side-effect of making me something of a limited-issue voter, should I choose to vote for either. This seems strange, since I feel fairly informed as a voter.

Am I alone in doing this?

With the seeming gridlock in Congress in recent years, do we really expect everything that is promised by either side? What do you worry about or focus on when it comes to political platforms?