How fun a party is depends on the party and your definition of fun

Political parties make it easier for the general public to learn about the general positions of politicians without doing much research. Since, you know, most people only really care about politics once every four years (unless they possess bitter hatred towards the government). I highly suspect that the effort involved in researching a politician's values is one of the main reasons why people don't vote for (or know anything about) independents.

For that reason, I'll be writing about the Green Party. I'm interested in the nuances of their stance, since most people ridicule them and I'd like to see if I agree with anything they say. The first thing I see on their website is "We stand firmly for social justice for all those living in this country regardless of their immigration status". When I click on the link, I find the social justice section of their platform. This includes (caution: the following aren't actual quotes)

• schools are broke
• increasing gap between the 1% and everyone else
• take down the patriarchy
• give money to all descendants of slaves as reparation

They are obviously very liberal. On the topic of military intervention in Syria, which can be found here, they are just as liberal, calling for an open door to Syrian refugees, who they believe to be "innocent civilians... far too often". 723 people have already signed their petition to "tell President Trump and Congress that military solutions won't bring peace and stability to Syria or any other country", and I'm sure many more people have seen the petition itself and been at least subconsciously influenced by its emotional language (eg. "civilian casualties", "accepting Syrian refugees and others fleeing violence is considered just too dangerous", "stop further bloodshed").

Since the Green Party is in opposition of Trump, I will now write about Trump. He affiliates with the Republican Party, and holds right-winged populist beliefs, some of which many may consider pseudonationalistic. The White House press released his statement on Syria here. It is very civil, sympathetic (eg. "no child of God should ever suffer such a horror"), and shows a reasonable thought process behind the military strikes which many have found to be cruel. However, it is one of the most civil things that I've heard from him, and I'm at least 40% sure that someone else wrote it for him. However, the fact that he probably didn't ad-lib shows that he is at least okay with the content of the speech.

Sigh. Here.