In article ,
"Robert Green" wrote:


Conflict doesn't HAVE to be the only output of a two party system. Once
upon a time, we were able forge compromises and maintain some forward
motion.

My theory (seriously) is that the demise of the patronage system at
the local level. At the time you had people active in the party for
their own enlightened self interest (a job). They tended to be less
ideological and more pragmatic since their very jobs depended on the
party staying in power. They also provided workers, etc. They also
worked at a leavening influence by disipating much of the power of the
ideologues. Now, the more fanatical people have a much more important
influence, especially at the party nominating level, and thus at all
levels.

--
"Even I realized that money was to politicians what the ecalyptus tree is to koala bears: food, water, shelter and something to crap on."
---PJ O'Rourke