Does the Democratic Party's track record lend itself to that ideal?
Without political parties, people would just be unorganized, opinionated blowhards. Unorganized political action is generally ineffective. I'm a leftist, so I picked the more leftist of the bigger two parties. Organization is key to getting anything accomplished. Can you imagine 435 independents debating in the House?
Kill me.
To the both of you, why pick from the major parties? Is it because they're the only ones who stand a chance it winning elections?
2. Republicans still think the Iraq war was a good idea. Democrats have realized it was not.
What about the idea of proclaiming the Iraq War to be a negative from the start? The way you phrase it leaves the idea (correctly) that the Democrats, at first, thought it was a good undertaking. In total, 111 Democrats voted yes for the war. From an anti-war standpoint, doesn't that make it seem like they're towing the line?
This is easy:I am leftist, and the Democrats are the most leftist party. I also am not a fan of policies that create rigid class lines, no healthcare for 50 million Americans, and failed states.
But the Democrats aren't actually leftists. Compared to Europeans, "our" left are a bunch of conservatives. To me, it doesn't look like any of the actions made by the Democrats amount to tearing down class lines, but inadvertently reinforcing them.
-
The problem I see plauging the political landscape is very much apparent here as well; picking between a simple dichotomy of American "left" vs. "right".
