Those non-violent protests shook them so bad they wanted to charge non-violent Quaker protestors with terrorism.
Not in USAs case.
On every big economically significant issue of the last 40 years both parties have been on absolutely the same page, none of the candidates would make different choices (at least for both houses and presidents, not sure about state levels, Im not from over there).
Even policies that one party publicly “opposed” were then carried on by the same party when it came in power (eg Bill Clinton).
So both parties would and have brought constant deregulation (financial markets especially), the same wars & anything war industry related, public infrastructure cuts (healthcare, schools, etc), taxation of profit, etc.
They bicker by design on issues that are huge for the non-elite (but meaningless to the elite as they can circumvent such issues), like lgbtq+ and reproductive rights.
This is simply a lie
Health care is a prime example of how badly youre lying.
Act & position themselves differently, but make sure the end result for the rich doesn’t change.
Eg - where is their one-payer system? At any point they were in power they could have implemented it. They just did not.
Or how many people (and how much expenses) does medicade even cover?
Democrats have a lot of instances where they are miraculously one vote short of what their official positioning is (especially in the last like 30 years when each of the parties vote almost unanimously on the same issues).
59 Democrats voted for Single Payer, 0 Republicans, it failed
60 Democrats voted to expand medicaid and protect preexisting conditions, 0 republicans, it passed
The USA then elected more Republicans. Republicans used that majority to cut taxes for the rich, raise taxes on everyone else, a plan that would have expired in 2026 if the USA didn’t just elect more republicans AGAIN.
Seems pretty fucking diverse, mate.
