"Democrats want to do things,Republicans want to stop things"

[Swede]

Makes sense to me with regard to government.



Pollster Celinda Lake spoke to first, and perhaps most crucial point in her email reply to me. "It’s easier to unify Republicans because mostly they want to stop things. It’s harder to unify people when you want to do things." (emphasis added) Therein lies the broader asymmetry: Doing nothing is a single thing, whereas doing something implies many options. And it is easier to build consensus around a “nothing” menu of 1 than it is for a more variegated menu of limitless options of “something.”

This is, I grant, not a particularly profound observation. Indeed, the idea that the status quo ante enjoys an advantaged position is a core assumption in social choice theories--especially as they apply to American politics, what with its separation of powers and supermajority rules and other constitutional and extra-constitutional rules and strictures designed to slow progress. That reality remains true regardless of the prevailing distribution of political attitudes, their intensity, and so on: It is an ineluctable fact in American politics it’s hard to do something, but even harder to reverse or undo or change course once it’s done. (Need I provide historical evidence on this point as the nation discusses a major policy initiative that has been churning through the public policy hopper for the better part of six decades now?)


http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/10/toward-general-theory-of-democratic_30.html

[Romulox]

1. Right, but the "thing" they want to do right now is to force us to buy private insurance...

"No" is a useful turn of phrase, once in a while...

[John Q. Citizen]

2. I wish the Dems were more like the Repos when it came to Iraq. They just can't say no, I guess.

[electropop]

4. We had the same train of thought!

When our political debate becomes so abstract and bland that it's about "things" rather than right and wrong, we all lose.

[electropop]

3. That's one of those simplifications that drains out the meaning.

This is a good example of how mealy-mouthed our political representatives tend to be. The real message is "Republicans are fighting to harm Americans on behalf of their corporate insurance company sponsors." Just say it that way! "Doing things" is not the measure of whether Congress is acting to solve problems. "Things" can be "good things" or "bad things." Saying "no" can be a "good thing" or a "bad thing;" it depends on what "things" you are saying no to. For example, saying "no" was clearly a "good thing" when Maxine Waters said it in opposition to the Iraq "bad thing".

[Octafish]

5. Republicans want to STEAL things.

Like the Treasury. Like no-bid and cost-plus government contracts. Big jobs in various industries after passing legislation benefitting said varied industries...

As for DOING anything to make life better for ALL Americans...nah. Like Celinda wrote: Today's republicans are do-nothings.

[stray cat]

6. GOP wanted to start putting your SS in the stock market

and started a war in Iraq, and started Iran Contra