• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

Politics The RINO/DINO Disease

Merc

Problematic Shitlord
V.I.P.
I really, really dislike these two phrases. For those that do not know they mean "republican/democrat in name only" and is meant to sound like some proud attempt to smear someone as disloyal to their political party.

The reason I hate these phrases is that it shows a very high degree of political ineptitude. Politics is not about how red or blue you are or how much you are dedicated to EVERYTHING other party members seem to think you need to be. So what if a republican or democrat agrees with something that goes against party lines? Why is that an issue?

To me, it does nothing but divide us further and it's a problem that needs to be curbed because it's poisoning the political atmosphere even more.

Thoughts?
 

Hilander

Free Spirit
Staff member
V.I.P.
I think if its good for the country they should be agreeing on it instead of finding some reason to bash each other. That seems to go on often too even if they think its a good idea just because someone not from their party came up with it. The result is nothing gets done and there is gridlock.

Sometimes I wish we just ran people for office and not a party. Parties do more to divide than to bring people and the country together.

I have to say sometimes nothing getting done is a good thing.
 

Van

Heavy Weapons Guy
V.I.P.
I actually view these terms differently. To me someone who is a rino is simply not a conservative. Never heard the term Dino before but my same logic would apply. I use the term rino all the time. I pretty much just mean to say someone is too moderate for me.

To me a rino is someone who speaks conservative principles and then does something opposite. It's the whole actions speak louder than words argument. Basically they don't stick with their claimed principles.

There aren't many issues liberals and conservatives are compatible on, that's why they are issues.

As for the division, I don't think the terminology used causes the division, it merely highlights it. When it boils down to it, I believe politics IS about how red or blue you are.

Perhaps I use the terminology incorrectly but those are my thoughts.
 

Merc

Problematic Shitlord
V.I.P.
I actually view these terms differently.
You're not really allowed to 'view' them differently, they mean the same thing for each respective side. To say you view them differently is essentially to say you don't agree with the definition, you know?

To me a rino is someone who speaks conservative principles and then does something opposite. It's the whole actions speak louder than words argument. Basically they don't stick with their claimed principles.
That's a hypocrite. We have a word for it already, it's part of the reason I think these are pointless words only mean to cause division and fighting.

As for the division, I don't think the terminology used causes the division, it merely highlights it.
Highlighting, which emphasizes and by definition, furthers the divide. The very intent of the phrase is to put the focus on dividing people. We shouldn't be worried about how "republican" or how "democratic" we are, that's completely bass ackwards. We should be concerned with how honest, passionate and consistent politicians are, that should define politics. This is also why, in my opinion, our system is so laughable, we're more concerned with 'scandal' and 'he said/she said' rather than actual issues. Everything is about insulting and backstabbing and who is lying about what.

When it boils down to it, I believe politics IS about how red or blue you are.
Why? Why do you think politics is about your degree of loyalty? If your political party tomorrow decided that putting children under 10 in labor camps was a good idea, would you blindly follow it? I'd imagine you wouldn't and you'd be quite upset about it.

And in many peoples' minds, you'd be an "INO" which is a problem since you're not pretending to be a part of that party, you already are. You simply do not agree with 100% of what they're doing which should never be a critique because by saying so, you'd be arguing against individuality. To me, that's a serious problem.
 

Smelnick

Creeping On You
V.I.P.
Its interesting, the difference between the Canadian political parties and the Usian(pronounced YoushAn) political political parties. In Canada, there's a completely different kind of divide. Especially considering we have 4+ different parties. (Although, that's decreased from passed years, and the flaw in democracy is slowly shrinking it to a two party system as well). We tend to focus on the actual politicians though. Even on facebook political wars, people are bitching about the politicians themselves still, or the political parties. We don't attack each other.

This whole rino/dino thing strikes me as a completely 'i hate you, you hate me' situation. People in the states no longer discuss politics. They have started being honest about how much they hate each other and how much they don't actually tolerate differences. The politicians have successfully distracted you from noticing how empty their promises are.
 

Laine

Registered Member
What I know of politics is... well not so much. I do know Estonia was as Danny has said, there are I think 4 parties and they all seem to want to go in different directions. Not completely different directions, but one will want just one little thing another does not and then no one agrees.

I am only now learning about American politicians and parties. And I can only offer very little to this but it seems there is a bolder line between them than I am use to. I feel like just from what little I know Republicans and Democrats spend more time trying to make one another look bad than trying to do the things that are needed to be done.

It is like if you put out white chocolate and dark chocolate one side would intentionally pick as their favorite the one the other side did not, even if they hated it. And then everyone in those parties would follow in line weather they disliked one or the other also. At least that is how it seems to me.

But I do think one thing most politicians do is forget about the people they serve. Here and other countries also. They feel above the people who elected them and that to me seems to be a big problem with what is best for a country and not the individual.
 

Van

Heavy Weapons Guy
V.I.P.
You're not really allowed to 'view' them differently, they mean the same thing for each respective side. To say you view them differently is essentially to say you don't agree with the definition, you know?
My apologies, I was saying I view the term Rino a bit differently from you. Yes, a rino and a dino are essentially the same thing, just starting on different parts of the political spectrum.

That's a hypocrite. We have a word for it already, it's part of the reason I think these are pointless words only mean to cause division and fighting.
In many people's minds, like my own, I think it has just become a synonym for hypocrite. That doesn't mean it exasperates the divide though.

Highlighting, which emphasizes and by definition, furthers the divide. The very intent of the phrase is to put the focus on dividing people. We shouldn't be worried about how "republican" or how "democratic" we are, that's completely bass ackwards. We should be concerned with how honest, passionate and consistent politicians are, that should define politics. This is also why, in my opinion, our system is so laughable, we're more concerned with 'scandal' and 'he said/she said' rather than actual issues. Everything is about insulting and backstabbing and who is lying about what.
There IS a big difference between liberals and conservatives. I have no problem highlighting it. In fact, I think it is healthy. I feel this in fact highlights the issues we disagree on.

But I agree, I don't care the the "scandal" and "he said/she said" scenarios. But this just results from human nature in my opinion. Sometimes these scenarios help weed out bad politicians, but most the time it's just a bunch of baloney.


Why? Why do you think politics is about your degree of loyalty? If your political party tomorrow decided that putting children under 10 in labor camps was a good idea, would you blindly follow it? I'd imagine you wouldn't and you'd be quite upset about it.
Of course not haha. I see this as a liberal vs conservative thing. To me, republican = conservative, democrat = liberal. This won't stop me from referring to the parties as repukelicans and dumocraps.

And in many peoples' minds, you'd be an "INO" which is a problem since you're not pretending to be a part of that party, you already are. You simply do not agree with 100% of what they're doing which should never be a critique because by saying so, you'd be arguing against individuality. To me, that's a serious problem.
Granted. Terminology is funny sometimes, and the different things it means to different people.

When someone calls someone a RINO, they are saying that the person is not really conservative. Likewise, I would think when someone gets called a DINO it would mean they are not really liberal. That has always been my understanding anyway. Would I be fine moving away from those words and just saying hypocrite? Sure.

I think we probably somewhat agree on this, I just tend to think of it in terms of liberal/conservative. I have no "loyalty" to the republican party. I do have loyalty to conservative ideology because I have studied both conservative and liberal principles and decided which were better.

Although, all people don't even define conservative and liberal the same as the next person.

Terminology is an interesting thing. Perhaps there are better terms we could use.
 

MenInTights

not a plastic bag
I too think the words mean different things to different people, but this is what it means to me. In 2008 the Democrat platform was to end the wars, reduce spending, end the surveillance state and make politics more transparent. There were other things to like universal healthcare. But anyway, they took office and went completely against all of those things that were on the platform. If they were going to expand the wars, surveillance and the deficient they should have ran on that. That to me is a Dino. You said as a Democrat you are for this but in office you are completely different.

In 2010 the Republicans promised they would either repeal ObamaCare or defund it. When they got in office, they refused to support the bills that would either defund it and they refused to support efforts to repeal it. They made politicians like Ted Cruz a piraha for doing what was in the platform. If its in the Republican platform and you run on that and then refuse to do it you are a Republican in Name Only.

I'd at least respect Obama if he would have said we're going to expand the drone program to take out American citizens and will be in Afghanistan forever and would at least respect Boehner of he'd said we're going to fully fund ObamaCare and isolate anyone that tries to repeal it. Instead they lied about what they were going to do.
 

CaptainObvious

Son of Liberty
V.I.P.
These terms don't mean that to me, they don't imply not going with party lines, they imply not agreeing with the general platform of the party. For example, down here, in this county, a Republican has never won an election. The Democratic candidate for any local position ALWAYS wins. Hardly anybody runs on the Republican ticket. Thus anyone running for office runs as a Democrat. Truth be told though many of them aren't really Democrats, in other words they don't adhere to many of what is on the Democratic platform. Some of them don't believe in expanding some of the government programs, some of them don't believe in abortion, some of them believe we should be taxing corporations more, things of this nature. They are Democrats in name only, because of political expediency.

John McCain is one of those people. In my opinion he is too far left. It's not that he goes against the Republican Party and the party platform, he really isn't a conservative and is a Republican in name only, for political expediency.
 

MenInTights

not a plastic bag
Just wanted to add also that its really not something that anyone should find offensive. Yes the terms are meant to be derogatory, but they are only meant for politicians. A citizen is not a RINO if you believe in lower taxes and are pro-abortion, that's just someone that sees things differently than me. RINO/DINO is only meant to smear politicians.
 
Top