Warning: this is a political rant devoid of any supporting evidence (because lazy).  If you agree with me you're alright.  If not, probably an asshole .. but there may be one or two exceptions.

Obviously the republicunts want to win every election more than they want to see any particular policy go their way.  As the democrats move to the center, republicans fight to prevent achievement of their old policy objectives under democratic presidents.  Democrats focus much more on achieving as much policy gain as possible in each and every measure that comes before the congress.  

Why have republicunts lost sight of principle in this way?  It's because their concept of the public good is too wed to individual exceptionalism.  They like stories about the great individual boot-strappers who fight their way to the top by grinding the lives of the many down to the nubs .. and then donate just enough dough toward a library or hospital to get their name put on the side of the building.  The opportunity to screw the many for the good of the few is what makes this country great in the minds of republicunts.  They require squalor and the gnashing of teeth from the many in order feel fully recognized for their exceptional achievement.

What about third party alternatives?  Find a well prepared candidate and we can talk about it.  Find such a one with any clear path to achieving anything in the existing political landscape and I'd be happy to sign on.  My free and entirely unsolicited advice to dreamers is to start small.  Get congressmen and then senators elected to these alternative parties and patiently build up some cred and maybe, someday, you'll get there.  

You're welcome.

Or, we could take ole Willie's advice and "first, let's kill all the lawyers." That'd surely take out a good 70 or 80% of both parties!

No doubt. But in the meantime government won't take care of itself. So I'm going to support the party that can win and can more often be relied upon to inch the ball down the field toward a fairer shake for the average guy.

Both parties are "wed to power."  Let there be no question of that.  The question is what use is that power put to?  A contrast of the parties' respective platforms shows that the Democrats will support progressive positions and will throw bones to the general populace.  The republicunts are a wholly owned subsidiary of the super rich and all they ever throw the lower classes is an anchor.

(October 23, 2016 at 1:44 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Both parties are "wed to power."  Let there be no question of that.

No doubt at all. But based on observation, the dems will not obstruct at all cost when they don't occupy the oval office. They will continue to responsibly execute the responsibilities of their elected offices while working to minimize damage to working stiffs.[/quote]

(October 23, 2016 at 1:44 pm)Minimalist Wrote: The question is what use is that power put to?  A contrast of the parties' respective platforms shows that the Democrats will support progressive positions and will throw bones to the general populace.  The republicunts are a wholly owned subsidiary of the super rich and all they ever throw the lower classes is an anchor.

Exactamundo.

(October 23, 2016 at 1:23 pm)Whateverist Wrote: No doubt. But in the meantime government won't take care of itself. So I'm going to support the party that can win and can more often be relied upon to inch the ball down the field toward a fairer shake for the average guy.

Oh, you know I'm being facetious.

Right now it'd take a lot to get me to vote for either major party.

This is why we need more grass root independent movements. Bernie's success rallying for the Democratic nomination is proof that people want something like it. The problem is nobody seems to be supporting those types of movements at the local level, which is where they begin to cultivate power. You don't even have to actually get the third party into office, you just have to mobilize a movement big enough for the Dems and Repubs to actually respond. Bernie lost, but Hillary and the DNC platform adopted a number of policies they may not have adopted without him. That, actually, is proof that the parties care more about power than the issues; it implies that the party establishment didn't really give two shits about the policy, they just want to appease as much of their voter base as possible so as to stay in power.

I'd be ecstatic if the two parties going forward consisted of a conservative branch of the democratic party and a more ambitious progressive party along the lines of Bernie. I'd be happy to take my pick and live with the outcome.

(October 23, 2016 at 10:23 am)Whateverist Wrote: As the democrats move to the center, republicans fight to prevent achievement of their old policy objectives under democratic presidents.

From a European perspective Democrats have always been center right. They're what we would call conservatives. Conservatives as in British Thatherist Conservatives. Certainly not the more humane German or French versions.

The Repubs seem to be everything right. It's hard to nail them. Some of them seem like religious nutjobs striving for a theocracy, some are outright fascists, some libertarians and some conspiracy nuts. Funny as that may sound, but they seem to be more diverse than the democrats. But not in a positive way.