Originally Posted by Akula2ssn
The thing is that I believe that the political parties actually thrive on the polarization of the population. By creating a polarizing atmosphere both sides obtain a concrete base upon which they can rely upon to support them. After that it just becomes a game of trying to out maneuver to other side to gain some kind of majority each election season, but even if they fail to gain that majority, they still have that large enough base to fall back upon so that even as a "minority" they still have enough numbers to cause problems for the majority. Both side can then just claim to do what they do out of "principle" to placate to their bases. Quite reminiscent of the trench warfare of WWI which resulted in countless lives lost for little more than a stalemate. The saying that "War is politics with bloodshed, and politics is war without bloodshed," is quite apt here because of how polarized it has become.
This sums up most of my sentiments, especially the closing statements.
I don't entirely disagree with you, I think the polarisation in reality isn't going to go away but intransigence on both sides ultimately isn't going to fix the external systemic issues alluded to elsewhere that are beyond the traditional stances of both sides. That's how it will need to be overcome unless the people give one side a clear mandate.
Which, they haven't done here.
I tend to not believe so many voted for Obama because they ALL thought he was doing so great (some will of course, as well as those who will think he's been disastrous) but I wonder if enough simply felt that circumstances even he couldn't fully control in the last few years meant they were willing to give him that second term to try and deliver. There's obviously a lot of thoughts as to why things went as they did but it's probably more complex than they think he's great because of the many reasons why one individual may have voted they way they did. For instance, one pundit I watched pointed out the claim that in the US and for women voters especially, abortion is still one of the main topics they consider important. Issues like that remain fundamental for a section of the voting group. So, a candidate's stance there could sway them in the 'lesser of two evil's' direction. That is their right as individual voters to prioritise the issues that matter to them of course. But it's a sign that in election terms there's obviously a lot of issues fight for control. I don't know if it's correct but some claims from exit polling were supposed to have suggested that while the economy was the biggest issue singularly, the deficit issue was lower down their list of concerns.
It all gets quite fascinating and easy to ramble over though. Anyways, it's over now until the midterms. I've heard some fairly mixed things about 'Newsroom' though I haven't seen any episodes in full.