I know political discussions on HN are discouraged but let me chime in as the one who made a comment higher in the thread: From a European perspective, both US Republicans and US Democrats are right-wing, except for guys like Bernie Sanders whose positions are close to a typical European center-left social democrat.

However, IMHO this doesn't really matter because in the US both the left and the right tend to score high on authoritarianism on the freedom vs. authoritarian axis on a two-dimensional political spectrum view if you look at their actual policies and views they defend. That even includes the almost nonexistent US far left. Strongly anti-authoritarian viewpoints are extremely rare in the US. Even self-proclaimed "libertarians" in the US tend to have fairly authoritarian views when you press them about it, they're usually merely anti-federal-government pro business right-wing neoliberals.

The far right and left are always going to be homes for extremists, by definition.

And also practicality. Extreme people are highly motivated to push their agenda, and that requires a party. They adapt and find a way to participate, one way or another. Often simply by ramping up awareness of the opponent party's inevitable extremes.

The real question is: how do the moderates in a party operate, and are they currently tolerated and reasonably well represented within the party.

(I am using extreme here to mean a lack of operating in objective reality, or a strong will to divide who "matters" from who doesn't. Usually they go together.)

There are more options for your own opinions but those don't matter.

In a representative democracy it doesn't matter what you believe only what the person you vote for believes.

Would Kamala have invaded Greenland? No, of course not, and you know it.

Plenty of people wouldn't even count her as "left".