At first, the simple explanation "none" comes to mind. Would that this were so simple, but it isn't.

Look upon at many levels, the Dem party serves multiple purposes.

The primary purpose, believed by a majority of our citizens, is that the Dems represent a political viewpoint associated with an action program. That it, the Dims, express a viewpoint and a program to achieve such policies for the "betterment" of the people.--Well, not all people. Hillbots make up a majority of those true believers in a long-dead caricature of what used to be a vibrant energizer for "positive" change in the country, i.e., for We The People (WTP)--not the elite robber barons who are productive of nothing except their own self-enrichment.

Positive change is therefore what is putatively beneficial for WTP. Gilens and Page co-published an article showing that the wishes of the 99% are almost uniformly neglected in passing desired legislation.

Most of the educated, which is an especially small percentage of WTP, realize that Dims are equally complicit as the Repugnants in fairy tale theater, otherwise known as Congress, deluding the masses with the truth of the Duopoly. The two parties are as inimitable as a medieval joust with wooden lances--for display only, not for harm. So the wrangling, vitriol, smearing, virtue signaling, dubious economic claims are just for show.

"The Democratic Party is Where Progressive Movements Go to Die"

The Dims act as a political spleen, ridding the circulation of potentially dangerous populist outcries for more and better change; not more and better Dems. Sucking in groups like Berniecrats, Justice Democrats, etc., the Blue Party successfully throttles expression and realization of positive change.

So far, we have identified two aspects of the DP:
1. Fairy tale theater
2. Filtering the blood of impure ideas

Other aspects emerge from this analysis. A grossly misleading aspect is "the lesser of two evils" mantra, as if there were were only two choices. The Duopoly does make every effort to ensure that the process is seen in exactly this "us or them" division. Whoa--Trump is bad; therefore Pelosi is better.

They are all a pack of thieves, liars, and hypocrites. So why are there only two such mega-parties? Because they got there with the firstest and the mostest. Dems go back to Jefferson, a fine intellect, even if a slave owner. Repugnants go back to Abe Lincoln, the man who saved the Union. But look how twisted and deformed both parties have evolved. Whatever was admirable or even passable in either party has vanished with the coastal haze, seemingly never to return.

So, then, we come to funding. With Democrats massively enfeebled by the loving attention tendered to it by Hussein and DWS, how is it they have even a semblance of power? Why would high stakes donors contribute to both when one is apparently on its path to Whiggery? As long as Dems have a semblance of blocking power (obstructionism), they are worth bribing donating to.

When the Dims collapse, what happens to the donations, not only to the Dems but the Repugnants? As history is revealing, Dim donations have taken a big nose dive (an essay about which recently appeared here in c99). By 2020, as the brain-ossified Dim leadership continues on its "we don't need no stinking' change", the relevance becomes more questionable.

One might argue, as indeed I am about to, that the Repugnants require some semblance of enfeebled Dimocracy so that their own fund-raising does not also fall off due to lack of competition.
The Dim leadership, if such it can be called (marching on a path to Nowhere at glacial rates) continues its relelentless "I'm For Me" politics (translated: fuck the rest of the party--I'm getting mine NOW). Like good Neoliberals, those at the top of the Dim refuse pile will ensure they get their share of disbursements.

So, two more aspects of utility for Dim politics:
3. Enrichment of the ossified elite
4. Preservation of Repugnant fund-raising near current levels.

Yet, there is more. Party A contests with Part B for supremacy on issues which have virtually no impact on the economic and civil well-being of WTP. Pick your issue: homophobia, transgenderism, xenophobia*, "peace versus terrorism" (now a meaningless construct to promote political ideals encouraging raping, pillaging, and murder of people who are "not us". This of course diverts the fickle masses, who can entertain political thought with no greater avidity that a goldfish.

One might be tempted to add, relevance of Dims includes the survival of the Lame Stream Media by encouraging corporate sponsorship for those companies choosing to empower the Dims. The CIA has largely rendered viewership an unreliable maker of media power, because all the Official Stories get coverage, whereas, to use the popular term, all other news gets shadow-banned.

Thus, two more utilities for relevancy of the DemonRATic party:
5. Diversions from important social and economic issues.
6. Facilitating shadow banning of stories wished to be suppressed by MSM.

One issue not amenable to my limited cognition, is why any of the rich mofo's continue to support the Dims. Perhaps they are spending good money after bad, considering the loss of the greatest presidential candidate ever!

Wherein this essay does one percieve a truly beneficial aspect to the continued existence of the Dim party? I also ask this question in reference to the Repugnants, culpable of the same mis-deeds, albeit performed in a different manner.

Is there a way out? Are we in an inescapable situation other than Revolution? No exit?

[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kELGCwMBEvA]