I'm just going to watch it burn now.
I don't think you have a choice. The trick for those who ever loved America is to achieve acceptance that it is likely indefinitely morphing into something unlovable and be at peace with that.
Please translate this concept [progressivism] into European politics
Western liberalism is represented in the ideas of people like Montesquieu, Locke, and Madison, and summed up nicely by
@Evangelicalhumanist: "I think of myself as a liberal in the classic sense. That is, someone who holds a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise -- with a modest tendency towards providing some necessary social services by government." This was the philosophy of small government borne of centuries of abuse from kings and priests: "Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest." - Diderot.
Later comes another movement eventually called progressivism, which sees government as a force for good by actively shaping society consistent with the humanist vision of enabling the most people to have the most opportunity to pursue happiness as they understand it (utilitarian values), and so we have public sanitation, public schools, public roads, public health care, Social Security, protections from monopolies, support for the working and middle classes (unions, minimum wage), agricultural inspections, pharmaceutical regulations, environmental protection laws, workplace safety and child labor laws, banking laws, construction laws, etc. and the taxes to support those activities - the things Republicans with the help of their supporters actively work to dismantle and cynically call Communism of socialism.
Liberals come in both flavors. AOC and Bernie are examples of progressives in the States. Classical liberalism is consistent with mid-20th century Republican politics. Eisenhower would agree with evangelical humanist. Those were the days when America's left and right shared common American values such as a love of democracy, support for the middle class and the average American, church-state separation, egalitarianism, and the rule of law. Yes, America frequently missed those marks, but at a minimum, all gave lip service to them. We all shared that agenda, but with different ideas about how to achieve it. The two sides viewed one another as the loyal opposition, and both held classical liberal values.
But that's not the line separating the American right and left any more. There is no loyal opposition on the right. The right is openly hostile to those principles now, but still use the language of liberalism, as with "the Freedom caucus" or now Trump, who would end elections if he could as president, with what he calls "election interference."
What does having a chance have to do with anything? Nothing will ever change if nothing ever changes. Vote for change if you ever want change to happen.
Vote for candidates with no chance of winning if you want to help those candidates who do and who you dislike beat your second choice.
