I've said (in essence), "Since Reagan, the Democratic Party has morphed into the Republican Party and the Republican Party has morphed into the Lunatic Party." You've claimed that isn't so. That the Democratic Party is very different from the Old Republican Party. I then post a quote from an Old Style Republican President and you say, "Well, he would be a Democrat today ..." (which I think, is MY point) and then cite Reagan and a couple of successors in an apparent attempt to claim New Democrats aren't New Republicans. I'll give you that. Heck, that's what I've said. From my POV, you claim New Republicans aren't like New Democrats, so New Democrats are not like Old Republicans. That doesn't follow.
I think we might be talking past one another again. Here's a summary of my views and I'd be surprised if you disagreed:
(1) Are New Republicans worse than Old Republicans? Of course they are. They are insane, and either stupid (useful idiots), corrupt supporters of or members of the oligarchy.
(2) Are New Republicans worse than New Democrats? Of course they are for reasons too obvious to list.
Where we part, maybe, is here:
(3) Are New Democrats worse than Old Republicans? No. They are essentially indistinguishable from one another.
And that's why Hillary won't get my vote in November. I'm sick of voting for Republicans.
I think we might be talking past one another again. Here's a summary of my views and I'd be surprised if you disagreed:
(1) Are New Republicans worse than Old Republicans? Of course they are. They are insane, and either stupid (useful idiots), corrupt supporters of or members of the oligarchy.
(2) Are New Republicans worse than New Democrats? Of course they are for reasons too obvious to list.
Where we part, maybe, is here:
(3) Are New Democrats worse than Old Republicans? No. They are essentially indistinguishable from one another.
And that's why Hillary won't get my vote in November. I'm sick of voting for Republicans.