Why are many people so partisan?

[Presnock]

On 11/14/2024 at 9:11 AM, OneMoreFarang said:

We all have our preferences and there is nothing wrong with that.

But it seems many people, in this forum and elsewhere, see their own side only as good and the others only as bad.

 

Trump hired Musk to make the US government more efficient.

I would have though everybody should be delighted by such a move. Or is there anybody out there who does not think the US and many other governments waste too much money?

 

If the DEMs would have created such a department, I guess many DEM voters would be delighted. But now, it seems many DEMs and the DEM media don't like this at all.

Why is it so difficult to agree that a good idea is a good idea, even if the others came up with this idea?

One can argue if Musk has some conflicts of interests. But that doesn't change the fact that it would be great to save lots of tax-payers money. 

 

The above is just one example. It seems to apply to many supporters of many political parties all over the world.

too true, we each have our opinion which is natural but too many folks on this forum don't accept that if it is different from theirs and they gladly it seems want to let the world know.  I am not a Trumper but yes, I was a former civil servent and recognize the bloated government bureaucracy of the US and the waste.  I am not sure that all will be good in the new administration..I have read the Project 2025 plan to shrink the govt, get rid of abuse of positions, etc and like you say, who can argue with that!  It would be nice thougjh if the elected officials in the Congress could think more about the citizens and the nation than they do about getting re-elected.  They remind me of the traditional used car salesperson who changes his spiel on selling a car based on the person to whom he is speaking and could really care less about the truth.  I think that the conservative move being sought through the project 2025 might be good if carried out honestly...the key to government but which I find lacking just about everywhere.

[newbee2022]

On 11/14/2024 at 9:11 AM, OneMoreFarang said:

We all have our preferences and there is nothing wrong with that.

But it seems many people, in this forum and elsewhere, see their own side only as good and the others only as bad.

 

Trump hired Musk to make the US government more efficient.

I would have though everybody should be delighted by such a move. Or is there anybody out there who does not think the US and many other governments waste too much money?

 

If the DEMs would have created such a department, I guess many DEM voters would be delighted. But now, it seems many DEMs and the DEM media don't like this at all.

Why is it so difficult to agree that a good idea is a good idea, even if the others came up with this idea?

One can argue if Musk has some conflicts of interests. But that doesn't change the fact that it would be great to save lots of tax-payers money. 

 

The above is just one example. It seems to apply to many supporters of many political parties all over the world.

That bureaucracy sometimes makes decisions slow is not new. And some posts are inefficient or superfluous. That Trump wants to change this is not a bad idea. But to choose Musk for this that is the bad idea. And worse is to give him almost unlimited power like a second president. But sure it will be his benefit

[OneMoreFarang]

50 minutes ago, newbee2022 said:

That bureaucracy sometimes makes decisions slow is not new. And some posts are inefficient or superfluous. That Trump wants to change this is not a bad idea. But to choose Musk for this that is the bad idea. And worse is to give him almost unlimited power like a second president. But sure it will be his benefit

 

I would be very surprised if Musk will work in that position for more than a couple of months. Trump and Musk have each a huge ego and a big mouth. I am sure there will be an interesting "shootout" with both of them.

[AndreasHG]

On 11/15/2024 at 12:34 PM, OneMoreFarang said:

 

I would hope you are right. But in the few articles which I read not even one had something like: In principle that is a good idea, but it should be done by someone else.

 

I think we all could live a lot happier together if we would try to agree on what we can agree and then look at the details. Only because one detail is not so good does not mean the whole idea is bad.

 

The risk with this approach is that you see the trees but miss the forest. Every politician has, or had at some point, some good ideas. That's the reason Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Pinochet, Saddam Hussein, etc. still have fans today.

 

[fvw53]

On 11/14/2024 at 9:11 AM, OneMoreFarang said:

We all have our preferences and there is nothing wrong with that.

But it seems many people, in this forum and elsewhere, see their own side only as good and the others only as bad.

 

Trump hired Musk to make the US government more efficient.

I would have though everybody should be delighted by such a move. Or is there anybody out there who does not think the US and many other governments waste too much money?

 

If the DEMs would have created such a department, I guess many DEM voters would be delighted. But now, it seems many DEMs and the DEM media don't like this at all.

Why is it so difficult to agree that a good idea is a good idea, even if the others came up with this idea?

One can argue if Musk has some conflicts of interests. But that doesn't change the fact that it would be great to save lots of tax-payers money. 

 

The above is just one example. It seems to apply to many supporters of many political parties all over the world.

The fanaticism of supporters of political parties and of football (soccer) clubs originates in the illusion that if the party or club they support is winning...they too are winning

[OneMoreFarang]

1 hour ago, AndreasHG said:

 

The risk with this approach is that you see the trees but miss the forest. Every politician has, or had at some point, some good ideas. That's the reason Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, Pinochet, Saddam Hussein, etc. still have fans today.

 

 

I think it's good to recognize even if the bad guys did something right. Because then the good guys can pick up those ideas and make the best out of them.

I think that is better than pretending the bad guys did only bad things. Because some people might argue: Look at this and that...

[NoshowJones]

On 11/14/2024 at 9:52 AM, KhunLA said:

Myself, family, friends & peers aren't & never were really partisan.  Probably because everyone I know, realize, they, politicians are all the same.  Little if any difference in Dems and Rep in USA.

 

This century, the politicians seemed to out do themselves, with war mongering, no control of inflation or healthcare cost.  ACA really killed affordable healthcare.

 

Bush & Obama, war mongering, and defense contractor reaping profits.

Obama's ACA disaster for most, making healthcare silly expensive

Biden's inflation, while oil & big pharm, having billion $$$ windfall profits.

 

They all suck, and did nothing but enrich themselves and their backers.  Whether bankers, brokers, big oil, big pharma, defense contractors, and now Black Rock types and hedge funds, buying & controlling everything.

 

USA food supply full of chemicals, killing people, and big pharma selling pills to manage their bad health.   Politicians allowing and endorsing it all.

 

How can anyone be partisan with any of those.  You really can't fix stupid.

As a guy from Scotland, I have never been partisan to my country because I am so ashamed of it.

The reason is where the Southern Irish people fought and died for their independence, most Scottish people could not put a X on a piece of paper for theirs.

They have now got what they deserve.

[mikebike]

23 hours ago, mogandave said:

And it is your position the article is unbiased?

Didn't read it. Don't care.

[mogandave]

26 minutes ago, mikebike said:

Didn't read it. Don't care.

Of course you don’t, you’re a leftist.

[jingjai9]

On 11/14/2024 at 9:11 AM, OneMoreFarang said:

We all have our preferences and there is nothing wrong with that.

But it seems many people, in this forum and elsewhere, see their own side only as good and the others only as bad.

 

Trump hired Musk to make the US government more efficient.

I would have though everybody should be delighted by such a move. Or is there anybody out there who does not think the US and many other governments waste too much money?

 

If the DEMs would have created such a department, I guess many DEM voters would be delighted. But now, it seems many DEMs and the DEM media don't like this at all.

Why is it so difficult to agree that a good idea is a good idea, even if the others came up with this idea?

One can argue if Musk has some conflicts of interests. But that doesn't change the fact that it would be great to save lots of tax-payers money. 

 

The above is just one example. It seems to apply to many supporters of many political parties all over the world.

The problem is that Musk receives billions of dollars a year in government contracts. Also, he will have the power to influence major decisions that could affect the success or prosperity of his own businesses such as Space X and its subsidiary, Star link  as well as Tesla. 

I do not question Musk's ability as a knowledgeable advisor; however, are we supposed to assume he is a  nice guy and will of course do the right thing for the country? OR could it be that his own interests come before those of the country and the public good? This is a dilemma -  when the billionaire class is put in such influential, non-elected positions.

[OneMoreFarang]

3 hours ago, jingjai9 said:

The problem is that Musk receives billions of dollars a year in government contracts. Also, he will have the power to influence major decisions that could affect the success or prosperity of his own businesses such as Space X and its subsidiary, Star link  as well as Tesla. 

I do not question Musk's ability as a knowledgeable advisor; however, are we supposed to assume he is a  nice guy and will of course do the right thing for the country? OR could it be that his own interests come before those of the country and the public good? This is a dilemma -  when the billionaire class is put in such influential, non-elected positions.

 

I think it's good to start a department to cut cost. I don't think Musk will be there for a long time. But then the department is still there, hopefully cutting cost and not adding cost.

[jingjai9]

21 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

 

I think it's good to start a department to cut cost. I don't think Musk will be there for a long time. But then the department is still there, hopefully cutting cost and not adding cost.

Trump and Musk all already bumping heads. So I think you are right. Musk will not put up with being told what to do for very long. I just hope at this point we get to see neo liberalism on trial to see how good or bad it is in action.

Critics of Trump and the neo liberal model often mention that the main reason  government agencies need to cut budgets is that the .1% are not paying their fair share of taxes. However, you cannot apologize for inefficient government agencies and maybe Musk and company can do something about this, but will it be at the expense of lower income people who cannot hire lobbyists to do their bidding in Washington?

[mikebike]

1 minute ago, jingjai9 said:

Musk will not put up with being told what to do for very long

Yet Trump holds Musk by the purse-strings as Prez. Who needs whom, now that the election is over? Trump will dump Musk before Musk dumps Trump.

[mikebike]

On 11/20/2024 at 3:24 PM, mogandave said:

Of course you don’t, you’re a leftist.

Huh? I don't get it? I was critiquing your criticism. I haven't read another post in this thread. Partisan politics is just plain stoopid. 🤷