The other side wants to contol things as well. Just mostly different things.

The problem is there is no TRUE left ideology and no TRUE right ideology. If you get two different people from the left side and speak to each of them at separate times and ask them what they want to see happen and what they think about the world, what is wrong with the world, how to fix it, etc. I guarantee you that you will get different answers.

If you get someone from the so-called right and do the same thing you will have the same thing occur.

The important thing to remember is they are people. They tend to have their own ideas until they feel the need to follow the group, until they give into peer pressure, etc. Once people are in a group they sometimes will suppress their own ideas and will tend to agree with the group or the more charismatic people that are present.

I witnessed this from deep within the so-called RIGHT in 2012. I was a delegate and went all the way up through state. I stopped right before going to nationals. I was one of those Libertarians that was attempting to infiltrate the GOP to get Ron Paul elected. The thought was that since they seem to be set on only letting the two parties have a chance then they only way to get someone we agree with elected is to have them go from within that party.

Now as Libertarians we tended to take things from both the Left and the Right. We infiltrated the right simply because that is where Dr. Ron Paul was.

I noticed in this process that there were quite a number of FACTIONS within the right. There was no one ideology. The fact of the matter is when we are FORCING people to pick from TWO choices only when in reality there are far more types of thought then that both sides have factions. The factions cannot have their own party and succeed, so they form within the parties.

This means there really is no LEFT or RIGHT that can be pinned down and defined. When you attempt to do so then you are likely choosing a single faction within that group and trying to say it represents the entire group. This is not the truth.

On the GOP side we had the Old Traditionalists that just always voted party no matter what, we had the religious, we had the neo-conservatives who more or less took power right when George W. Bush was coming to power, and we had the Libertarians in GOP clothing like me. There were also other variants that were mixes of those.

I argued within the GOP. "You are arguing pro-life, yet you are also arguing pro-war, isn't that a bit of hypocrisy?" That was the type of thing I would point out.

The point is that LABELS exist for reasons, but when you try to apply them to people they will be vaguely descriptive of that person. They will not define in any detail what that person actually is, what their beliefs are, etc.

When you realize we've basically been forced into TWO party system (and some people like myself think it is almost a one party system) then you realize we have a lot of different types of people out there.

What do they do? There are more than two types of people.

Though if they believe in the system still (which I do not) they pick one side or the other. They very possibly agree with neither side, yet they pick one.

So they are not the same as someone who jumps headlong into that party. There are a lot of different types of people in each party that are there for different reasons.

That doesn't mean their cannot be VERY VOCAL members of the parties that catch the attention and can give either party a bad name.

If you have 100 people at a rally, and then you have 10 really loud obnoxious people and that is who the news is on. It can be easy to claim that the people at that rally were loud and obnoxious. In reality it would only be 10% of the people, but they are so loud and vocal that this is who is reported on, and who those outside remember.

I believe these are the vocal people that are irrational, rioting, calling for impeachment of Trump (when he hasn't even done any actions yet), etc. are.

They are a very vocal minority. Now there are also some conspiracies that these people are being paid to do some of the things they are. I don't know if they are or not, but it is food for thought. The media seems to like to give them a lot of attention.

I did write some blog posts about this before this entire Jared blow up over generalization:

• Training for Complaining
• The Con Job Hidden Within the Words
• I don't like many media journalists out there... but I do like Ben Swann
• People on the left doing false flag things

Oh and thank you for your discussion. I appreciate your thoughts and that you are keeping it civil.