The issue is though, Smoltchanov, that having clearly defined parties is good because it acts as a heuristic for voters who don't follow politics very closely--which doesn't work if each party is an ideological mixed bag.
I don't belong to "voters who don't follow politics very closely", so, obviously, it's not good from my point of view. I have a lot of other arguments against having "ideologically pure" parties in case (as in US), with strong President and only 2 major parties, but they will take a lot of space here, so i will not go into details...
Ideology isn't something you can just turn off. Objectivity is a myth, and you're probably one of the biggest ideologues on this forum because of your uncritical embrace of 'moderate-ism.' To pretend that people like Mark Pryor or Susan Collins aren't deeply committed to Wall Street and are instead some kind of principled moderates is an exercise in delusional political masturbation.
