America is more divided today than 4 years ago

[Perotista]

I wouldn't say that that's accurate. McConnell stated in about 2010 that the GOP's top priority would be to deny Obama a second term. That set the groundwork. From then on, the right was total obstructionistic, and their followers followed, and the left reacted to that, of course. The big division came with the Tea Party and the vitriol from the members of that group, culminating in people actually spitting on Congress people outside of Congress before Obama was elected a second time.

I don't think things are worse. They are about the same as they were a couple of years after Obama took office, when the shock of the recession began to wear off, and as Obama's administraiton started acting on its reforms it had campaigned on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-A09a_gHJc

The poll wasn't my idea. It is just a snap shot of how Americans view a nation divided today. I am sure those from the opposite side of the aisle are putting all the blame on the Democrats and the President as you are on the Republicans. As far as I am concerned, that is the problem with Washington today. Too many of all elected officials from the president on down are way too busy being Democrats and Republicans than being Americans. I long for the day when our elected officials were Americans first, Republicans and Democrats second or even further down the line.

As long as those trying to get elected divide us into groups, into voting blocks, turn us against each other, it will only get worse. I can remember a time when elections were about ideas, about visions for the future and solutions to problems. Today it all about throwing mud at each other, it is about the negative attack ad, it is about defining your opponent as the devil reincarnated. In short it is about making the voter hate the other more than he hates you.

 

[Montecresto]

I really don't blame the major parties at all. They are just doing what political parties do. While I do believe that the modern Democrats have a core of both witting and unwitting Leninists I also believe that it's the American people who need to discover that for themselves. Furthermore, big government Republicans feed the process. The lure of a 2% uptick in votes for your party in one district or another is enough to make most career politicians wet themselves.

We are changing from a government which produces opportunity to one which provides outcomes and little by little we're being herded into the pen.

I won't disagree with your clarification at all, thanks.

 

[Perotista]

I can see that.

It is very plain to see, only the blind fail to see it.

 

[Reformedfindlay]

It is very plain to see, only the blind fail to see it.

I see said the blind man

In all seriousness, I think I first began to see it when the "Become-A-Dumbass-Today!" party (or as they call themselves, the TEA party) came in to existence.

 

[Perotista]

I see said the blind man

In all seriousness, I think I first began to see it when the "Become-A-Dumbass-Today!" party (or as they call themselves, the TEA party) came in to existence.

That was 4 years ago. But I think the tea party was more of an off shoot of the symptoms that were already in place. Perhaps outgrowth would be a better word.

 

[Perotista]

With only a fourth of Americans registering as republicans, you have a credibility problem.

here is the party affiliation/association figures from 1935 that I think both parties need to take a very hard look at.

Here is a list of party affiliation from 1935 to present. I find it quite interesting that the Republican Party has never been higher than 35% of the electorate and that occurred in both 1945 and 1955. Truman had replaced FDR in 1945 and WWII had come to an end. In 1955 Eisenhower was president and was popular with both parties. Whereas the Democrats have been as high as 52, 1965 a year after the Goldwater debacle and passage of the civil rights act of 1964 and has now reached their all-time low of 29% of the electorate. The Republicans are now at 23%, just a bit higher than their all-time low of 21% the year after Nixon resigned from office because of Watergate.


Pew Research for the 1935-2000 numbers/Gallup for 2005-Today

Year…Dem…Rep…Ind…Ind.Lean.Dem….Ind.Lean.Rep…..True.Ind
1935…51……30……19
1940…50……32……18
1945…47……35…..18
1950…48……32…..20
1955…47……35…..18
1960…51……29…..20
1965…52……24….24
1970…47……27…..26
1975…51……21…..28
1980…45……27…..28
1985…40……32…...28
1990…38……30…..32
1995…32……32…..36
2000…34……30…..36
2005…34……33……30………..14…………………....8…………………8
2010…32……33…..34………..12……………………15…………………7
2011…30……27…..42………..18……………………15…………………9
2012…35……30…..33………..16……………………12…………………5
2013…30……24….44………..14…………………..18………………..13
2014…29……23….45………..13…………………..17………………..15…..As of July 10 2014

 

[Lutherf]

Oh, give me a break.

Damned liberals...always wanting something for free:lamo

Heck, probably union too!

 

[Jack Fabulous]

67% of Americans see a more divided nation today than 4 years ago
35% blame President Obama
34% blame Republicans in Congress
23% blame both parties and the President

Voters See A More Divided Nation; GOPers More Enthusiastic to Vote - Rasmussen Reports™

The divide and conquer strategies that both parties use to win elections is something I have been harping on for a long time. Apparently I am not the only one to notice how this nation is fast becoming more divided than ever. Abraham Lincoln once said, “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” This nation is that house.

I said in a thread not too long ago that the nation has been hijacked by ideology and this poll seems to reflect that.

Leaders unite.

Ideologues divide.

When was the last time this nation had strong leadership?

 

[Reformedfindlay]

That was 4 years ago. But I think the tea party was more of an off shoot of the symptoms that were already in place. Perhaps outgrowth would be a better word.

But would we have known were it not for the TEA party?

And if we did would we have learned the scope of how big the issue is and would we have learned fast enough?

The true question is, what the hell are we going to do about it.

Presidency used to be about two parties working together to find the best solution and the solution deemed better won the party a presidency, now it looks more like a catfight to me than anything else.

 

[Perotista]

But would we have known were it not for the TEA party?

And if we did would we have learned the scope of how big the issue is and would we have learned fast enough?

The true question is, what the hell are we going to do about it.

Presidency used to be about two parties working together to find the best solution and the solution deemed better won the party a presidency, now it looks more like a catfight to me than anything else.

Catfight would be a good word to use. In the senate you have two ideologues, neither leaders is willing to work with the other. One tables almost every bill from the Republican House without so much as a debate let alone a vote. The other filibusters every thing the Democrats come up with. The leaders in the senate before them, Daschle and Lott then Frist, Mitchell and Bob Dole, even Byrd and Baker were not such party hacks as these two. Reid and McConnell, both have to go. When it becomes more important to stop every thing the other party does or wants than even getting your own stuff passed, they have to go. That would be a good start to get back to a working congress, at least on the senate side of things.

You have to have two leaders from the two parties that want to get things done, not that just wants to stop the other guy and other party.

 

[Perotista]

I said in a thread not too long ago that the nation has been hijacked by ideology and this poll seems to reflect that.

Leaders unite.

Ideologues divide.

When was the last time this nation had strong leadership?

That may depend on one's definition of leadership.

 

[Montecresto]

here is the party affiliation/association figures from 1935 that I think both parties need to take a very hard look at.

Here is a list of party affiliation from 1935 to present. I find it quite interesting that the Republican Party has never been higher than 35% of the electorate and that occurred in both 1945 and 1955. Truman had replaced FDR in 1945 and WWII had come to an end. In 1955 Eisenhower was president and was popular with both parties. Whereas the Democrats have been as high as 52, 1965 a year after the Goldwater debacle and passage of the civil rights act of 1964 and has now reached their all-time low of 29% of the electorate. The Republicans are now at 23%, just a bit higher than their all-time low of 21% the year after Nixon resigned from office because of Watergate.


Pew Research for the 1935-2000 numbers/Gallup for 2005-Today

Year…Dem…Rep…Ind…Ind.Lean.Dem….Ind.Lean.Rep…..True.Ind
1935…51……30……19
1940…50……32……18
1945…47……35…..18
1950…48……32…..20
1955…47……35…..18
1960…51……29…..20
1965…52……24….24
1970…47……27…..26
1975…51……21…..28
1980…45……27…..28
1985…40……32…...28
1990…38……30…..32
1995…32……32…..36
2000…34……30…..36
2005…34……33……30………..14…………………....8…………………8
2010…32……33…..34………..12……………………15…………………7
2011…30……27…..42………..18……………………15…………………9
2012…35……30…..33………..16……………………12…………………5
2013…30……24….44………..14…………………..18………………..13
2014…29……23….45………..13…………………..17………………..15…..As of July 10 2014

That's great, thanks for putting that up.

 

[Perotista]

That's great, thanks for putting that up.

What I find interesting is the decline in the two major parties strength. From approximately 80% from 1935 to 1960, in the 70% range from 1960 to 1985, then in the 60's from 1985 to 2012. Then last year and this year only in the 50's. So if the two parties has lost approximately 30% of the electorate to the independent ranks, that seems to tell me the two parties are not meeting the needs or fulfilling the wants of the electorate.

In other words as the one party moves further to the right, the other to the left, they are leaving the majority of Americans without a political home. Make sense to you?

 

[JumpinJack]

The poll wasn't my idea. It is just a snap shot of how Americans view a nation divided today. I am sure those from the opposite side of the aisle are putting all the blame on the Democrats and the President as you are on the Republicans. As far as I am concerned, that is the problem with Washington today. Too many of all elected officials from the president on down are way too busy being Democrats and Republicans than being Americans. I long for the day when our elected officials were Americans first, Republicans and Democrats second or even further down the line.

As long as those trying to get elected divide us into groups, into voting blocks, turn us against each other, it will only get worse. I can remember a time when elections were about ideas, about visions for the future and solutions to problems. Today it all about throwing mud at each other, it is about the negative attack ad, it is about defining your opponent as the devil reincarnated. In short it is about making the voter hate the other more than he hates you.

I'm not a Democrat. I'm an independent. I'm not even an ideological Democrat who calls herself an independent.

 

[Montecresto]

What I find interesting is the decline in the two major parties strength. From approximately 80% from 1935 to 1960, in the 70% range from 1960 to 1985, then in the 60's from 1985 to 2012. Then last year and this year only in the 50's. So if the two parties has lost approximately 30% of the electorate to the independent ranks, that seems to tell me the two parties are not meeting the needs or fulfilling the wants of the electorate.

In other words as the one party moves further to the right, the other to the left, they are leaving the majority of Americans without a political home. Make sense to you?

That's what I've been saying forever, and getting kicked around for it. People are increasingly realising that both parties are taking them to the same place and they (we) don't like it. That's what strikes me as odd, the number of hardcore partisans on both sides here on DP.

 

[Perotista]

That's what I've been saying forever, and getting kicked around for it. People are increasingly realising that both parties are taking them to the same place and they (we) don't like it. That's what strikes me as odd, the number of hardcore partisans on both sides here on DP.

I do not think it is odd. It is after all the hardcore who are the most political active. They are also the ones who are the least likely to notice the fall in both parties strengths. I am sure it doesn't bother the democrats to have dropped from 51% of the electorate in 1975 down to 29% today. After all they still have a 6 point advantage over the Republicans. I do not think the Democrats would care if they only made up 10% of the electorate as long as the Republicans made up less.

After all the two major parties have a monopoly on our electoral system. They write the elections laws as a mutual protection act. They take in tens of millions of dollars from lobbyist, wall street firms, corporations, special interests that no other party has access to. Neither party care if the majority of the electorate are disgusted with them, where else are they going to go? The two major parties do not care if the majority of Americans are voting for the lesser of two evils or the least worst candidate or party. They are still voting for one of them.

Republicans and Democrats will be the downfall of this nation, the reason for that is they, the Republicans and Democrats have forgotten that they should be Americans first who happen to be Republican or Democrat. But that is not the way it is today in Washington D.C.

 

[Montecresto]

I do not think it is odd. It is after all the hardcore who are the most political active. They are also the ones who are the least likely to notice the fall in both parties strengths. I am sure it doesn't bother the democrats to have dropped from 51% of the electorate in 1975 down to 29% today. After all they still have a 6 point advantage over the Republicans. I do not think the Democrats would care if they only made up 10% of the electorate as long as the Republicans made up less.

After all the two major parties have a monopoly on our electoral system. They write the elections laws as a mutual protection act. They take in tens of millions of dollars from lobbyist, wall street firms, corporations, special interests that no other party has access to. Neither party care if the majority of the electorate are disgusted with them, where else are they going to go? The two major parties do not care if the majority of Americans are voting for the lesser of two evils or the least worst candidate or party. They are still voting for one of them.

Republicans and Democrats will be the downfall of this nation, the reason for that is they, the Republicans and Democrats have forgotten that they should be Americans first who happen to be Republican or Democrat. But that is not the way it is today in Washington D.C.

Stop stealing my line Pero! I completely agree with this analysis.

 

[polgara]

I do not think it is odd. It is after all the hardcore who are the most political active. They are also the ones who are the least likely to notice the fall in both parties strengths. I am sure it doesn't bother the democrats to have dropped from 51% of the electorate in 1975 down to 29% today. After all they still have a 6 point advantage over the Republicans. I do not think the Democrats would care if they only made up 10% of the electorate as long as the Republicans made up less.

After all the two major parties have a monopoly on our electoral system. They write the elections laws as a mutual protection act. They take in tens of millions of dollars from lobbyist, wall street firms, corporations, special interests that no other party has access to. Neither party care if the majority of the electorate are disgusted with them, where else are they going to go? The two major parties do not care if the majority of Americans are voting for the lesser of two evils or the least worst candidate or party. They are still voting for one of them.

Republicans and Democrats will be the downfall of this nation, the reason for that is they, the Republicans and Democrats have forgotten that they should be Americans first who happen to be Republican or Democrat. But that is not the way it is today in Washington D.C.

One thing I would like to see, assuming anything is changed, is that the POTUS and the Attorney General be from opposite sides of the aisle. Since we have seen that there are few checks and balances in place, there are no watchdogs. Every POTUS has an agenda, and I understand that, but why isn't Holder reminding Obama what our immigration laws are? Instead, he goes along with whatever Obama wants to do, going as far as suing Arizona for doing what the federal government should be doing!. Obama and Holder are sitting in DC, while the brunt of the problem - illegal immigrants - is falling on the States to handle! That is not fair or just! Investigations go nowhere, and when a whistleblower tells the truth about things, they are reassigned somewhere else. Obama ignoring laws he doesn't like should not be allowed - Holder is the Attorney General for this country! :2mad:

 

[Cardinal]

Of course. The division is a core tenet of Leninism ...

Oh, the irony. Listen to am radio for ten minutes and get back to me.

 

[Perotista]

Stop stealing my line Pero! I completely agree with this analysis.

I first started this kick back in 1992 when I first started to campaign for Ross Perot. He gave all of us some good advice, He said, "Take a couple of steps back, put some cotton or ear plugs in your ears to stop all the rhetoric, then just watch how the two parties govern. Watch their actions, not their words which are polar opposite. You will find by watching they govern just about the same."

 

[Perotista]

One thing I would like to see, assuming anything is changed, is that the POTUS and the Attorney General be from opposite sides of the aisle. Since we have seen that there are few checks and balances in place, there are no watchdogs. Every POTUS has an agenda, and I understand that, but why isn't Holder reminding Obama what our immigration laws are? Instead, he goes along with whatever Obama wants to do, going as far as suing Arizona for doing what the federal government should be doing!. Obama and Holder are sitting in DC, while the brunt of the problem - illegal immigrants - is falling on the States to handle! That is not fair or just! Investigations go nowhere, and when a whistleblower tells the truth about things, they are reassigned somewhere else. Obama ignoring laws he doesn't like should not be allowed - Holder is the Attorney General for this country! :2mad:

Holder is a lapdog to the president. All Attorney Generals are as they are appointed by the president and the president holds all the power over them. If the president says the IRS did nothing wrong and there isn't a smidgen of scandal there, it is Holders job to conduct an investagation that find not one iota of a smidgen of scandal. There will be no proper investigation.

 

[Montecresto]

I first started this kick back in 1992 when I first started to campaign for Ross Perot. He gave all of us some good advice, He said, "Take a couple of steps back, put some cotton or ear plugs in your ears to stop all the rhetoric, then just watch how the two parties govern. Watch their actions, not their words which are polar opposite. You will find by watching they govern just about the same."

Yeah, and the day americans figure that out will be the day that old two party system yoke will be broken. Perot was right, and you should remember, there was a guy (politician) in the 1960's that pointed out that in the end, there's a dimes thickness of difference between the two. They need however for people to THINK that they are worlds apart. This is why I always point to the polar partisans on this board who help drive that false premise.

 

[Montecresto]

Holder is a lapdog to the president. All Attorney Generals are as they are appointed by the president and the president holds all the power over them. If the president says the IRS did nothing wrong and there isn't a smidgen of scandal there, it is Holders job to conduct an investagation that find not one iota of a smidgen of scandal. There will be no proper investigation.

Cynical but true. Again, would be nice for the partisan to pull his support and break that trend.

 

[Perotista]

Yeah, and the day americans figure that out will be the day that old two party system yoke will be broken. Perot was right, and you should remember, there was a guy (politician) in the 1960's that pointed out that in the end, there's a dimes thickness of difference between the two. They need however for people to THINK that they are worlds apart. This is why I always point to the polar partisans on this board who help drive that false premise.

George Wallace was the one who said that there isn't a dimes worth of difference between the two parties. Also I forget who said it, but another one said that in the United States we have only one political party, but it has two wings. A Republican wing and a Democratic wing. Both were 100% correct.

 

[Montecresto]

George Wallace was the one who said that there isn't a dimes worth of difference between the two parties. Also I forget who said it, but another one said that in the United States we have only one political party, but it has two wings. A Republican wing and a Democratic wing. Both were 100% correct.

Ole George Wallace! I knew you'd remember. I love the other one too.