I certainly am not surprised by this but I highly object to the divisive nature of the headline of the article. I know lots of Republicans who are highly compassionate people and DO want to help others... they just have different ideas of HOW that help should be delivered, and by whom. Additionally the differences in the percentages are really not great enough to support the headline either, nor do we know how the questions were asked and that can make a lot of difference in how they are answered. For instance... do you support programs to help the poor is pretty broad... where as do you think government should fund programs to help the poor is more specific. They will get a wide difference in how both sides answer those questions as Republicans, in general, think social welfare is not the job of government, whereas Democrats think that should be one of the primary purposes of government. Most MODERATE Republicans and Democrats actually agree on what most of the problems are... we simply differ on what the solutions should be. However the political PROCESS, and the media, THRIVE on keeping the sides as polarized as possible. The right especially since they are funded more from the money of the 1% and big business and their policies favor the top more than the bottom. I think we need more political parties to break gridlock and to keep the two party system from manipulating voters to their own agendas.
Posted on: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 14:45:16 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015