Interestingly, right-wing parties understand this quite well. If they loose an election you never hear that they have to convince moderates. Instead they get even more radical.
The other issue is that many of the issues that progressives are concerned about (e.g. climate change, inequality, gun control) require action by society as a whole. Ideally we would negotiate and find policies that address the priorities of both progressives and conservatives. However, that doesn't currently seem to be possible.
Please read the federalist papers.
I do not want the equivalent of a yellow vests movement happening here.
Gerrymandering is a huge issue, and it makes it so that moderates don’t have to exist because of safe districts.
The fundamental disagreement about priorities between the parties somehow turned into disagreement about facts in the past decade.
I believe that something like proportionate representation is a better solution. It would still allow minority populations (e.g. rural areas) to band together and get representatives elected that reflect their priorities. However, since the system is no longer winner takes all it promotes finding solutions via negotiation.
Demonizing the other size is impressively the other way. It's happening whenever you see people flinging words like racist, sexist, fascist, and nazi.
Moreover, there is a difference in calling spade a spade, and hate speech.
In terms of demonization, I think its fair to use words like racist, sexist, and fascist when they are accurate descriptions. Before the Trump administration I was opposed to using those terms because I didn't feel that it was clear that they were accurate. However, I do think they are accurate now.
In my opinion, Nazi is only a reasonable term when the person is actually advocating for Nazism which, other than actual Neo-Nazis, is very rare. The only example I can think of where it might be valid was when Trump said that there were good people on both sides of a Neo-Nazi rally.
- Persuasion: I think that you are mistaken as to what is in your best interest, here's why my approach would benefit you more.
- Negotiation: Here's how we can work together to find a solution that meets both of our interests.
- Zero Sum: I recognize that this isn't in your best interest but I don't care because its in my interest.
Due to the power of Fox News and the Republican party's current willingness to ignore facts, I don't think persuasion is possible.
Similarly, the strategy that Fox News and the Republican party have taken of promoting polarization, demonizing the other side, using straw-man arguments, etc.[1] Makes it impossible to have the kind of nuanced debate and compromise that would be necessary for a negotiated solution.
Therefore, it seems like all that is left is a zero sum solution. If the other side won't listen or negotiate then the only option remaining is to implement our policies whether they like them or not.
I'm not saying that's an ideal situation, but it seems to me that its the reality that we find ourselves in.
[1] To be fair, I think that progressives do this to a worrying extent as well. However, I single out the Republican party due to the degree to which they have focused on this strategy and because the fact that many Republicans get all of their news from Fox makes the strategy almost unassailable.