First, let's review. You claimed the parties are equally guilty or at least 'both guilty' of any acts that are treasonous, using the word loosely, in nature, and I said that's wrong and you asked me to name any cases Republicans only were to blame - and you responded then by implying that if you found ANY cases both were culpable, then both were always culpable. You're still sort of doing that.
In fact, you said that all the items in my list could only happen because Democrats helped, when NONE of them needed any Democrats' help. It's hard to shake someone brainwashed into the 'both sides are equally bad' mentality to recognize they're wrong, you are showing that.
It's a little odd how you keep bringing up the patriot act, which was not on my list because, as I said, though it was a Bush initiative, both sides DID support it, and I said that, and you just keep bringing it up as if finding any case where both are responsible is the topic.
To clarify, Barbara Lee was the only vote against the *Afghanistan* war; Democrats in the House mostly voted against the authorization of force Bush used for *Iraq* (lying to Congress he wouldn't use it for war). If it had been up to Democrats' votes it would not have passed.
Both parties support our defending the Kurds in Syria, so both parties deserve credit or blame for that depending how you feel about it.
Obama did NOT embrace 'unitary executive' as much as Bush or trump. Being able to find any cases where he exceeded his power among the many he was accused of doesn't make him equally guilty of it. trump is running around saying he can do ANYTHING HE WANTS - show me Obama saying that. trump is refusing EVERY DEMAND, EVERY SUBPOENA, ALL COOPERATION with Congress to perform their oversight role - both an extreme abuse of power and impeachable - Republicans accuse Obama of occasionally not giving them all the information they wanted, often illegitimate demands, but it wasn't CLOSE to what trump is doing.
I understand how people get fixated about the 'duopoly', and it leads them to make all kinds of false equivalencies. They put 'both parties' on the 'enemy' list and want to treat them equally. It's too much effort to recognize they're not. But it's a mistake and wrong.
You can both raise legitimate 'duopoly' issues, and fight for change and reform about that issue, while also recognizing how the parties aren't the same, and the practical issue that since we HAVE that 'duopoly', you have to make at least choices about 'lesser evil' while it's the case.
How your efforts are better put at fighting FOR something like ranked choice voting, than in voting third-party acting like it doesn't matter which of the two parties get elected.
'repugnant and bankrupt' - well, it's what our system strongly encourages and has since the first presidency when the country immediately split into the Adams and Jefferson parties under Washington. And it's pretty critical voters even if they want reforms, to recognize in the meantime which party is better to support.
