The vast majority of people in the first world consider Republicans to be reactionary, so, uh, that really doesn't have anything to do with a polarisation of discourse caused by a two-party system. Plus, the party platform contains many elements that are literally reactionary by the dictionary definition of the term.
The Democratic party IS middle-of-the-road. It is a centre-right, corporate-friendly party that constantly hews to the centre of the political spectrum and marginalises its members that could be considered in any way left-wing. What the United States does not possess is any actual left-wing party, which tends to skew perceptions and political discourse in people only familiar with American politics. However, you're quite correct in that the Democrats are frequently painted (by actual left-wingers as well as right-wingers) as wishy-washy fence-sitters.
Also, every party's political platform is "The most good for the most people, in the most cost-effective way possible", and for the most part, the people in every party believe that's what they're doing. I mean, really, what do you think they think they're doing?
The Democratic party IS middle-of-the-road. It is a centre-right, corporate-friendly party that constantly hews to the centre of the political spectrum and marginalises its members that could be considered in any way left-wing. What the United States does not possess is any actual left-wing party, which tends to skew perceptions and political discourse in people only familiar with American politics. However, you're quite correct in that the Democrats are frequently painted (by actual left-wingers as well as right-wingers) as wishy-washy fence-sitters.
Also, every party's political platform is "The most good for the most people, in the most cost-effective way possible", and for the most part, the people in every party believe that's what they're doing. I mean, really, what do you think they think they're doing?