Is GOP still a Serious Political Party?

Once upon a time (as in, when I first arrived on this shore), I had these images about Democratic and Republican parties: the former as young, hippy, and dreamy group, while the latter as a band of suited, serious people dealing with the real world. Lots of cues reinforced such images. GOP, after all, stands for "Grand Old Party," which is quite odd given that it's the younger of the 2. GOP, on average, consists of older, more educated, more "traditional", more religious, and wealthier (thus more likely to be in leadership and professional positions) than its competitor. There are proverbs that celebrate the supposed seriousness of GOP and caring of Democratic party, such as "if you are not Democrat before 30, you have no heart; if you are not Republican after 30, you have no brain."

The last few years, though, my impression has changed quite radically.

Let's start the with the presence, as in, the last "big issues" of the 2 parties. As of today (02/27/2016, if anyone keeps count), the last big events of GOP have been Gov. Christie's declaration of support for Mr. Trump, the debate in Texas, and the show down over (potential) Supreme Court appointment. The last big events of Democratic party (not counting the running primary) were Senator Bernie's economic plan and constitutional duty of the president in Supreme Court appointment. Alright, the last of entries of both are 2 sides of the same coin: Democrats want to at least a pretense of regular constitutional process, while Republicans want to shut out the other side. Let's analyze these events, shall we?

If one reads on Republican events (except maybe the discussion over Supreme Court appointment), one can be forgiven to think that this is a teenager dispute. Let's see, Senator Rubio ridiculed Mr. Trump of sweating, and Mr. Trump shot back that the Senator was low life and used quite a bit of make up. Huh? I mean, huh? It's understandable that there was a show going on. However, is this how serious people do civic discussion? I mean, how old are those men? 16? Wait, sorry, my school discussion at 16 was more serious that that. This resembles 12 year olds trading verbal abuses. It makes me feel ashamed to host such joke in my supreme legislative body.

Talking about legislative body, i.e. the Senate, it's not doing so hot right now. You know, I heard of something called "saving face." It means that you don't burn bridges: even if you disagree from the beginning, you still give your opponents the courtesy of polite listening and consideration. I mean, those Republicans keep bring up Vice President Biden's quote from 1992. However, that very quote shows the difference between grace and bridge burning. Then Sen. Biden said, "I highly recommend." There was a shed of grace left for his opponents, that they did have option to ignore a recommendation. Sen. McConnell leaves no such consideration. He simply refused his constitutional duty and refused the president his constitutional power. Is take-no-prisoner the way we should treat our fellow colleagues? Is take-no-prisoner the way we should treat our fellow citizens?

On the Democratic side, the discussions were radically different. The arguments over Sen. Bernie's plan focus on actual policies, not sweat and make-up. The arguments are almost put forward as "well, we do want that, but this plan is..." In other words, the attackers showed respect for the attacked, even conceded good ideas. The arguments are laid out in thoughtful opinion and academic papers. It feels like a discussion, not a school brawl.

These events are just proxy to the whole election cycle as a whole. News on GOP side seemed to be generally about characters and their blusters, such as debate performance and unrealistic plan to bomb far away areas. News on Democratic side has been around policies, trust worthiness, and party loyalty, which are generally more civic than their competitor. It seems that GOP is not having a civic and political debates. No, they seem to instead having a reality show about who can make the most outrageous utters and who has more testosterone.

But, then, again, what would one expect? After all, at least a third of Republican party at this point support a candidate who condemned a whole country (Mexico) as criminal, regarded the largest religion in the world (Islam) as terrorist, insulted the Pope (I mean, seriously!), praised torture (I kid you not, he said that torture worked and therefore is acceptable), and generally made mockery out of his country. If this was not bad enough, his biggest opponent tried to out-do his immaturity rather than to remind the fellow citizens what American Exceptionalism is about. The uneducated, misinformed, and recession-stricken citizens can be pardoned for their ignorance, but it's just impossible to pardon the representative whose job it was to ensure national prosperity, liberty, and dignity. What do people think of U.S.A. when a serious contender of her highest leadership insulted her neighbor and insulted the Pope. I mean, come on, He was the Pope. Can we not pay a bit of respect to that?

But, then, again, what would one expect? GOP greatest aim has been to illegitimize their country first citizen by any mean necessary for the last 8 years. What kind of citizens who prefer their country's bankrupt to losing election? What kind of citizens who prefer purity of ideology to functioning government? What kind of citizens who prefer the downgrade of their country worthiness to changing their ways? What kind of citizen who prefer wasting time on a law that has been approved by all 3 branches of government to functioning civic government.

What kind of citizens are those?

I used to think that GOP had a few bad apples. But look at their primaries and caucuses. Bad apples are not the problem. Bad apples have dominated the norms, and good apples fought desperately to save the soul of their party.

At this point, I must ask: is GOP still a serious political party? Or is it simply a dangerous game show that bored Americans play?