Being knowledgeable and having a sense of history does not mean that one is living in the past, GfS. I am aware of what the Democratic Party used to be (and falls way short now) and I am also aware of what the Republican Party used to be. And with a knowledge of history, I know about what the Republican Party was like when Theodore Roosevelt was president and why, when he decided to run for yet another term, he broke his affiliation with the GOP and started the Progressive ("Bull Moose") Party. And even though Dwight Eisenhower was one of the better Republican presidents, the Repubs have been sliding further and further to the Right ever since.

The Democrats had their act together with another Roosevelt, Franklin D., and with "Give 'em Hell" Harry Truman, but no Democrat from those days would recognize the party anymore.

Try to comprehend this, GfS. I am not a member of any political party. I am politically active. But I am neither Democrat, nor (God knows!) Republican. I do not fit into any of your predigested political categories, so I don't fit into any of your convenient pigeon holes.

Unfortunately, the way our system is set up, third parties tend to be spoilers and draw votes away from the candidates that are preferable—not necessarily good, but the better of two lousy candidates. This is why I favor preferential or instant run-off voting, but I won't hold my breath 'til it happens.

". . . but you guys are promoting a mindset that is keeping people blinded, and divided, as Americans."

I don't know what thread you've been reading, GfS, but Bobert and I are not "promoting" any "mindset." That's strictly an erroneous assumption on your part.

Unfortunately you didn't answer my challenge to put forth your solution to the problem. All you have done above is restate the problem.

Read what Stringsinger and Bobert have posted just above.

And LEARN.

Don Firth

P. S.   "Treasonous traitors," by the way, is redundant.