attacking the Dems aren’t helpful because they currently have no power. The other party is causing a lot of damage and there seems to be no stopping them
If you buy into the underlying premises of how a liberal democracy functions (liberal used here as a technical term, not as a perjorative) then the only ones who have the power to stop the other party is the Dems and they actively choose not to. They’re neither down, nor out they’re doing their job of controlled opposition exactly as they are supposed to.
I still don’t like saying how they’re both the same because I fundamentally don’t believe that to my core (ie if they had all three branches we wouldn’t be talking about all this current mayhem).
However, I think I understand your point and I agree with it.
The difference is the viewpoint:
If you buy into the underlying premises of how a liberal democracy functions (liberal used here as a technical term, not as a perjorative) then the only ones who have the power to stop the other party is the Dems and they actively choose not to. They’re neither down, nor out they’re doing their job of controlled opposition exactly as they are supposed to.
I still don’t like saying how they’re both the same because I fundamentally don’t believe that to my core (ie if they had all three branches we wouldn’t be talking about all this current mayhem).
However, I think I understand your point and I agree with it.
So thanks again!
They aren’t the same, one’s a sword and one’s a shield. The shield can’t effectively stab, but the sword can’t either if it’s forced to parry instead.
I engaged because it seemed like there was agreement, just miscommunication. Glad I was able to help cut through it :D. Appreciate you!