To believe there's no real difference between the two parties, you must be either lying or clueless.

[stupidicus]

34. ho hum, the same old stuff

wholly lacking in any examples or evidence, other than the frequently observed repetition of the same charge around here from those who can't rebut the facts that justify the criticisms of the dems that they abhor.

I see this

and with no real-world reason or justification other than trying to repeat the debacle of 2000 and put another right-wing Republican into the White House.

used all the time and applied to those who criticize this and that about BHO and/or the dems, but I have never seen a poster here actually claim that the two parties are identical in all ways as you claim. If they did, they wouldn't be here long, now would they, given how intolerant some around here are of ANY dissent or criticisms whatsoever? Naturally you and those like you would be calling for their being banned

Don't be a wingnut (right-wing or extreme-fringe).
Democratic Underground is an online community for politically liberal people who understand the importance of working within the system to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of political office. Teabaggers, Neo-cons, Dittoheads, Paulites, Freepers, Birthers, and right-wingers in general are not welcome here. Neither are certain extreme-fringe left-wingers, including advocates of violent political/social change, hard-line communists, terrorist-apologists, America-haters, kooks, crackpots, LaRouchies, and the like.

Vote for Democrats.
Winning elections is important — therefore, advocating in favor of Republican nominees or in favor of third-party spoiler candidates that could split the vote and throw an election to our conservative opponents is never permitted on Democratic Underground. But that does not mean that DU members are required to always be completely supportive of Democrats. During the ups-and-downs of politics and policy-making, it is perfectly normal to have mixed feelings about the Democratic officials we worked hard to help elect. When we are not in the heat of election season, members are permitted to post strong criticism or disappointment with our Democratic elected officials, or to express ambivalence about voting for them. In Democratic primaries, members may support whomever they choose. But when general election season begins, DU members must support Democratic nominees (EXCEPT in rare cases where were a non-Democrat is most likely to defeat the conservative alternative, or where there is no possibility of splitting the liberal vote and inadvertently throwing the election to the conservative alternative).

since that "AWK AWK they're identical" stuff would appear to violate certain TOS criteria. This is why I see these exaggerated charges as the BS they are, and the product of a less than creative imagination, because they (those charged here) likely would have provided cause for their expulsion in relatively short order. AFter all, if there position incontrovertibly and demonstratably is that there "is no real difference", then that "the same" stuff as an implied advocating for no diff in who you vote for -- an inarguable violation of that bolded above. Are you suggesting that the moderators/owners here aren't doing their job adequately?

It's really nothing more than dodge and an insult to those who do have honest and defensible criticisms of BHO and the dems, and is no doubt designed for and intended to either make social lepers outta them here, silence them, and to spare you the embarrassment of having no credible defense of the things they criticize.

Of course there are diffs between the two parties in terms of policy pursuits, some are just not satified with the size of the diffs across a range of issues important to them and the principles they hold dear as lefties, and who aren't willing to stay silent or be silenced (by efforts like this one) just to benefit from the good graces of those that insult them and their intelligence this way.

WHat's next, BHO didn't choose by his lonesome to use a kill list, issue drilling permits in the arctic, etc, -- a great many things reasonable people can disagree over? If he can't survive politically due to the choices in fact he's made, well, that's political life.

To me that's the most hilarious part about these kinda tirades -- it's almost like you think those that are doing the criticizing are educating people with falsehoods or period, when anyone with any business here discussing or debating the issues should be fully familiar with and have an understanding of them sufficient to form their own opinion that likely won't be influenced negatively unless the facts are there with which to accomplish it. This suggest to me that you think this place is full of impressionable and gullible nincompoops that need to be protected from facts that might cast a bad light on BHO/the dems, lest their full awareness and fear of the rightwingnuts at the gates be overcome and votes are lost to them.

Nobody here as far as I can tell thinks that there's "no real difference" between them, because even the unenthused, disenchanted, disillusioned, etc, with BHO and the dems all say at least they'll vote against Romney as the alternative, which more than indicates their awareness of significant diffs despite the level of dissatisfaction they have for BHO. I've been predicting for going on three years now that the fear of the rising rightwingnuttery would be his salvation, assuming that the repubs didn't find someone to restore some measure of sanity to their party. He was already starting to compile a list of things and disappoints with them and him even then. Your kind around he seem to think that's some kinda deep and dark secret, despite it being evidenced in the erosion of enthusiasm gap, a loss of donors, etc, or even things like this http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48038023/ns/politics-the_new_york_times/

Is his Keystone approval a product of someones imagination http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/03/obama-defends-oil-record-fast-tracks-keystone-pipeline/ and are you exaggerating about what others have charged in terms of his involvement in potential Mediacre cuts http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/washington-post-how-obama-failed-get-, changing their opposition of that into a charge he's out to destroy in in its entirety? One can reasonably think so, because all those kinda exaggerations fit the narratives of those around here that think all criticisms of him and the dems has some nefarious motive -- like assuring his/the dems election loss, rather than their honest and principled desire to stand in the way of things they don't approve of no matter who is proposing them.

ANd those with dishonest narratives are generally speaking, the first ones to project their guilt of it onto others.