They, like the people who join them, change. There is no membership requirements to join a party except that you be registered to vote. Parties accept anyone who decides to join.
So what if those new folks are of a different mind set than those before them? Initially they became another minority viewpoint- I say minority because I am making the presumption based upon my previous description that they “are of a different mind set.” Their thinking is different- not necessarily on all issues but on some issues.
Look at the gay rights movement. Neither party of the 1950’s or 1960s or even 70s 80’s or 90s would accept gay rights. But some population of people then were still LTGB. Some portion of all populations have ALWAYS been LTGB. What did they do? They came out, they wrote, they lobbied, they debated on media and eventually they convinced enough others to accept them for who they were and are.
Not everyone feels this way about any given topic, but we hopefully listen and evolve into a more accepting society. Accepting of becoming gay? (for those who don’t know, you don’t become gay. You are or you are not). But no, accepting of people who are gay- who they are- and of their rights.
Mostly before the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Southern Democrats voted with that party. Sometime after that law because of their discriminate and religious ways, they changed parties and became Republicans. What did that do? It changed the make up of the Republican Party. It largely became the Teaparty. Winning the party nomination depended on getting votes from party members no matter who they were. Today that party is made up of many disparate groups, some of whom detest each other.
It’s is still organized by GOP leaders that have their own agenda. That agenda is not the will of a large number of people registered as Republicans today.
On the other hand Democrats are finding massive new numbers of young people, of immigrants, academics, and clearly some people with socialist or even extreme socialist leanings. The Democrats have in their history had some small number of socialists even communists for decades. See the movie Trumbo.
It’s a well acted film about a difficult time.
But many blue color Democrats in this election feel abandoned by their party- it’s too far left now- just as some moderate Libertarian Republicans have felt abandoned by theirs- it’s too far right now.
The result this time is a Democrat who is left of her party center , and a Socialist who is way too far left of center, and a group of Republicans where only one who is a moderate, though he is rude, crude, and socially unacceptable.
Our two party system no longer describes who we are. Yet in order to try to win our presidency, at this time, a candidate needs to be in one or the other.
It’s a dilemma.
Some countries have multiple parties, which forces them to sometimes make evil alliances with political enemies to win control. I’m not much in favor of that either.
I think we need leadership in BOTH parties that more clearly define who we are and in what we believe. We need several party conventions just for the purpose of bringing us together conveniently held around the country. Again, JUST for the purpose of redefining our meaning and our platforms. Who are we and for what do we stand?
I personally favor new party leadership not the existing party leadership to do that. It needs to be open, transparent, and civil.
What are your thoughts about our political morass? What would you suggest to help solve our issues?