In a way, we now have four political parties all jammed up into two: The AOC/Bernie Dems, the corporatist, neoliberal Dems in league with a few moderate Republicans, the social conservative libertarians (think Ben Sasse, who sometimes dances with neoliberals), and the crazies, many of whom hopefully will find themselves in prison soon.
My own politics align most closely with the AOC branch of the Democratic Party. If their proposals are considered overreach, I'll cheer that on, but as currently constructed, I don't see Democrats leaning that way (although there are promising murmurings from Biden). But folks with my point of view deserve to be heard - we've been silenced for 40 years of post-Reagan Ayn Randy Darwinism.
I do agree that power corrupts. The Democrats have been in charge of my hometown Chicago since forever (I've been away for a long time now). They've made a mockery of FDR's party there, and they are the poster children for corruption. Mike Madigan had been Illinois speaker for 30 plus years before FINALLY losing the speakership last Wednesday. And, of course, it's where the shifty Rahm Emanuel hangs his hat.
That level of party dominance is almost impossible at the federal level. Historically, it is rare for one party to control all three branches.
Republicans did it off an on between 2001 and 2007 (with a break between 2001 and 2003) and during the 83rd Congress of Ike's presidency. Republicans also gave us the Great Depression (they're really good at stuff like that) when they ran things between 1927-1933.
Democrats have held control of all three branches in 1937-1945 and 1961-1969, the latter period in which they gifted us the Vietnam War.
Typically what happens when one party dominates is that they get a royal ass-kicking after their brief reign. An Illinois scenario has simply never happened at the federal level and is very unlikely to.
Also, I would argue that Dems NEED to control the Presidency and both halls of Congress while the Right has a 6-3 advantage in the Supreme Court, or things could get very ugly.
In fact, if you look at that 6-3 SCOTUS advantage, THERE'S your checks and balances.
As for the headline of your story — an inarguable point. But they should have purged him before they nominated him. Most thinking Americans knew who Trump was back then. That they foisted him onto us anyway was disgraceful.
