Most definitely not, he very much inherited this division. My concern is with what I perceive as his attempts to increase this division, for what I can only assume as his gain. We don't need any help there.
I'm interested in what you think the cause of the division is? Where can't we agree? Leave the politicians, the fraud, the media.. out of it. Where can't we agree?
I would venture that the national dysfunction isn't as pervasive as it is perceived. Local politics are still quite collegial, even if the debate does spiral at times. For the most part, that is. Of course their are outliers, but local government in general tends to hash out differences respectfully, still. I would say that the "crazy" has become more magnified, however, in this ever connected world we live in.
I submit the end of the effective federal government to be Newt Gingrich's "win at all costs" approach to governance. Prior to that time, a good deal in Congress was considered "good for the country" only when every senator and representative absolutely hated it..... since then it has become the era of "I'm not voting for it unless it has everything I want in it" from everyone, which isn't effective governance. Gingrich effectively showed one party how to stop conceding anything and still get elected... and that's where we stand
Not unsubstantial to this observation, Gingrich's time was barely preceded by the striking down of the Fairness Doctrine in network broadcasting.... which led to Fox News, CNN, MSNBC all swiftly ascendant. None of them have the need to follow any of the guidelines that used to be in strict adherence. I won't give Newsmax or OAN a glance here.
