The important role of liberals.

Liberals whine all the time about everything and are either stupid and/or completely crazy, so you don't want them running the country.

However corrupt politicians often pay off people who criticise them to go somewhere else and liberals, being stupid and/or crazy, are very hard to pay off. Every man has his price, but if you get enough liberals whining away so the total expense of avoiding responsibility will be too high, there will be no way to escape justice for the corrupt politician or whoever is up to no good.

So you need liberals and you need enough of them to police a wide variety of issues in a heated paranoid manner. However the more liberals you have, the more influence they have over the government. So you need to find a balance between the corruption caused by liberals with their corrupt ideals and the corruption they alleviate through criticism.

I'm trying to make al ist of factors to understand how to control the proportion of liberals and how many and what type of liberals are needed. This is it briefly so far.
:the liberals' ability to criticise
;how crazy liberals are and how much money is needed to subvert them
;how much need there is for criticism ie. how much corruption there is
;how many people are in a position to commit the various crimes and how much money they have

The role of the media and action groups is a very important factor, since hierarchial groups are easier to bribe than an assorted movement. Michael Moore for instance makes a lot of money for not criticising certain companies and officials and the new york times is a liberal newpaper that occasionally expresses some avidly non-liberal points of view. It's obvious what is going on.

After spewing "conservative" in their retoric for the past 100 years the republican party would risk alienating their current constuency to change their name in such a way, even though the name of a political party means nothing.

party policy changes based oh who is in the party and who they are trying to get into the party.  the green party wouldn't so much change their ideology to suite those they were picking up, they would simply add on more in places where their platform had limited scope. the overall policy would change very little seeing as they agree with the democrats on most issues, and tend to just want to take it a few steps furter.  the point was really that the disbanding of a political party wouldn't exactly create a 1 party system in the us.  another party would simply fill in the gap.