Which party is dominated by extremists?

According to a poll conducted in battleground congressional districts by The Hill, more Americans see the Democrats as being dominated by extremists than Republicans.

The poll found that 44% of likely voters say the Dems are more dominated by its extremist elements while only 37% peg the GOP as more dominated by extremists:

More than one in every five Democrats (22 percent) in The Hill's survey said their party was more dominated than the GOP by extreme views. The equivalent figure among Republicans is 11 percent.
Results for independent voters reflected the larger sample. Forty-three percent of likely independent voters said the Democratic party is more dominated by its extreme elements compared to 37 percent who though the GOP had fallen under the sway of extreme views.
The figures by party do come with one caveat. Because the voter sampling size is smaller, the margin of error by party is 4.5 percent.
The data surprised Democratic strategists and political experts in a campaign season when much media attention has focused on the battle between the GOP establishment and Tea Party-backed candidates such as Sharron Angle in Nevada and Christine O'Donnell in Delaware.
They said it suggests problems for a Democratic party seen as too liberal.

For more than a year, the media has hammered the tea party and the GOP for being "too extreme." But the proof is in what each party has been pushing during that time. The Democrat's agenda is seen as radical by a plurality of voters - even 22% of Democrats think so.

Another false narrative crashes and burns before the election.

Hat Tip: Ed Lasky

I start with the assumption that the standard is correct because it has self affirmed as being from a divine source.

And can you seriously ask why an opinion based on no standard is better than an opinion based on a fixed, proven standard?

When you have nothing to stand on but your own opinion on any of those topics, you have really nothing to discuss, because you can’t state that your opinion is better or righter than someone else’s.

Example:
Prove that Mother Theresa was a better person than Adolph Hitler, when there are no standards.

>>I would say pretty much all the amendments were shifts to the right.<<

I would disagree. I would say they were clarifications of what was not spelled out clearly enough in the constitution. A sort of “making it official” sort of thing. And many of the later amendments were actually shifts to the left. I doubt very seriously that the first 2 were not what the founders had in mind even before the war for independence.

>>...the middle for their pious view of being “Middle”, which is not middle at all, just lazy and pretentious...<<

Yep. I love being around people that I suspect call themselves “moderate” and before they get a chance to actually say it, I casually mention that the sad thing about our system is that elections are won by persuading the moderates, when the moderates are the most misinformed and indecisive part of the electorate.

How is it self-affirmed? Whose self? Everyone’s?

An opinion about these subjects that we are talking about, is dependent/based/relative on/to one’s belief.

That’s right, because I do not believe that anyone’s opinion in these matters is better or righter than anyone else’s.

That would be impossible, as someone may be a follower of Hitler. I would say she was because she didn’t order the murder of millions, but that is my opinion. That follower of Hitler would disagree, but neither of us could prove anything. It depends on the mores of the time an event occurs. These change with time, region, societies, beliefs, etc. That is why I do not believe in absolute standards. Standards are relative to something.

I see the third through seventh as clarifications. I don’t see the 8th as a “right” or “left” issue. I think the 9th and tenth are definitely a clarification of what our founding fathers already believed. And with all of these, that is what it comes down to: Is it to the right or the left of the founding father’s beliefs that led to the constitution itself.

The 11th I also believe jives with the beliefs of our founding fathers. As does the 13th. I do think the 18th was a move right, but the only people I can think of that would really support such a law now would be muslims and mormons. Ok, a few southern baptists may SAY they’re for it, but the ones in dry counties in Kentucky just go to the wet counties to get what they need. ;)

I just read your post. You are correct. We really don’t agree.

If all standards are relative, there are LITERALLY no standards. That is the position of an atheist - or a wishy-washy agnostic.

You are right about one thing. Standards are relative to something. They are relative to God.

>>Use the founders and the Constitution as written and ratified as your standard, and now almost everyone is “extreme left”.<<

That is my position as well.I am amazed when I talk, even to conservatives, about health care, etc. They will say things like “Obama’s plan is a catastrophy. What the government should do is...”.

My response? It is none of the government’s business. The function of government is to protect our borders (military of some sort) and protect us within our borders so that we may live free and prosper without fear of crimes against us (police, copyright laws, courts, jails, etc.)

Anything else usually does more harm than good, though I like public roads.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.