There is a situation where Joe Don Baker played a villain in a Timothy Dalton Bond, and then an entirely different (good guy) character in a Brosnan Bond.

(Also the Craig films are regularly made worse for their internal continuity IMO)

There will be some "Wow you can't make these people happy" sentiment but what's really happening is the Dems are beginning to reap the consequences of not really believing in anything. Choreographed maneuvers, too clever by half talking points. People have just had it

Right now, they feel like a party of nothing. No real values to uphold, beyond the importance of keeping a stiff upper lip when you get sucker punched.

And of course a party based on actual virtue wouldn't question whether to hold onto trans rights as an issue post election.

Democrats may not be at the "starve people to get what I want" level but they're not good people either.

If you campaign on your opposition being fascists that are willing to destroy america, then you can't come back later and treat this like a little brother in a sitcom.
Like "we may not always agree but in the end we're family"

Which, of course, brings me back to that * doing so much heavy lifting in my previous tweet. Because it's not that the Democratic party is in any way truly virtuous. It is much much more important for Democrats to look like the good guys than actually BE anything.

But a compromise is also a tacet way of communicating "we may not agree on everything but we can find common ground for the good of the country"

And I'd argue that there's actually nothing virtuous about acting that way with a party willing to starve poor people to get their way.

Which, 20 years ago is a fine virtue to hold*.
I genuinely think Angus king slept well after that deal was struck thinking that he helped put food on tables of Mainers in need, even if nobody will thank him for it.

And yeah "no pedophiles allowed" is a baseline I can get behind. I like that part. And I generally find it to be a more preferable choice to the alternative.
But, virtue also means taking the high road and compromising.

It's why the conversation regarding the Epstein files is so disconnected.

Like Rs say: what if one of YOUR people is on the list? Then you wouldn't want it released

And Ds don't have people, they have virtues. Anyone on that list who is a Democrat will see an immediate end to their career

I have this theory that one major difference between our two political parties is that Dems prioritize a set of virtues while Republicans prioritize people who's behavior is always retrofitted to be right.

I do not recall if it fully meets your needs but Cambridge latin course book 1 was what I learned from as a sophomore in high school. Very much the "Dick and Jane but in Pompeii".