Analysis deals with a set of knowns and ignores everything outside of the set.  Political discussions rarely venture outside of 'the frame' except to consider different ideological perspectives on the given set.  But once we consider the real context, what we do not know about a subject, we are confronted with the unspoken assumptions that we use to deal the unknown; religion, superstition, folklore, conventional wisdom and the prevailing cultural norms. When we take these values into analysis it becomes clear that the underlying currency of all cultural transactions is certainty regardless of whether it is based on evidence or belief.

There are two interconnected sets of certainties, an existential set of sensual boundaries and a cultural set of shared values.
Our shared cultural understandings mediate the uncertainties of our physical existance.  Without language we would all be autistic, unable to navigate between our needs and our limitations.

Do you percieve your past to have been chaotic or claustrophopic?  If it tended towards chaotic I would bet that you call yourself a republican and if it was claustrophobic I will bet you call yourself a democrat.  If I am wrong then perhaps you are a force of nature, not nurture.  My theory is that the experience of our past to a certain extent determines the narrative of how we mediate the unknown.  And our narrative is our politics.