on political discussion

ok, in my life the most favorite topic of conversation these days is the political race. Strange since I've gone 24 (I'm now 24 yrs old - wow) yrs without caring (to any extraordinary amount) about anything political. But now that I'm talking about it I figure I'll blog about it as well.
As with most things in life, I don't want to talk about candidates, although I will say that I shocked some people this last week by saying that I wasn't necessarily for McCain and Palin - but thats another story :)
I wish to discuss the difference between the liberal and the conservative mindset. You see, to me the difference between the two has always been one of outlook rather than policy. Most of the people that I know who lean (or are) liberal tend to view the world as a complex, multi-layered organism that is continually susceptible to the butterfly effect (if you don't know what I'm talking about I'll explain in a postscript). Conservatives tend to view the world in terms of choice A or B (sometimes C and D but not always or even often). now, as I've thought about this I've come to realize that I tend to view everything through a prism of simplicity. There are a few reasons for this: 1) the complexity of the world as seen by the left is paralyzing in its totality - nothing legitimate ever gets done because somebody always gets stepped on - creating a new area of disenfranchised, bitter people to be championed and rescued. 2) because every conflict/area of disagreement can be boiled down to a yes/no kind of vote.
The problem arises when I try to offer solutions to the great issues of the day - because no matter how simple the problem truly is, the solution is never simple.

at this point I am tempted to just say that everybody else is stupid and moronic and that I could do a far better job of running everything than the lying, two - faced monsters who pass for rulers in our farcical parody of a government. But it would add nothing significant to the discussion other than giving me a chance to truly rant and rave.

I don't think that the solution to a problem like our environment is terribly simple. Every solution that is being brought forward right now is a stopgap measure at best and in many cases will actually cause more problems than it solves (see the economic cost of a Prius or wind farms if you want an example).
In additiong to the paralyzing nature of the solutions to simple problems I am also having trouble deciding which of the two candidates will do less damage in office. Isn't it sad that the only reason I'll vote for either candidate is because he'll do less damage than the other?
The hard thing is, America as a concept is still a shining city on a hill. Its just that letting people run that city is like covering the walls in dung. But hey, enough about my sentimental, faux philisophical wannabe-ism. the real question is - what do you think?

p.s. butterfly effect: simple actions have extraordinary consequences. a butterfly flapping its wings causes a nation to fall. See also: Good Will Hunting, and The Butterfly Effect.
p.p.s for a really great discussion that prompted the writing of this article see this link.