While you are kind of correct, grouping the democrats in as part of the group that won't compromise is not fair. They've come to the table with demands for compromise, and they didn't start this problem so it's not theirs to clean up. It's the right and moderate right that aren't compromising.
Indeed, the problem has been that Democrats have been compromising to keep the government running for decades, and it finally came to a point where the other team decided they could start getting away with anything.
Fault and fairness are irrelevant; they’ve never had anything to do with how government functions and damn sure don’t look to start mattering any time soon. A two party system this polarized simply will. not. work.
Which is exactly why it's important not to bail the republicans out of their self imposed ongoing schism. They need to be broken up and that can't happen unless they repeatedly fail to caucus together on even simple procedural tasks like electing a speaker. This is an ideal problem brought upon themselves to show they are already not a single unified party. Just a loose agglomeration of shit stirrers. Two bad kids in their granddad's trench coat.
I certainly wouldn’t say that bailing them out is the best choice, either from a moral or a practical point of view. My point was merely that the eight nutters here are not the real problem. They are merely symptom of much more grave and perhaps systemic threats to the governmental system.
... which Republicans have a large hand in perpetuating.
I'm not saying Democrats are the saints and angels, but they're a damn sight better than their red-faced counter-parts. What little enabling their members do pales in comparison to the enabling of the Republican party.
Wholesale change needs to happen. And moving The Leftovers party out of it's middle-of-the-road approach is part of that, but it's not even close to a majority. Trying to lump the two together as some sort of "everyone in government is bad!" approach is disingenuous and antithetical to seeking change.
If you want to see a solution, stop trying to generalize the problem. We've had generalized "solutions" for decades, and it's done nothing but slow the degradation a little bit at best.
Your assumption that I’m making an argument to moderation is fundamentally incorrect and a little insulting.
My assumption is that you're casting too wide a net because you're just tired of the status quo, but you don't really know who to really blame. So you're blaming everyone.
You're talking out of both sides of your ass.
They are relevant when it comes to elections. And that's all that ultimately matters in our system.
Lol. Tell that to Al Gore.
?
He was blamed for being boring, which he was. That was his fault. He didn't contest Florida enough. That was his campaign's fault.
I think the concept was that he lost even though he won.
While you are kind of correct, grouping the democrats in as part of the group that won't compromise is not fair. They've come to the table with demands for compromise, and they didn't start this problem so it's not theirs to clean up. It's the right and moderate right that aren't compromising.
Indeed, the problem has been that Democrats have been compromising to keep the government running for decades, and it finally came to a point where the other team decided they could start getting away with anything.
Fault and fairness are irrelevant; they’ve never had anything to do with how government functions and damn sure don’t look to start mattering any time soon. A two party system this polarized simply will. not. work.
Which is exactly why it's important not to bail the republicans out of their self imposed ongoing schism. They need to be broken up and that can't happen unless they repeatedly fail to caucus together on even simple procedural tasks like electing a speaker. This is an ideal problem brought upon themselves to show they are already not a single unified party. Just a loose agglomeration of shit stirrers. Two bad kids in their granddad's trench coat.
I certainly wouldn’t say that bailing them out is the best choice, either from a moral or a practical point of view. My point was merely that the eight nutters here are not the real problem. They are merely symptom of much more grave and perhaps systemic threats to the governmental system.
... which Republicans have a large hand in perpetuating.
I'm not saying Democrats are the saints and angels, but they're a damn sight better than their red-faced counter-parts. What little enabling their members do pales in comparison to the enabling of the Republican party.
Wholesale change needs to happen. And moving The Leftovers party out of it's middle-of-the-road approach is part of that, but it's not even close to a majority. Trying to lump the two together as some sort of "everyone in government is bad!" approach is disingenuous and antithetical to seeking change.
If you want to see a solution, stop trying to generalize the problem. We've had generalized "solutions" for decades, and it's done nothing but slow the degradation a little bit at best.
Your assumption that I’m making an argument to moderation is fundamentally incorrect and a little insulting.
My assumption is that you're casting too wide a net because you're just tired of the status quo, but you don't really know who to really blame. So you're blaming everyone.
You're talking out of both sides of your ass.
They are relevant when it comes to elections. And that's all that ultimately matters in our system.
Lol. Tell that to Al Gore.
?
He was blamed for being boring, which he was. That was his fault. He didn't contest Florida enough. That was his campaign's fault.
I think the concept was that he lost even though he won.