Labeling people as Republican or Democrat is silly and has become meaningless

Labeling people as Republican or Democrat, while it is silly, is also very meaningful inside this nation. If you look, you will notice that even the definitions don't match: Republicans are very much different than Democrats. REPUBLICANSWhenever someone is labeled as a Republican, people usually think of him as more liberal, more wealthy, and as a snobby richie who is much better off and wouldn't mind leaving the poor behind. That stereotype is in it for the money, quite obviously, and will attempt to empower the candidate who promises lower wealth taxes, or something that helps out their buisnesses. The problem is that not every Republican is an image of this stereotype. In my experience, none of them come close.I personally live in a well-off area where the dominant party is the Republican party. I have spent two years here, made many great friends that'll last me through life, and had a chance to meet many of their parents as well. All Republicans (well, not all). But none were even coming close to that stereotype.This kind of shows that Republicans sort of have their ideals. While it is a nice profitable thing to believe in as well, all of my friends support it simply because of the principal. Freedom, it's the thing the country was built on, and, according to me, the way the world will topple. Needless to say, I would probably call myself a democrat.DEMOCRATS Democrats are very different. They're a more socialistic side of things, viewing the nation as a community instead of a group of individuals. I have come into contact with masses of Democrats as well, but then we were a bit too young to talk about politics. Democrats are much different from Republicans, because they occupy the other end of the spectrum. They are poor lazy workers, instead of rich snobs (according to stereotype).Democrats want to unite America as a community where everyone helps each other out wether they want to or not. Things like Obamacare, where they don't have to pay for themselves, that's what they are into. But, again, I doubt many people fit this sterotype.Most likely people see it as a grand community, a return to ancestral roots where people didn't have to fight over game, because game was everywhere. People were nicer, they shared, they helped out their neighbors, they wouldn't mind giving a cup of flour on asking. In other words, the tribe would be ONE. Of course, one can exploit this just as easily as the other party to simply not have to pay.CONNECTIONI think that these two parties are dominant because they express exactly opposite views. I mean, on says we should be ONE, the other says we should be MANY. It doesn't get more different than that. The problem is that no person fully believes in either one, but gists his beliefs into one of these categories. (MAIN POINT): In America, REPUBLICAN and DEMOCRAT have no longer remained simply parties; they are opposing views on how to run a nation. That is why labeling a person as Republican or Democrat is incredibly meaningful, because it not only reveals his views, it also reveals that you dissapprove and therefore side with the opposite views. It is silly though. Meaningful, but very silly, if you know what I mean.REBUTALLSThe names originally had nothing to do with the corresponding parties' beliefs; but they now stand for them. For example: 'Google'. What's that supposed to mean? But we understand now that this is a search engine company.Our current election system is incredibly bizzare and incredibly corrupt, and I personally believe this sort of warrants the removal of the government, but this in no way proves that labels are neither silly nor meaningless. They can either signify how you want to cheat other people, or how you actually believe the nation should be run. Admitted, main parties are very adventurous in their beliefs, yet they don't change quickly enough to actually lose their followers faith. For me, well, I already stated exactly what I think each party believes. I think a majority of people looking at this debate have their own definitions as well. That just proves that the names are meaningful, even though their meanings change over the decades.That's actually very interesting though. What could have happened is an internal political integration, where lots of people without beliefs came into the system and were sort of convinced by both. Which caused both to shift towards each other and eventually come close enought that they would essentially work for the same thing, then gradually seperate back slowly as immigration decreased. of course, there is no reason that they shouldn't switch places at the high point, switching followers as well, then falling back to what they opposed before. That's my explanation.And sorry for your vote. That kind of does show the weak spots of the system.