If you were a taxonomist, you would have to classify Dems and Repubs as different species

[eridani]

Conservation voters ratings of the 2008 WA State legislature




Alliance of Retired Americans rating of 2005 Congress on senior issues



Votes are ranked on a scale of 0 to 100, with Republicans clustering around 0, and Democrats clustering around 100. So the reason why unions, feminists, environmentalists, etc. stick with Democrats is that Democrats overwhelmingly vote the right way on their issues and Republicans almost never do.

From a progressive standpoint, of course, the obvious problem is that the bold, transformative stuff like single payer or EFCA never makes it out of committee. And that is never going to happen unless OWS and similar groups become permanent outside pressure groups. It would be helpful if progressives would get better at doing electoral politics, so that we could primary more Democrats who need it. All too many progressive issue junkies refuse to recognize that most voters don't happen to be committed policy wonks.

BTW, the most conservative Democrats have better voting records than the most liberal Republicans. For all 222 House Republicans in 2005, the average score was 5.5 (standard deviation 6.2). For the 203 Democrats, the average score was 94.6 (standard deviation 8.0). Rating a Democrat as conservative with a score of less than 85, there are only 19 of them--with average score of 75.8 (standard deviation 8.8). Rating a Republican as liberal with a score of more than 15, there are only 16 of them--with average score of 22.2 (standard deviation 4.6).

[housewolf]

1. There is evidence to suggest that there is actually a difference in the brains

between those of the left and those of the right

It's quite interesting, see if you can find it. It helps answer some of the questions about why/how the worldviews are so different and irreconcilable.

[joshcryer]

2. Fascinating OP, thanks.

I personally think infiltrators are here because it was so effective in 2010, pushing the false meme that there's no difference.

[eridani]

3. The same only in the sense that we can't seem to get bolder initiatives moving.

However, all that incremental stuff really does help people, and we can't ignore that basic fact.

[joshcryer]

4. I got an epic OP to illustrate that (incremental stuff helps people).

Will probably sink like a rock like yours did (would've missed it were it not for housewolf) but I appreciate your OP and will probably use some of its data in my OP if that's OK. And I'll give you a kick when I wake up, because it's wrong to state there's no difference.

[HopeHoops]

5. Of course. On group have their asses on their shoulders. The others are Democrats.

[tabatha]

6. Those would make wonderful visual ads.

The top two show that the Republicans are all over the map in their section of the graph - greased palms? while the Dems are mostly consistent.

But the difference in senior and retiree issues is unmistakable - yet Rove will run ads that say the opposite.

[eridani]

8. The first set is from a state legislature

Even Repubs in WA State know that it isn't smart to be too anti-environmental here.

[MNBrewer]

7. Lack of reproductive isolation argues against that hypothesis

[Octafish]

9. It's a case for convergent evolution.

The principal environmental factor being money.

[MineralMan]

10. Of course, if you're a splitter, you'd have to break both parties up into sub-species.

Lumper or Splitter? That's the real question of taxonomy.