Eh.  When your attempted 'sophistry' consists of either abjectly failing to understand what I said (at best) or deliberately erecting straw-men (more likely) it makes me less inclined to continue the discussion, as I see no point in debating someone whose arguments are predicated on dishonesty.

We'll start with how you mischaracterized my arguments, then you can say something abjectly stupid and/or dishonest, and we can continue from there until you pass my boredom threshold:

(1) My dislike for either major political party doesn't mean I don't like ANYTHING
(2) You didn't ASK what my choices are, you proclaimed the Demopignicans and the Repignicrats to be the only VIABLE ones.  I disagree.
(3) Because I didn't go into detailed descriptions of mechanisms whereby I believe "authorities" can be held accountable doesn't mean "I don't know how or why" such accountability can be attained.
(4) I wasn't referring to politicians as the 2%.  I was referring to those they serve (cont. below):