>The "stabbing in the back" refers to how they treat their constituents, and in that regard, my analogy perfectly describes the situation, and this is why they'

>The "stabbing in the back" refers to how they treat their constituents, and in that regard, my analogy perfectly describes the situation, and this is why they're both terrible parties. Ok, I see that you think they are basically equally bad in how they treat their own constituents, but since their constituents want different things, I don't know why it matters. Imagine a simplistic political model where the country is divided into two exact halves that want to exterminate the other. It wouldn't make sense to switch sides no matter how ineffective your side is. If the other side is equally or more likely to carry out their plans, more trustworthy, has spiffier uniforms, better speakers, or whatever, that isn't a reason to support them.