Like what does being pro gun have to do with lower taxes and being pro life?
What does wanting more gun control have to do with raising taxes and being pro choice?
Why is it that if a person believes one thing they automatically believe another?
Like what does being pro gun have to do with lower taxes and being pro life?
What does wanting more gun control have to do with raising taxes and being pro choice?
Why is it that if a person believes one thing they automatically believe another?
Comments
The following is a copy of the original post to record the post as it was originally written.
Like what does being pro gun have to do with lower taxes and being pro life?
What does wanting more gun control have to do with raising taxes and being pro choice?
Why is it that if a person believes one thing they automatically believe another?
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
By amalgamating the positions of their members.
Generally speaking, any policy is going to be relatively independent of another policy. This has nuance of course, like something being highly associated with taxes and not the actual policy itself. But anyways, there’s 3 main ways a party "picks" a position
Opposition to another party (more common today, if they believe this, then I don’t) – Immigration seems to fall into this camp, but it may be changing.
The large majority of the party believes in something – If large majority of the party believes in being pro-choice, then the party is going to be pro choice. This is more of a ground-up approach where it’s members collectively pick the platform, rather than the party establishment itself.
A strong leader picks the platform – VERY common and obvious with trump, but it happens with every single presidential candidate. This is generally "if President X believes this, and I am of party X, then I shall believe in it too." Medicare for all is probably the most obvious left-wing example today, it’s so associated with Sanders that, if you believe in sanders, you’re almost guaranteed to believe in M4A. This can sometimes be quite subtle, but still remains extremely obvious under Trump. Personality cults are built upon this principle.
Some people have meetings and write stuff down. Then they and other people vote.
I think a more interesting sub question is how do political parties prioritize what they focus on and achieve.
>Why is it that if a person believes one thing they automatically believe another?
They don’t have to, and we see different people reconcile this in different ways.
For example, I have observed:
republicans choose the position of giving the rich more money and change all other facade positions to accommodate any subset of the population that is stupid enough that there is potential to trick them into voting for giving the rich more money.
Democrats hold a convention in which they have delegates from every single precinct in the US to construct a party platform.