Divisiveness is now...good?

[Fawlty]

Whenever there are political divisions as strong as those that develop from two-party government systems, there will be some partisan hypocrisy. That's understandable and probably unavoidable, but we can usually work through it, and often come out of it with sensible policy.

One of the most enduring arguments against Obama is that he was divisive. Now, setting aside whether that was actually true, or whether the measures of divisiveness were valid, the argument was that divisiveness is bad. This is, I think, squirm-proof. Divisiveness was bad for the country, straight up.

Now today. This administration is extremely divisive. I don't believe there is any serious argument against this. Even if we presume that the nation began this administration in a state of serious division, it has been fed constantly and kept as divided as possible. There has been no serious attempt to unite public opinion through infrastructure or health care, which are two of the ripest areas for reconciliation. There was no attempt to appoint moderate Justices like Garland- a compromise offered by Obama, the apparent divider.

So here we are. We must either acknowledge that this divisiveness is also bad and criticize it to a comparable level (even with a little partisan lean, fine), or we must admit what seems to be the truth today: proponents of this administration have changed their minds from before, and now they feel that divisiveness is a force for good, because their preferred leader is in charge.

 

[HomerThompson]

Whenever there are political divisions as strong as those that develop from two-party government systems, there will be some partisan hypocrisy. That's understandable and probably unavoidable, but we can usually work through it, and often come out of it with sensible policy.

One of the most enduring arguments against Obama is that he was divisive. Now, setting aside whether that was actually true, or whether the measures of divisiveness were valid, the argument was that divisiveness is bad. This is, I think, squirm-proof. Divisiveness was bad for the country, straight up.

Now today. This administration is extremely divisive. I don't believe there is any serious argument against this. Even if we presume that the nation began this administration in a state of serious divisiveness, it has fed constantly and kept as divided as possible. There has been no serious attempt to unite public opinion through infrastructure or health care, which are two of the ripest areas for reconciliation. There was no attempt to appoint moderate Justices like Garland- a compromise offered by Obama, the apparent divider.

So here we are. We must either acknowledge that this divisiveness is also bad and criticize it to a comparable level (even with a little partisan lean, fine), or we must admit what seems to be the truth today: proponents of this administration have changed their minds from before, and now they feel that divisiveness is a force for good, because their preferred leader is in charge.

There is no reasoning with Trump loyalists. I'm sick of trying to use reason and logic to argue with them.

I want them under my boot now. They are lying, racist scumbags with no sense of decency at all.

Anything to win. No level of hypocrisy is too high. No level of human cost is too high, as long as it triggers the Libs. It's disgusting and insane.

 

[My Spot]

Welcome to politics.

 

[Lead]

The interpretation of divisive could become broad. I think sometimes bringing tense subjects up is a good thing to do, even if it's going to piss people off. What I don't like is being divisive just to do it and I think that's where I'd draw a line between Obama and Trump at this point in time. I don't think most of what Trump does with his divisiveness is to serve an end other than possibly distracting the public/media at certain times. Most of the topics he divides us over usually aren't worth becoming divided over.

 

[Fawlty]

Welcome to politics.

This admin and this level of division is not really business as usual, it's a bit of a crazy outlier.

 

[all caps]

There is no reasoning with Trump loyalists. I'm sick of trying to use reason and logic to argue with them.

I want them under my boot now. They are lying, racist scumbags with no sense of decency at all.

Anything to win. No level of hypocrisy is too high. No level of human cost is too high., as long as it triggers the Libs. It's disgusting and insane.

"Sick of trying to reason"

The next time you use reason and logic to argue anything will be your first time. Quit bullshitting.

 

[Fawlty]

There is no reasoning with Trump loyalists. I'm sick of trying to use reason and logic to argue with them.

I want them under my boot now. They are lying, racist scumbags with no sense of decency at all.

Anything to win. No level of hypocrisy is too high. No level of human cost is too high., as long as it triggers the Libs. It's disgusting and insane.

The hardcore 30-35% is definitely a problem, and tougher gunk to dislodge, but I think the other 65-70% is capable of seeing reason specifically on the divisiveness. It's something that people can see at every level of American organization, education, income, and political awareness.

 

[Ripskater]

I don't agree with everything Trump says or how he goes about it. But sometimes when he's aggressive and hits PC/leftist unAmerican beliefs head on, it's a good thing.

 

[all caps]

Please find another thread for this junk, thanks.

Dont start a thread about divisiveness and pretend like you guys arent a major part of it. Otherwise just send this hypocritical bullshit straight to the dump.

 

[HomerThompson]

Trump is easily the most divisive President of all of our lifetimes. There is no close second, and Obama was not divisive at all. He was just black, and a lot of Americans couldn't, and still can't, handle it.

 

[My Spot]

Dont start a thread about divisiveness and pretend like you guys arent a major part of it. Otherwise just send this hypocritical bullshit straight to the dump.

lol you've gotta love it, this dude has been banned like 4 or 5 times but wants to lecture the rest of us about divisiveness. Full HollywoodNicky.

 

[Bamboozled]

Trump is easily the most divisive President of all of our lifetimes. There is no close second, and Obama was not divisive at all. He was just black, and a lot of Americans couldn't, and still can't, handle it.

He's out of office, get over him.

 

[gassius_clay]

Lefties have been slandering everyone that disagrees with them as a racist for over a decade and now are upset by divisiveness.

 

[Fawlty]

The interpretation of divisive could become broad. I think sometimes bringing tense subjects up is a good thing to do, even if it's going to piss people off. What I don't like is being divisive just to do it and I think that's where I'd draw a line between Obama and Trump at this point in time. I don't think most of what Trump does with his divisiveness is to serve an end other than possibly distracting the public/media at certain times. Most of the topics he divides us over usually aren't worth becoming divided over.

The division is beyond broad or narrow interpretation now, though. That's why I chose this to draw a box around, because it's the most obvious and undeniable feature of today's politics, and because it eclipses any political division we've seen in a long time, with the exception of Bush/Iraq War, which is a more normal and necessary subject for division.

I think that's a really good distinction you made between Obama & Trump. It's another way of saying that "division is now good" because it's considered an end in its own right, a desirable political climate rather than a byproduct of controversial leadership.

 

[Ortegoat]

There is no reasoning with Trump loyalists. I'm sick of trying to use reason and logic to argue with them.

I want them under my boot now. They are lying, racist scumbags with no sense of decency at all.

Anything to win. No level of hypocrisy is too high. No level of human cost is too high., as long as it triggers the Libs. It's disgusting and insane.

Trump is president. The libs have nothing to run on so they try to impeach him for anything. No ones cares about hoes he banged 20 years ago, we only voted for him to trigger you

 

[Swing]

It's good to the extent that all the people whining about negative media coverage, constant investigations, and public outcry are being forced to realize there is earnest objection to this administration's behavior. They'll keep claiming it's just liberals being whiny, of course, but every Trump supporter who after his inauguration was crowing about how liberals would just cry in the street for a few weeks and then go home knows (whether or not they'll admit it) that it's not just a temper tantrum.

At some point this will have to be addressed by more than petty tweets. It's already ugly and could get worse in the interim, but the bottom line is that the country as a whole is going to have to move on. And I think there are too many independents who are displeased with Trump for it to work out in favor of his garbage demagoguery.

 

[Scrody]

Shutting down rallies, attacking supporters.

"You guys are so divisive! REEEE!"

 

[Fawlty]

Lefties have been slandering everyone that disagrees with them as a racist for over a decade and now are upset by divisiveness.

Let's assume this is true, that the attempts at creating an equitable society on the grounds of race were misguided, naive, failed, whatever.

That's bad, correct? It's bad to divide the country racially. So what then is the excuse? Does that make today just a tantrum?

 

[Squarechoke]

Dont start a thread about divisiveness and pretend like you guys arent a major part of it. Otherwise just send this hypocritical bullshit straight to the dump.

Are you saying that both sides haven't been a part of it in both the mentioned cases? If you aren't saying that then there's no point in bringing it up as it won't affect the question, since it's just asking if the same criticism is valid when the roles are reversed in the same kind of problematic context.

 

[My Spot]

Trump is president. The libs have nothing to run on so they try to impeach him for anything. No ones cares about hoes he banged 20 years ago, we only voted for him to trigger you

Perfect example here. Dems and libs gave no fucks about Clinton getting a damn BJ in the oval office from a Boise 7 and took giant shits on any of his various accusers. Trump says something over a decade ago though and that's worthy of being impeached and removed from office.