Which party aligns itself more with the worker, and which with the corporation?

Arnette Dominici: Communists align themselves more with the 'worker.' (Labor unions, class warfare, revolution, public ownership of the means of production).Social-Democrats align themselves with the corporations. (Manditory Health Insurance, Bailouts, public stakes in private corporations, regulated monopolies with gauranteed profits, etc...)I think it's most important to uphold the rights of individuals. Since not all individuals are workers, it would be wrong to uphold only the rights of workers. Since corporations are fictitious entities, they have no rights to uphold, and granting them rights is an absurdity....Show more

Madie Strople: Honestly, neither really side with the worker nowadays. It is mostly smoke and mirrors with the Dems. During the 30 years after WWII, both parties favored the worker and unions over large corporations. Then the Republicans began to move much to the right during the mid 70's and the Dems moved with them. I support policies ! and institutions that strengthen the lower and middle classes while weakening corporate power. I am not anti-corporation. There are some wonderful corporations out there, like Google. However, as corporations gain power, they tend to take over the government. This happened during the early 20th century and is happening again....Show more

Shan Lanen: The democrats are for the worker and the Middle Class.Republicans know slavery is illegal but that doesn't stop them from getting as close to it as possible.

Daria Verfaillie:

Shawn Lelis: republicans are for both. no corporation no employees.

Kim Gerbino: I would compare them and mention that they are similar because in both cases there is an opressed people who lack the means necessary to overcome "the system" because of the system itself. I would contrast the two by saying that civil rights affected one group of people, a minority of the population. The internet censorship in China is affecting th! e whole country. Its not people vs people and govt. Its simply! people vs govt.

Margy Sandquist: agreed

Imogene Neiswander: Side question, who should receive the majority of the profits, the workers who make the profits, or the owners who..., well..., do not work for the company but just collect dividend payments, like the Waltons of Wal-Mart.

Alvaro Oare: Lib Nemesis, what you did is called side stepping the question. I didn't ask if both were important, I asked which one is MORE important, and to WHOM.

Nilda Bafia: Let me see.....People are real humans and corporations aren't.So I'll support peopleBTW I love your rice. Been eatin it since I was a kid....Show more

Lahoma Beadell: Conservatives want them both to do well. The nonsense about the democrat and republican is just that, nonsense.It was good for another laugh tho.

Monroe Rainey: I SUMMON LUDWIG VON MISES! (KSHSCSKSHKSH) (LIGHTING BOLT!)Who is 'reactionary' and who is 'progressive'? Reaction against! an unwise policy is not to be condemned. And progress towards chaos is not to be commended. Nothing should find acceptance just because it is new, radical, and fashionable. 'Orthodoxy' is not an evil if the doctrine on which the 'orthodox' stand is sound. Who is anti-labor, those who want to lower labor to the Russian level, or those who want for labor the capitalistic standard of the United States? Who is 'nationalist,' those who want to bring their nation under the heel of the Nazis, or those who want to preserve its independence?Edit: for your sub questionI SUMMON PETER SCHIFF! (BLOOGABLOOGA) (BUBBLES)The fact that there are different degrees of wealth has always struck some as being inherently unfair. Central in this belief is the rich became this way because they take wealth from others, thereby creating the poor. In economics this is called the labor theory of value which states that profit is created by paying workers less th! an they are worth. So entrepreneurs can get rich only if they succeed i! n making others poor. Reality is the reason the rich get that way is they offer something of value to others....Show more

Marielle Hedeiros: or how would you contrast the two.

Todd Stogner: Democrats due favor UNIONS and not the owners of companiesRepublicans favor the entrepreneurial spirit and disdain government interventionBoth have good points but as I have seen in many casethere is lot of Republicans in the UNIONS and a lot of Democrats who are business ownersthe cheese cuts both waybut your assumption is right about the Democrats and Republicans...Show more

Hollis Demasters: DUH

Wilfred Santacruce: Well the Democratic party is less incorporated then the Republican party but it is fishy when large companies like Goldman Sachs gave money to McCain, Romney, and Obama in the 2008 election and primaries.

Madge Voice:

Kris Otuafi: You answered your own question. Both are equally important. No corporations = No jobs

Marvel Mcaulay! : Democrats and Republicans pledge allegiance to money. Most of the money comes from unions, special interests, and corporations. They don't give a damn about workers (unless you give money to a union who gives money to the politicians).Its better for government to protect all life, liberty and property. Then you don't swear allegiance to one side or the other....Show more

Buster Exline: 70% of the middle class voted for Bush65% of the middle class voted for McCainThink that gives you your answer for which party supports workers more.

Coleman Petropoulos: Democrats are against corporations in spite of how it hurts workers. Republicans are for free markets so all workers and all companies of any size can have equality of opportunity.

An Cardine: Democrats AND republicans are both heavily influenced by corporations and slightly influenced by (and often pander to) lower class and workers needs.I think that it is accurate to view our party system as essentiall! y a one party state with two different factions. A lot of overlap betwe! en these two factions, but for the most part they agree.It is important to remember that the United States is not a democracy. It is a polyarchy. The term was created by leading Yale University professor Robert Dahl. Essentially a polyarchy is a system in which power is held by the wealth of the nation, those who James Madison called "The responsible class of men" and the rest of the population is distracted from major issues and occasionally allowed to participate in minor decisions.This is the system that our country was founded on. Government must be established in order to "Protect the minority of the opulent against the majority". This has changed slightly because of popular struggles that have been won, but it remains largely the same.For example, in modern elections the public is very inactive. In most elections the majority of the population doesn't vote. Even those that do vote don't care very much. They actively vote against their own interests, they vote on thing! s based on personality traits rather than policy, "Would I want to have a beer with him?" seems to be a rather popular question.These are the things that are specifically pandered to by the media. Issues that the public cares about are pretentiously avoided. For example: an issue that largely affects the average American is economic policy. From an outside perspective, you would guess that things like NAFTA and globalization would be huge issues in the public mind. All of this is, however, rarely mentioned or covered by the media. These issues are largely marginalized.There is a very good reason for this. If you analyze the positions of the elite and the powerful in comparison to the proletariat, there is a very sharp split in opinion. The elite are all heavily in favor of things like globalization, NAFTA, and other things that help to expand their profit while it is heavily against the interests of the working class to have these policies instituted. For example, in the el! ection of 2004, not many American citizens new that the Free Trade Area! of the Americas was coming along. It was a marginalized and ignored issue by the mainstream press because there would obviously be a sharp split between the desires of power and the desires of the average american.In conclusion, both American political parties are heavily in favor of corporate and private power. They are both funded and paid for by the ruling class. If you seek a way for the workers to obtain some power, it cannot be done within this framework. The system was set up to be this way, it was envisioned as a system that will protect a small minority's power from the majority, and that is exactly what it does. If you want to see workers obtain power, it is essential to change the system itself, for it is one that will forever hold back workers power by holding up the power and privilege of the elite....Show more

Alvaro Oare: Wow that is a very tough question. Tough but fair

Amina Motzer: It's the normal cycle. Since FDR, there has only been one tim! e either party has been elected President for more than two terms (Reagan for two terms, then Bush for one). And Congress goes back and forth too. When Clinton was first elected, Congress was controlled by Democrats, but then lost it to the Republicans.The People seem to vote one party to power, then get upset with the political BS, vote the other party into power, and not learn from the past because they get upset about that party....Show more

Antone Bual: Workers rights...more important to uphold!!!!!

Bryant Chaudhry: I don't think either party represent either of those. The biggest lobbies in Washington aren't run by corporations or unions. The two parties obviously have different philosophies. Repub want to foster entrepreneurship and believe wealth trickles down. Dem want to redistribute through entitlements. Whichever you prefer most likely depends on your economic background....Show more