Tuesday, September 24, 2013

Is Strong Party Affiliation a Problem in the U.S.?

In a recent Huffington blog post by Ariel Edwards-Levy, a new survey was cited revealing Americans' trust in the federal government's ability to problem solve is at an all time low. Taking into account the current economic and financial problems the U.S. is facing, as well as the proposed military strikes on Syria, it is easy to understand why public trust in the government is falling. Just 42 percent express confidence in the governments problem-solving abilities. However, the percentages of Republican and Democrat trust vary greatly. Currently, Republicans' trust in the government's handling of foreign affairs is at 35 percent while Democrats are at 71 percent. It is noted in the blog post that, "partisans traditionally have more faith in government when their own party controls the white house." This raises the question of whether reliance on party affiliation is too heavy in the United States. Because there are so many governments in the U.S. to keep up with, it is easy to see how party affiliation is so heavily relied on, despite the governing party's ability to make decisions in the White House. My great grandfather used to always say, "never vote for a Democrat," and it is true that older generations do tend to have a stronger party affiliation. This voting reasoning is greatly flawed, and is comparable to a child voting for their friend as class president based solely on that friendship. Hopefully, though, younger generations are stepping away from this trend, choosing to be informed, listen to the issues, and vote as non-partisans for who they think is best suited for the position.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/13/government-trust-poll_n_3922684.html?utm_hp_ref=huffpolitics-blog

2 comments:

  1. I agree. Trying to discuss different points and views is almost impossible with some of my friends because of their absolute party affiliation. Regardless of how logical a point might be they will refuse to pay attention to it due to the party affiliation of the point being made. For example, Obamacare has popularly been called socialist when, in fact, it was signed into law in Massachussets by previous presidential republican candidate Mitt Romney.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree. Trying to discuss different points and views is almost impossible with some of my friends because of their absolute party affiliation. Regardless of how logical a point might be they will refuse to pay attention to it due to the party affiliation of the point being made. For example, Obamacare has popularly been called socialist when, in fact, it was signed into law in Massachussets by previous presidential republican candidate Mitt Romney.

    ReplyDelete