both parties see the light when the opposing party is in power. when they regain power, they then justify power grabs b/c of the grave opposition they face that may strip that power from them.

The argument is "well the other side would do it" and then lay out all the things the other side will destroy or take away or ruin as a 'higher purpose goal'.

I'm not wholly libertarian and don't really belong here. I have a middle-ground.. sometimes contradictory attitude about whether morality should be guided by principles (regardless of outcome) or outcome (regardless of principles). I've always had a balance between the right of the individual and the good of the society. and there's a lot of issues i disagree with libertarians on.

But I think one thing we can all note and agree upon is that opinions about executive power, the electoral college and even states rights has nothing to do, in practice, with how people think the world should work. It has nothing to do with how people think government should be designed.

It all has to do with the opportunities your wing-of-thought, or your party can exploit to get ahead. It's relative to current conditions.