Back in the day, these two parties became catch all parties for people who shared a few basic opinions. Now, as we saw in the past presidential election, to be nominated to head a party, one must slide right into the specific views of said party. Both candidates were moderates it seemed before either ran for President. But Obama and Romney both had to slide into their respective party to a. Win the nomination and b. Win the support of the party's followers. These parties are no longer parties as they are groups of people with specific views, as people can no longer express their own opinions like Ron Paul. Ron Paul Revolution!!!
So weird to see a useful and interesting question from Master Debater (or however he misspelled it).
I might have argued against this before Obama's face was superimposed on Star Wars t-shirts, but that man is a walking false prophet.
Plus consider that if you want to become president, you'd better adhere to the religion of choice for your political party (and own a dog; allergies be damned).
I'm posting this people I think people need to know. 58% OF AMERICANS ARE SOCIALLY LIBERAL AND FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE! AND NEITHER PARTY IN THIS COUNTRY IS FISCALLY CONSERVATIVE AND SOCIALLY LIBERAL! So less than 42% of Americans are democrats or republicans by even the loosest definition.
Filling word count. Filling word count.
I've noticed so many Democrats in the media and the forums across the Internets who had been some of the loudest voices against the Iraq War now supporting war in Syria. In spite of the fact that if Syria is justified Iraq was definitely justified and when you ask them they say they still think of Iraq as a mistake.
Instead of thinking it over critically and holding one's position logically consistent across different positions they just ask "what does my party say?" What a bunch of sheep.
If we want to save America we should abandon the Democrats and Republicans in droves.
Cult: a system of religious veneration and devotion directed toward a particular figure or object. The Democratic and Republican parties cannot be like cults because they simply are not cults. Cults are religious organizations centered around the veneration of one leader. The Democrats and Republicans follow many leaders, they do not view those leaders as infallible (The left was the first to Crucify Obama over the NSA debacle). Something that does not follow one infallible leader and is not by nature religious, cannot be a cult. By definition.
There are many definitions of cults. The one that would be most appropriate in this case is a controlling, hierarchical social structure that manipulates people through pressure or coercion to conform to a mold: this is a social cult, which many religious and business organizations model. I do not deny that there are cult-like qualities to the political parties, but there isn't the kind of intense, personal pressure that there is in true cults.
That said, while the parties themselves may be innocent, there are certainly smaller communities of people who form these kinds of cults based on the political parties by putting heavy, authoritarian pressure on others around them in a close-knit community (family, friends, or coworkers).