Because of course a two party system is fundamentally different from one party one :-D

... + the liberal institutions + the non-totalitarianism + the actual, real life democracy + historical and political context + ... :D

That’s correct, yes.

I'm assuming there is irony and you mean 2 is not enough. But it's still day and night compared to single party, irony is not an argument in itself.

No, two parties representing largely the same lobbyists and sharing largely the same views are not "night and day" compared to one party. I'd go as far as to say they are exactly the same, except for pretending there's some actual, working opposition.

This was an easier both sides-ism to get away a decade ago. It stretches credulity today.

Not really - they differ in rhetorics, but not in things that matter. Democrats hadn’t denounced any part of religious fundamentalism, for example.

> Democrats hadn’t denounced any part of religious fundamentalism

This is a baffling assertion that takes about ten seconds to debunk. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/at-prayer-breakfast-obama-conde...

That’s not denouncing fundamentalism, that’s just asking to tone it down.

Can you quote a single US senator who openly called “life from conception” what it is, like they called out antivaxers?

What is, according to you, the definition of "life from conception"?

I'm a supporter of abortion but this is going to be fun I think.

The definition doesn’t matter, what matters is what it is: a fringe theory reinvented in late XIX century as part of Catholic hate campaign.

Your point being? As a reminder, we’re talking about democrats failing to condemn extremist ideas.

I was just curious, you were drifting off.

To your point, I think democrats and republicans positions on climate are very different: https://arstechnica.com/science/2022/07/us-support-for-envir...

That would go against your point that they support "largely the same ideas".