Yes there has been massive expansion of the government, but it is not even remotely close to Socialism. To suggest it is indicates that you have a gross misunderstanding of what Socialism is. Trust me, I have dealt with Socialist regimes and nothing in the United States even comes close or ever has. If you have actually residing in or adjacent to true Socialism, you would not make such a grossly erroneous statement.
There is not some sort of absolute definition which defines when the scope of government has breached into the realm of "socialism". These are just words. I described it as becoming "more socialist" because the State (not the states, which is a completely different concept) wants to assume functions that society would have already provided itself. For you to claim you have dealt with a "Socialist" regime, in some sort of definitive sense of the word, and disclaim the United States has elements that could be described as in the context I used it, is sheer semantic nonsense.
As for your "abhorrence" of both administrations, it sounds more like you prefer to ride the fence rather than boldly stand up for your principles. No offense, just an observation. I fully supported President Bush overall and was not optimistic about President Obama, but I give him 110% of my respect and support as the Commander In Chief.
What you're presenting is a false dilemma. This isn't a multiple choice test. There isn't only the choice of support Bush W., support Obama (or for that matter, any other administration who has been elected or candidate who vied for to the office of the President) or you're a fence sitter. I will support a candidate who defends The Constitution. Neither of those candidates did so. So me not choosing to support them actually is
boldly standing up for my principles.