The fact is, the economic difference between Democrats and Republicans has shrunk quite a bit over the last 30 years, rhetoric aside.
I think this is largely due to the foundation laid down by the Reagan Administration/Grover Norquist types in the 80's. Consider that before Reagan took office, there were less than 50 registered lobbyists. Today we have over 35,000! Special interests started to corrupt *both parties* at previously unseen levels. Don't get me wrong, there was always SOME level of corruption, but it's dramatically increased IMO largely because it's legal. I mean much of this lobbyist activity is largely legalized bribery.
Not to mention the fact that there is enormous incentive for those in Congress to promote policies that benefit Big Business (to the detriment of most Americans), because they can then retire to huge paychecks in the private sector, or to think tanks funded by corporate, monied interests.
The "Reagan Revolution" created a population of tax-averse, government-averse people who don't realize that less taxes and government does not automatically translate into better conditions for the middle class. In fact quite the opposite.
Of course conservatives continue to point to taxes and regulation as scapegoats for why most people aren't doing very well (or they *pretend* that most people ARE doing well despite all evidence to the contrary). Pointing out that there are now X number of people making millions and billions shouldn't be any comfort to anyone.
Yes, there is a *theoretical* argument that giving more money to the rich ultimately helps the middle class, but it's become increasingly clear that theory has largely been disproved. At what point will conservatives stop arguing their points using these (disproved) economic *theories* and start looking at the *practical* impact to most Americans?
PS---The democrats of today know that talking about tax increases and more regulation tends to be political suicide. This is largely because of the tax-averse groundwork I mentioned earlier and partly because Dems just do an awful job framing these issues. So in the end most Dems these days are basically just socially liberal, fiscal centrists (at best).
We need someone with some guts who can actually frame the arguments properly and point to the prosperity of the 50's-mid 70's (where levels of regulation and taxation were MUCH higher than today). And someone who will put strong conflict of interest laws in place for Congress so that the laws they pass won't lead to huge paydays when a term ends. And someone who points out that high GDP's and levels of productivity have meant NOTHING to most Americans, so we need to stop looking at those things (along with how well the stock market has done) as our only measures of success.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2697193&mesg_id=2697193