3
3
0
Are we too divided?
Click the link below, it's a good read and still relevant even if the election is over. Food for thought.
https://www.theodysseyonline.com/trump-hillary-political-polarization-america
Click the link below, it's a good read and still relevant even if the election is over. Food for thought.
https://www.theodysseyonline.com/trump-hillary-political-polarization-america
Donald Trump
Hillary Clinton
Republicans
Democrats
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 7
2
2
0
Interesting how we were supposed to accept Obama’s election, yet Trump’s election is the end and the apocalypse. Every day the New York Times, Washington Post etc print editorials about how Trump is trash. Fine, but they didn’t care to much about the person that wanted to “Fundamentally Change America”, media didn’t even bother to ask what it meant. The same man a supposed “Constitutional scholar “ said the constitution was flawed because it was prohibitive and not proscriptive”. Was he asked what proscriptive measures should have been proscribed? Again crickets from these same Trump bashers. Even Woodward thinks the media is gone off the deep end over Trump bashers. So maybe, just maybe we all need a long look in the mirror.
(2)
(0)
LTC David Brown
My point is the news media is unwilling to accept Trump so they spend 24/7 bashing him. I did not like Obama but he was president. There was an alliance between the news media and Obama. This same cabal is at war against Trump. Fine, but don't pretend this is just the result of Trump's victory, it is also fueled by Hillary's loss. The news media can't stand their failure to correctly predict the election and swing the vote to Hilary. The news media also wishes to remind us we were idiots to vote for Trump. Well these clowns need to get over and their condescending BS!
(0)
(0)
MSG Stan Hutchison
LTC David Brown - Or could it possibly be that those in the "media" you denigrate of are just very concerned over the potential dangerious actions of an erratic, childish POTUS?
(0)
(0)
LTC David Brown
MSG Stan Hutchison - The problem was and is the media reported/reports NOTHING positive about Trump. Trump would have 10,000 at his rallies ans Hillary was having 500 to 1,000. McCain was mocked over rallies the size of Hillary’s. The disparity in enthusiasm was phenomenal.The same goes on today, unemployment rates, increase in manufacturing jobs, etc are glossed over for things about Stormy etc. We can look at “global warming”. Measured temperatures have been increased by 2 degrees. No curiosity by the media, NOAA won’t explain, but no problem, shut up we are telling you global warming is happening. Etc, etc, etc! The purpose of the news media is to report the news. Of course they can take an editorial stance. If they think Trump is bad fine, but they distorted news coverage to sell a tale that wasn’t true.
(0)
(0)
MSG Stan Hutchison
LTC David Brown - I am not sure where you get your news, but I can find almost any side I want to see. It is out there. Yes, there are those biased for and against Trump, and any other's in the public eye.
IMO, the primary problem today is there are so damn many "sources" for any issue that many do not take the time to do a little research and learn the facts.
IMO, the primary problem today is there are so damn many "sources" for any issue that many do not take the time to do a little research and learn the facts.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Obama started and exacerbating the dividing at the national level I think in another few years it will fade. I don't think it is permanent. 2018 it might rear it's ugly head again because Hillary is still around running her mouth. I think by 2020, it won't be much of an issue.
Interesting the percentages about how people consistently vote. Again flys right in the face that Gerrymandering works and even contradicts that political stance.
Interesting the percentages about how people consistently vote. Again flys right in the face that Gerrymandering works and even contradicts that political stance.
(2)
(0)
MSG Stan Hutchison
"dividing at the national level"
We have always been divided, from the very start. That division led up to 1861 when it boiled over, with disastrous. tragic results. Then we attempted to re-unite and move on, but it is evident that has not been the most successful.
With the exception of our wars, we have never been united at a national level. Sometimes at state level or regional levels, sometimes at political levels or racial levels, but very seldom at a national level unless threatened from outside.
We have always been divided, from the very start. That division led up to 1861 when it boiled over, with disastrous. tragic results. Then we attempted to re-unite and move on, but it is evident that has not been the most successful.
With the exception of our wars, we have never been united at a national level. Sometimes at state level or regional levels, sometimes at political levels or racial levels, but very seldom at a national level unless threatened from outside.
(0)
(0)
SPC Erich Guenther
MSG Stan Hutchison - Really? No Landslide elections since 1861 outside of wartime? I think I can remember more than one. Start preparing for the TRUMP landslide in 2020.
(0)
(0)
MSG Stan Hutchison
SPC Erich Guenther - I said nothing about elections. Yes, there were a number of "landslide" elections since, but what to they mean? Let's use 1984 as an example. Reagan won by a "landslide." However, there was only a 54% turnout of the 182 million eligible voters, so that meant there were 86 million eligible voters that did not vote for him, compared to 50 million that did.
So, no sign of unity there.
( I know, one can make numbers reflect what they want, but this is simply an attempt to show we have never really been united. Even war does not always unite us. Hell FDR got 62% of the votes in 1940, and only 56% in 1944)
So, no sign of unity there.
( I know, one can make numbers reflect what they want, but this is simply an attempt to show we have never really been united. Even war does not always unite us. Hell FDR got 62% of the votes in 1940, and only 56% in 1944)
(0)
(0)
SSgt GG-15 RET Jim Lint
1972 - Nixon won 49 states with McGovern only winning ONE state. I would call that a landslide.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1972
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1972
United States presidential election - Wikipedia
The election of President and Vice President of the United States is an indirect election in which citizens of the United States who are registered to vote in one of the 50 U.S. states or in Washington, D.C. cast ballots not directly for those offices, but instead for members of the U.S. Electoral College, known as electors. These electors then in turn cast direct votes, known as electoral votes, for President, and for Vice President. The...
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
We've stopped being Americans. We have stopped being compassionate. We have lost our moral high ground.
(2)
(0)
Capt Dwayne Conyers
If this country was founded on Christian values, which is how the GOP defines it, then we are failing to practice the love and compassion of Jesus Christ.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google