Can someone please state that difference between the two. To me they seem to blur together.
They do as there are moderates on both sides. Democrats tend to be much more socially liberal than Republicans. Republicans tend to favor less regulation of the economy (this depends on the specific form of regulation, but for the most part this holds). Democrats, as a party, tend to be pro-choice, Republicans pro-life. Democrats tend to favor social policy at the federal lever, Republicans at the state level (again depends on the issue).
To me it just seems as simple as they both are into the money rather than the people who elected them. I believe ti should be the other way around. Or atleast make to welfare of the US population a priority, rather than the money.
The difference in idiology is there, the difference in behavior is certainly fuzzy. The major difference I see is that Democrats see the world as complex, while the Republicans take a more simplistic stance, and are proud of their simplicity.
Democrats get a lot of their money from big unions. Republicans get most of theirs from big corporations. It does make a difference in how they act when they get into office.
Re: my view
It isn't the money, its the power. Political office doesn't really pay very much.
Re: Re: my view
That doesn't mean there isn't alot of money in it.
Re: Re: my view
I certainly agree with this. Vanity is the sin of choice in politics. Greed is just a perk.
I agree, Njorl.
I would like to add that generally:
Republicans are conservative.
Democracts are liberal.
That Republicans belive that the gov't that governs least governs best (but of course not ot the point of lawlessness)and the Democrats are for big gov't.
A big problem with defining them is how very general you have to be. There are many exceptions to what others and I have said.
EDIT: Hey, I finally figured out italics!
Re: Re: Re: my view
?? Yes, it does. There is not a lot of money in politics. The president of the US (he's like the CEO of a company with 250,000,000 employees) makes $400,000. Thats PEANUTS compared with what the CEO of a decent sized company makes and a tiny fraction of what they make after getting back into the private sector. They can make that in a WEEK on the lecture circuit. And look at Hillary Clinton - she made more than DOUBLE for an ADVANCE on a BOOK about being MARRIED to the president than Billy did the whole time he WAS president.
Re: Re: Re: Re: my view
See? You prove my point..there is tons of cash in politics! Not to mention if you can funnels some government contracts into your own pocket, which is more common than you might think.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: my view
[?] [?] Huh? Oh wait, is this another one of those 0%=50%="equality" things?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: my view
Go away Russ, your services are no longer required here.
Just because the salaries of politicians are not incredibly high does not mean that there is not a lot of money in politics. Many politicians do gain money outside of the political system because of their positions.
Uh huh...as though anyone would pay Clinton for his memoirs if he were a plumber, or would pay Bush I anything o speak if he were a schoolteacher. Politics leads to cash indirectly, but as surely as the sun rises in the east.
Politicians have a good life.
Their income alone provide for smooth living. On top of that are perks and free services which are available to them. Afterwards, they can land a well paying job making hundreds of thousands of dollars per year for what might amount to being little more than a figurehead on a board. They are much better connected to power and wealth than the average citizen. Politics, like prostitution, pays. In this respect there is little or no difference between Democrats and Republicans.
(that last sentence thrown in only to make it appear as if I'm talking on topic, hehe).
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: my view
Gee, thats nice. Delete it.
Rage, your second sentence contradicts your first. You used the words "in" and "outside."
Welcome back, Russ...I'm hoping you had a good weekend?
You have to admit, Russ...there is good money to be made from politics, even though the salary is low. It is the same way that pro athletes can often make much more as endorsers than in their sport(just look at Anna Kornikova).
On the other hand, what company would have Dubya as its CEO? (Without threats and massive bribes...)
We could always say that the Republican Party has turned towards hatred as a weapon against Democratic success, while Democrats have a rational anger about the Bush Administration's failures. There's a big difference right there.
Separate names with a comma.