Welcome to the way politics works in this country. Both parties are collections of interest groups. (Or "alliances" in the Biercian sense - the union of two or more thieves who have their hands so deeply inserted into each other's pockets they cannot separately plunder a victim.)

The difference between them is how they are internally divided. Republicans tend to divide themselves into subgroups on the basis of what they believe (national security hawks vs. America-firsters, social conservatives vs. libertarians, free-marketeers vs. business types etc. etc.) - some compromises are inevitable. Conflicts are apparently settled on the basis of "I'll give you this turf if you promise not to muscle in on mine." Which is how you got the utter incoherence of a party of self-proclaimed fiscal conservatives going along with compassionate conservative spending. Everybody gets something they like, but they're all stuck with something they hate. The losing sides are always bought off with government programs. And everyone walks away butthurt but muttering "could have been worse."

Democrats tend to divide themselves into subgroups on the basis of what they are or do for a living (working-class, members of trade and professional unions, the "noblesse oblige" rich, racial minorities, women, gays, young hipsters, pensioners, activists for various causes, etc. etc.) - the organizing principle of the party seems to be "support everyone else's agenda and we'll support yours." Conflicts are apparently settled on the basis of whoever's asking for a change of the status quo wins, except when it's a government program, in which case, it will be made bigger. The losing sides are always bought off with government programs. And everyone walks away happy but with this vague feeling that they've been screwed over somehow.