Indeed but that's likely to push people to greater extremes or to reject voting entirely. Look at the next US election, they've had Trump, now they've got Biden and honestly they could get Trump again (if he runs).
In the US you couldn't paint a more diverse picture if you tried but the fact is Americans aren't lurching between left and right, they're just getting the same crappy record on repeat.
The current standard of politics is just not working in any country. The only common denominator seems to be that politicians clearly don't have the answers or they're asking the wrong questions, or more likely both!
What do you expect from democracy? Go back and look through history. What actually worked, apart from the consensus built after the second world war?
Did Blair turned out to be better than this? Iraq II pretty much sent us into these dark ages. He played with presentation of official fact and figure so much and now there is little out there anyone believes. Thatcher pointedly make a show of humiliating and punishing the miners and their communities that has ruined millions of lives over decades. The seventies ended in disarray. The sixties were nothing but scandal, massive hypocrisy.
Saying 'it's not working' without admitting how little it ever did, is golden era fallacy in action. Democracy was always very very disattisfactory. Bad for one lot, bad for the other. Bad for both. You choose. It doesn't work "properly". It can't ever be hoped to. It's just that everything else turns out to be worse.
The current standard of politics is defined by what people respond to. Your problem is with people as they are today. I agree. But we've let that happen over the last decade by pointing the finger at other nations, other groups, rather than tackling the emerging economic and cultural hegemony that Google, Facebook and Twitter have in place.
They're more powerful than the press and TV combined. But we've let them grow into the largest global force by allowing regulatory gaps to persist.
Whilst that remains the case, anyone with money can use it to push their own agenda, and squash others, in ways that can't be traced and therefore will never be brought to account for. People don't really take it seriously, in my view.
I don't know what to do about that. "Serious" people were supposed to take it seriously but the power they appear to offer us is intoxicating, and most of us get carried away and fail to land a punch. We can't resist it. If we use it, it would be for good, and it will work. But we are on the hoof, and let our standards drop. And anyway, it doesn't work. It didn't turn Ukraine, for example. Regardless, instead of landing punches that make a difference, we just restrict our own influence by endlessly adding more to this nearly totally useless unstructured pile of useless, ill thought out, poorly written comments. We cut corners in our logic and use of language, forget about ethics, and our natural supporters respond more positively the more unhinged and less careful we are. Then that becomes the norm on all sides, and we start to lose sight of what is real at all, as the language becomes more about symbols of belonging on one side or another, than a reflection of reality. And then that becomes part of our law, and we can't defend it, but we do, and that means the whole thing is less worth of respect, and that's how people treat it and percieve it.
You want to reverse that, please do. But this entire ecosystem passively and actively encourages us to behave exactly in that way, and we show zero sign of stopping ourselves from doing so. What would be radical these days, is to get a suit, read the daily paper, write letters, have taciturn discussions. And to do so not to gain recognition of someone slyly representing the supremacy of the interests of white men (a la Rees Mogg), but because you seek to be erudite, even handed and fair, and recognise that is possibly indivisible from us as white people putting our emotions in a box rather than letting them shape all our thoughts.