How many political parties should there be?

[sytaylor]

way to completly miss my point and argue agaisnt something i never even suggested.

Maybe it would help if you made a point then.

 

[kyleb]

i did, maybe it would help of you got some tutoring in reading comprehension.

 

[sytaylor]

well when you ask people why they support something, and they can't give a rational explantation, obviously they didn't reach the conclusion on their own.

So to whom does this refer if not the politicians? Is the frustration not with those who "toe the the party line"? Or are you assuming that everyone who votes for a party hasn't made their own conclusions, and is therefore a moron and shouldn't vote? There has to be something suggested here, otherwise it was a pointless statement.

 

[kyleb]

something suggested? i outright said what i meant and meant what i said, there is no suggestion going on. read my comments again and take them for what they are instead of trying to read into them what is not there if you would like to understand my perspective; but, count me out if you are simply looking for an argument or something. :?

 

[sytaylor]

So your problem is with "people"? That can't be a reason for everyone to have their own party representing them, nothing would ever get done.. In suggesting this its saying that everyone within a party is incapeable of their own free thought, and thats what i object to.

 

[kyleb]

well its easy to object to an argument when you have created a strawman to tear down, it isn't exactly productive though.

 

[sytaylor]

Indeed which is why i questioned your original throwaway statement and have been looking for detail. If you don't wanna give then thats fine.

 

[kyleb]

if you want detail then quit asking questions rhetorically only provide absurd answers for you to argue against. if you want clarification then just reread what i originally wrote and try to understand it instead of looking for an argument. if you can manage than and still have questions then feel free to ask; but please refrain from trying to answer for me, because when you do you are really only arguing with yourself.

 

[sytaylor]

I've read your statement a thousand times over, the question above

So your problem is with "people"?

Is genuine, I really don't get who it is you were having a go at with that statement, its far too vague, thats all I want to know. That would allow me to decide whether i agree or disagree. Simple.

 

[kyleb]

i'm not trying to have a go at anyone here, i am pointing out that i believe people who meet my above description are detrimental to society.:

people who obviously don't think about things themselves and simply tow their party line.

not:

someone who is in or leading a party

obviousy, if someone leading then they aren't towing anything.

not:

everyone who votes for a party

people who vote for a party don't nesscarly argee with alll the positions of that party.

and not:

everyone within a party

as they too do not necessary agree with alll the positions of that party.

but there still are are:

people who obviously don't think about things themselves and simply tow their party line.

and, without parties, those people would left to either abstain or exercise their ability for independent thought and analyse the issues themselves.

 

[sytaylor]

Thanks for the response, appreciated

I think the problem is the opposite, there are far more people who are apathetic to anything other than emotive self affecting issues than those who tow to a party. While there are those who will hump anything their party says like a sports fan, they are the exception, since most people with an interest in politics tend to have a reasonable understanding of real world issues.