Flirting With Polarization, Ctd

Max Ehrenfreund sees no reason to restrict one’s dating pool to a single political party, noting that 2013 has been the year of strange bedfellows:

The House vote on the Amash-Conyers Amendment showed that party affiliation has little to do with support for the National Security Agency or its activities. More Republicans believe gays and lesbians should be allowed to marry. If someone tells you she’s a Democrat, you know very little about what she thinks federal fiscal policy should be. Maybe she agrees with President Obama’s attempts to reduce spending while increasing taxes, or maybe she reads Paul Krugman. On the question of whether the United States should intervene in Syria, Republicans and Democrats seem more or less united in opposition. (But I’m done writing about Syria.)

Party affiliation has not been a reliable indicator of a person’s views on any of the most important problems confronting our society this year. … For the past few months, these changes have made politics fascinatingly unpredictable. They also mean that if a person is searching for a romantic partner, online or at the club, neither stated party affiliation or any other trait will probably tell her what a potential love interest believes about several important issues. The consequence is more disagreement, more awkwardness, and, best of all, a more resilient democracy.

Previous Dish on the subject here and here.