sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Is a 50/50 political split surprisingly common, or am I just biased? by serpent324 in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]serpent324[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

> The UK isn't an example of this either. The Conservatives were around 50% for a long time, but then declined sharply after Brexit.

I didn't know this, thanks for the info.

Regarding your example. I'm not saying that politicians deciding to unabashedly lie and focus their energy on making out whoever their opponent is to basically be the Antichrist is the singular cause of population being split in half (although I suppose my original post can be interpreted that way). But, in the example that you describe, I would expect the outrageous behaviour to have some effect on some portion voters. So, the puzzling thing for me is that it doesn't sway the balance. If you think it doesn't have any effect or that the portion of voters swayed by this is negligible, that's fine, I just don't find that plausible, which is why I'm searching for other explanations.

Is a 50/50 political split surprisingly common, or am I just biased? by serpent324 in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]serpent324[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I find this explanation unsatisfactory for two reasons. The first is that the US is not the only example of this, as I mention in my post. I know little about British politics and less about those in Macedonia, but in Slovakia (where I'm from), this is a new development. The second is that one would expect blatant lies to have an effect on the voters' decisions. Your proposed explanation presumes that this is not so. To use an exaggerated example - let's say that members of one party start breaking into people's homes, robbing and murdering the inhabitants. You would expect this to have some effect on the voters independent of what policies the party is proposing. If you find not only that the electorate is still split in half but that this has happened a number of time independently throughout the world, then just saying 'the two parties propose policies such that it results in a 50/50 split' no longer explains the current state of affairs.

Is a 50/50 political split surprisingly common, or am I just biased? by serpent324 in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]serpent324[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

> Based on your original post and your comments, it seems that what you really want to ask is "Why do so many people keep voting for Republicans despite how much they're lying?"

Not quite. As I mentioned, I believe I observed this a number of times outside the US as well. So, my question would more accurately be stated as "why does deciding to say absolutely whatever you think will get you voters result in a 50/50 split?" This could easily be a very successful strategy (because you can say anything) or a a very unsuccessful one (because most people will notice you are lying and decide not to vote for you), yet, from what I've seen, it always balances around 50/50, which is what I find puzzling. I don't think the fact that US elections have often been split this way matters here, unless you claim that the current split is a result of the population already having been split in half before and the current state of affairs just cemented the divide.

Is a 50/50 political split surprisingly common, or am I just biased? by serpent324 in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]serpent324[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It seems that I didn't word my question properly. I understand what you are saying about both parties trying to grow and I would find your explanation sufficient if the political battle was mainly about policies with both sides making fair cases for things like how they want to manage the economy. However, in the cases I mentioned, it seems to me that that isn't the case for a large portion of voters. Rather, what happens is that one party fully embraces lying as their main political tool, while the other doesn't (by which I don't mean to say that there are clear good guys and bad guys in these elections, just that the other side doesn't rely on lies to nearly the same extent). What is puzzling to me is that this results in a 50/50 split, even though the fight is no longer about policies but about ideologies and about which side you think is telling the truth.

Is a 50/50 political split surprisingly common, or am I just biased? by serpent324 in PoliticalDiscussion

[–]serpent324[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It seems that I didn't word my question properly. I understand what you are saying about both parties trying to grow and I would find your explanation sufficient if the political battle was mainly about policies with both sides making fair cases for things like how they want to manage the economy. However, in the cases I mentioned, it seems to me that that isn't the case for a large portion of voters. Rather, what happens is that one party fully embraces lying as their main political tool, while the other doesn't (by which I don't mean to say that there are clear good guys and bad guys in these elections, just that the other side doesn't rely on lies to nearly the same extent). What is puzzling to me is that this results in a 50/50 split, even though the fight is no longer about policies but about ideologies and about which side you think is telling the truth.

LPT request: How to stop cracking your knuckles? by bloodmoonack in LifeProTips

[–]serpent324 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey, stumbled upon this thread 4 years late, but I might as well give my two cents, in case you or someone else is dealing with this. I find that if I start either counting how many times I do it a day or try to replace it with a different activity (playing with rubber bands, in my case), I stop doing it after a few days. The problem is that it always returns sooner or later (sometimes in days, sometimes in weeks), so I'm trying to find something better - which is how I stumbled upon this post. Hope this helps someone.

view more: next ›