Neoconservatives and certain democrats

Ronald Reagan inadvertantly started the current neoconservative political group when he allowed congress to spend trillions more than he took in during his eight years as President. Saying he beat the Soviets doing so doesn't hold much water in my opinion.
Bush II also belongs to this same group.
In trying to evaluate the direction the neocons and the democrats are headed, I find considerable confusion---not by me, by them.
People such as the Canadian paraplegic Jew, and Pulitzer winner, Charles Krauthammer, lend a strange philosphy to our foreign policy: only go to war when our economic interests are at risk, never for humanitarian reasons only. Well, he didn't have to say that; all wars, so far, have been about economics only, with some pretention about humanity. Such as Iraq.
Now the democrats also have neolibs. Not many as officials, but many as voters.
How would one explain the vote in Florida and Tennesee for president and the vote in California for governor in any other way?
All I'm trying to warn of here is that we do not want to end up like Italy with scores of political parties, where coalitions try to govern. Notice I said "try."
The day is gone where we can say that republicans are tough on money distribution, welfare, budgets, and prefer corporate welfare for dribble down purposes.
The day is gone also where we can say that democrats spend more than republicans, gets all of the minority votes due to economics, attach more spending "earmarks" than do republicans to bills, and all presidential candidates come from either the middle south or new england.
We already have a four way coalition and you can see the damage!