I have no idea of what the relevancy of this is.
I believe you. You haven’t the foggiest.
That is kind of unproductive, even when having a discussion with someone who seems to be being deliberately obtuse.
I am strengthened and enriched by your criticism.
Now this, this, both sides do roughly equally! 
Well, sure, but hardly anyone uses underline…
Both sides have people on the fringes with crazy ideas.
The difference is that the far right wing of the Republican Party has galvanized into the Tea Party, a group that has a lot of clout in the overall makeup of the party with a rather large influence on it as a whole.
The far left? There is no far left equivalent to the Tea Party. The farthest left in the party at a national level are a few outliers with no real power and they don’t tend to have crazy ideas, they just have liberal ones. Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders are not bat-shit crazy, they just have ideas that the mainstream Democrats have not embraced and lack a coalition to force the issue.
Also, while there are loony people on the left, they rarely if ever achieve the kind of stature that the wingnuts of the GOP have. Maxine Waters won’t be debating Hillary for the Democratic nomination in 2016.
Whereas the 2012 Republican debates were a fucking clown car.
When Hillary wins the nomination, she won’t be picking Charles Rangel for her running mate. Whereas McCain picked Palin.
These are key differences. So maybe it’s not that both sides don’t do it, but one side does it with a lot more frequency, a lot more influence, and with a much higher profile. Which means they’re not equal even if they both do it.
This post has been underlined by the … oh, never mind.
I might put it differently. The far-left is more fractured than the far right. PETA and Greenpeace are easily as crazy as the far-right but their goals are (largely) independent of each other and don’t have the same clout. The far-right, perhaps galvanized by the socialist Obama, has a bigger tent for everyone.
You’re proving my point. Does Greenpeace or PETA have anywhere near the impact on policy as the NRA or American Family Association?
Obama is not a socialist. He isn’t even a liberal. In my opinion the closed match to him in the modern era is Nixon.
That’s to be expected, seeing as how they are so inclusive, accepting and open-minded.
deeg, how many people in the US supported North Vietnam? How many as a percentage of the American Left? What is your threshold for a “nontrivial” number?
There have been a fair number of cases in recent years that liberals have been quite upset about, like Citizens United, Shelby County and Hobby Lobby. But unlike a number of major Republican figures, no notable Dems or influential lefties have suggested that Justices face recall elections (Cruz), or that the Supreme Court should be done away with entirely (Jindal).
No, I disagree with all of them. The real problem is proving these beliefs are liberal or left wing. Are they left wing economically or socially?
Hell, what he’s doing with the TPP shows he’s authoritarian. Let’s all make backroom deals with other countries in secret.
Note that this is, per the OP, “a thread to collect instances of stuff that Republicans do and say that has no equivalent on the Dem side, at least not among actual officeholders and other major party figures.”
If there are any “Liberal crystal-lovers, anti-nuke and anti-GMO groups, Gaia worshipers, pagans, vortex seekers, [or] astrologers” among actual officeholders and other major Democratic party figures, I damned sure haven’t heard of them.
Jerry Brown?
I’ve only ever heard of one astrologer in politics, and that wasn’t in a Democratic White House.