- Dołączono
- 23 Cze 2015
Eliminationist and zero-sum rhetoric has been on the rise for the last decade. The other side is not merely wrong, they're fundamentally evil. Any gain for them is a loss for you. You can not--and should not--negotiate with them. You can only eliminate them, like a cancer.
Compromise has become a dirty word in politics. The parties get away with electing hardliners by controlling their bank accounts. If you don't follow the party line, the party will throw their support behind a primary challenger. To make matters worse, it's the extremists who are most likely to vote in a primary. And in one-party states and counties, the other party never wins, so you can nominate a complete sperg and still win.
I think this was the original intent of the Tea Party caucus; to capitalize on the anguish of working-class whites who felt that they had been getting the short end of the stick for the last few decades. Barack Obama's election was just the spark that set it off.
Compromise has become a dirty word in politics. The parties get away with electing hardliners by controlling their bank accounts. If you don't follow the party line, the party will throw their support behind a primary challenger. To make matters worse, it's the extremists who are most likely to vote in a primary. And in one-party states and counties, the other party never wins, so you can nominate a complete sperg and still win.
I think this was the original intent of the Tea Party caucus; to capitalize on the anguish of working-class whites who felt that they had been getting the short end of the stick for the last few decades. Barack Obama's election was just the spark that set it off.
