Derid says, "...the GOP and Dems are the same in all but name..."
Except for things like abortion, health care, size of government, taxes, welfare, defense spending, entitlements, government spending, and probably a number of things I'm forgetting.
If they were exactly the same, legislation would be passing by unanimous consent. Since it's not, I'm guessing they're not.
Abortion - social wedge issue designed to split and distract people away from things that really matter.
Health Care - Lots of rhetoric, but Bush Medicare Part D, Romneys promises to "save" ponzi scheme entitlements, and much much more... not a lot of difference. Health Individual Mandate was a GOP creation - the GOP doesnt like the current Obamacare because of 2 reasons 1) it was designed to create additional Dem constituencies of dependence, and 2) Its unpopular so can be siezed upon for political Capital.
Size of Govt - GOP may be for some sort of smaller Govt than the Dems... but its like comparing Saturn to Jupiter. One is larger than the other, but theyre still both huge. Both candidates fully endorse TSA, Homeland security, and an extremely large, unnecessary, and unbeneficial (to anyone but the ruling bureaucrats , contractors and privacy violating machine manufacturers ) police state.
Taxes - lots of rhetoric here, but mostly its focused on taxing the wealthiest, and its all rhetorical political smoke and mirrors. If the Dems really cared about it, it would have happened in Obamas first two years.
Defense spending - Obamas still spending 800B on defense. Romney would apparently increase it drastically - and while I was a big supporter of Romney's initial push regarding Naval spending and R&D , his latest push for vastly increasing land armaments has left me gaping at the utter stupidity.
Entitlements - GOP might have a slight edge here, since they would probably at least voucherize medicare....eventually...
Govt Spending - Hard to see how the GOP is going to reduce spending while saving entitlements and doubling the military. They both spend money like its water. In fact, saying that is probably inaccurate - because the Fed has, under Bush and Obama make sure that money is in fact more plentiful than water. Since water is a finite resource, digital currency without any tie to a real world commodity is infinite.
--
Legislation does not pass by unanimous consent all of the time, because though both parties basically function the same and are the same creatures of corruption - the beneficiaries of said corruption can be different. They fight over "show" issues, to determine who gets to dole out the goods. Both parties are, at this point, basically existing solely to extract wealth and power from the us, and hand it to their benefactors, friends, and cronies.
Both parties are about free handout to corrupt banksters. Both parties are about corporate welfare and subsidies to their constituents, both parties are happy to give free reign to the Monsantos of the world , both parties favor regulation that favors established business interests over the market competition.
Sure, there are some honest elements of each party. But those elements are not in control.
Both parties got caught breaking their own rules, to quash the grassroots at their own conventions.
Both parties are about more debt, less freedom, bankster bailouts, useless wars, and voodoo economics. Sure, there are some differences around the edges - and major differences of style and rhetoric.
But Obama looks very much like Bush, and I suspect Romney will look almost exactly like Obama. Except for a greater religious tilt to some policies and enforcement. Possibly a greater eagerness to shuffle off to more expensive, useless wars. Mitt would probably ease up on stifling energy regulations some, which would be a benefit.
Neither will address the fundamental issues in a meaningful way.