Quote Originally Posted by 3FLryan View Post
I can't, for the life of me, understand why you think I want you to use vague or hard to understand language. The point is, comments like "the republics are steadfast" ARE VAGUE AND HARD TO UNDERSTAND. A fact is NOT VAGUE and NOT HARD TO UNDERSTAND. It is just a FACT. There is nothing "dumbing down" about explaining the philosophy of the republican party. It IS dumbing down and misleading to say they are "down to earth."

The guy asked, "Who should I vote for?" You said "I'm sure you'll find republicans to be more down-to-earth, blah blah blah." That doesn't give him any information. No facts. It is just propaganda! It wouldn't have been if you said, "Well, republicans believe in X and democrats believe in Y, and I think X is better." This would be fine! In fact, it would have been great, because it would have been LESS VAGUE, EASIER TO UNDERSTAND, and then he could have decided on his OWN what he thought instead of having you force-feed him your opinion that "republicans are more down to earth."
[/b]
Why is down to earth misleading? Who has made this so? You, the media?
I have folwed both parties for some time. Down to earth as most would understand it, is quite befitting in my eyes.
In your case, you are generalizing, which is worse, IMHO.
For exampe. YOu can word this a half a dozen ways or more. Two examples presumably from differant parties.
1.The Rebulican party recognizes the rigths of the second emmedment.
2.The Rebublicans sponser guns.

Each party is going to put their spin on the other parties termonaolgy, hence the reason we are in a position to catagorize and word very directly how we feel a party is positioned.