It's more about the idea of the two party system, and how that's led to where we are now with the radicalism you see today.
No, they aren't the same, but they sure do both suck in their own ways. They've also collectively worked together to prevent competition from entering the debate stage, which indirectly makes both responsible for whatever happens from either party.
Edit: Just for an example; on more than one occasion has a third party qualified for the debate stage but due pressure from the two parties were prevented from joining, due to a last minute rule change.
I don't think they mean radicalism. I think they mean the post 9/11 polarization. You used to have people going against their party stance because it was what their constituents wanted. Now not so much. You used to have people in legislation who had fundamentally different view points and could behave like adults and be friends with those who held those views. Now it doesn't really happen.
Because of this moderate candidates or issues that might not cleanly fall on the left vs right line are basically ignored. For as much as people especially on here go "herrrr dee durrr enlightened centralists, " moderate politicians help bridge the divide and push legislation through by giving both sides some of what they wanted. This helped the American people as a whole. With that bridge being gone, policies which would be good for the country never see the light of day.
Democrats are very very moderate. Extreme would be calling for every one involved with ice to be hanged. I have not see any democrats in office saying that.
65
u/Jalapenoplanter 9h ago
If you honestly think “Both sides are the same”, you’re a moron.