Health care: Few democrats pound their fists in fury over the lack of universal health care. Few republicans do the same over completely privatized health care. Most are content to speak vehemently on their chosen partisan side every 6-8 months, then settle into minor debates over details of current care. Is it because they don't have enough support to win their agenda? I think more because it provides a nice apparent divide that they can use to win partisan support.
Providing the apparent divide sort of speaks against your statement, no? We said platforms not actions, didn't we?
Abortion: Just look at the presidential candidates. No republicans call for outlawing it, unless I missed one. No democrats call for allowing it in all circumstances. They just debate over partial birth and other nuances.
Family: Jeez, enough *** marriage examples, they're killing me.
Er this comes into play more than in the *** issue - birth vs adopted parental rights, common law vs lawfully wedded rights and privileges (not just ***, straight too), there's actually quite a lot going on here though admittedly on a state by state basis and often overlaps into health care issues.
Racial Relations: An occasional vehement support/denunciation of Affirmative Action, with the other 99% of the time ignoring it aside from EEOC details. Past transgressions and recompense--no serious Democrat is railing for that. The issue itself is fairly tepid though.
Yeah except for when something happens in an urban area and people all line up on their sides explaining their points of view and rationalizing their own partisan interpretation of the laws/programs (gun control, inner city funding, social programs, etc)
I agree that everything isn't as polarized as much as the media would like us to believe. But there is more of a difference between the two than you seem to realize.