No matter who wins, the country will continue to divide

[Hit-N-Run]

This is the scariest thing about what's happening. Doesn't matter who wins this fucked up election, the country is splitting in two. Media, big corporation, religious groups, progressives, pro-illegals, pro-choice, and the huge amounts of money in campaigns are too big to change and want this divide. Nothing is going to stop them and there will be no compromise.

I say this country has 50 years before it collapses and breaks apart. China will be the new and only super power since it will begin to depend less on US and more on internal middle class while the middle class of the US will disappear and there will only be the uber-rich and the poor. There will be more distrust of fellow citizens as we will look upon each other as the enemy (Just read some facebook posts or watch the news for 5 seconds and you'll see it's already happening).

Sorry to sound dire but things aren't looking good when we have the two political parties we do and they put up two shits like they have. The system is flawed and no one can change it. We'll continue down this path until we can't take it anymore and crack.

 

[Thurisaz]

Peaceful segregation can be done, and indeed, it's been done in the past.

 

[Gazwald]

Well yeah, that's a two party system.

 

[Fedorable]

Everything would be better if I was king. Too bad my heirs would turn into tyrants.

 

[kpt018]

I don't think the system is nearly as flawed as people claim. Are there issues? Yes. Is there a lot I would like to change? Yes. But overall we get the government we deserve and quite frankly the divisiveness in politics is representative of the divisiveness of the citizens. For example, liberal minded Manhattanites think very differently than people living in rural Mississippi.

And there are certainly important differences between the party but I don't see any of those differences even coming close to a civil war or succession.

 

[Higus]

I try to think of it like this: The system being hard to change is a feature, not a defect. If the country is divided, perhaps the wise thing to do is to have a stalled out, unproductive legislature until voter' priorities are more aligned and officials who are willing to work together are elected.

 

[PrinceOfPain]

Everything would be better if I was king. Too bad my heirs would turn into tyrants.

Very platonic.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I don't think the system is nearly as flawed as people claim. Are there issues? Yes. Is there a lot I would like to change? Yes. But overall we get the government we deserve and quite frankly the divisiveness in politics is representative of the divisiveness of the citizens. For example, liberal minded Manhattanites think very differently than people living in rural Mississippi.

And there are certainly important differences between the party but I don't see any of those differences even coming close to a civil war or succession.

I'm more optimistic than the TS but less optimistic than you. The public tends to judge the president (and president's party) by the state of the country, especially the economy, and also to reward the president for "bipartisanship." That creates political incentives for Congressional members of the opposing party to avoid compromise and work against the interests of the nation. And the Constitution doesn't provide a good means of resolving conflict between the executive and legislative branches of gov't.

Traditionally, public-spiritedness and a genuine desire to enact legislation that people think would be good has overcome those issues. But today's GOP isn't letting those things get in the way, as they've developed an ideology that gov't policy can never work well, and no harm can come from stopping the gov't from doing anything. And even people who can see the problem often get caught up in the grip of the national MSM religion of Bothsidesism, which leaves them literally blind to the problem.

So where does it end? Trump getting trounced might help, but it might just enrage them further. On the other hand, there's always a left and right, but there's nothing inherent in right-wing thought that leads to this ideology. A group of people can be for strong borders, strong defense, slow social change, and a lean gov't with low taxation and a relatively weak safety net without being fanatical saboteurs.

 

[Harmonica]

IThere will be more distrust of fellow citizens as we will look upon each other as the enemy.

Don't worry, this will be remedied the second your country faces another crisis caused by outside agents.

 

[J. Bernie Cunningham]

Comparatively we live wonderful lives in America but our current system of voting between two gangs beholden to money far more than citizens will inevitably lead us to a bad place.

I mean shit our next president is Hilary Clinton or Donald Trump. That sentence alone should send a ripple of fear through every Americans mind.

 

[Devout Pessimist]

There will be a divide as long as liberals will continue to unreasonably demonize and attack the Right:



Nearly a month after their initial event with Milo, entitled “Social Justice is Cancer,” the College Republicans were asked to attend a debriefing with the Director of Student Life & Leadership, Darlene Esparza, and Associate Dean of Students, Sherwynn Umali, to discuss the planning process of the event. During the meeting, College Republican President Ariana Rowlands raised the possibility of Milo’s return to campus.

Just four hours after the meeting, a UCI administrator sent the group an email to inform them they had suspended the club for an entire yea

I wonder how much this has to do with the election?

“We wanted his return to be a rally for young Republicans, just before the election, to invigorate and excite young conservatives to vote for the GOP. I told administration this, so it is clear that this suspension that comes during such a critical election year, is a political statement on behalf of UCI,”


http://www.breitbart.com/milo/2016/06/21/irvine-republicans-suspended-punishment-milo-talk/

 

[Jack V Savage]

Comparatively we live wonderful lives in America but our current system of voting between two gangs beholden to money far more than citizens will inevitably lead us to a bad place.

I mean shit our next president is Hilary Clinton or Donald Trump. That sentence alone should send a ripple of fear through every Americans mind.

I don't see what's supposed to be so scary about Clinton. Regardless of whether you like her, she's a similar caliber of candidate to Kerry, McCain, Romney, Dole, Bill, and Bush 41 (better than some, not as good as others, but in that group). Much better than Bush 43 or Reagan, and a tier below Obama. Trump is the worst major candidate that I'm aware of.

 

[Lead]

Completely agree with this but I'm not sure how it will swing back and if this has been caused from our media/new technology. There are plenty of ways to fall into an echo chamber today but I think there is also a culture that finds this acceptable. We actually have far more resources in the past with news and can easily find a variety of views for any specific issue so it's on the person.

The thing I find with this also is we get more issues pushed to the forefront that most people don't give a shit about but it allows the parties to contrast their views.

I'd like to hope it can't sustain itself for long. If you look at what the GOP primary did, it's hilarious because we had this block of primary voters each cycle getting more and more pissed at not getting a harder right candidate "outside of the establishment" and then the year jeb crashes and they have a perfect opportunity to get their wish, they pick some liberal leaning wild card that happens to just have the outsider cover to him. I'd like to believe this cycle will cause a reset of not the party but the voters no longer bitching about the establishment or at least voicing their opinions with better alternatives. I highly doubt it though.

Add on to this the regressive left wing that infiltrating the Democratic Party and it becomes very hard to relate to anyone here. The middle is almost becoming its own party with the edges being the other. Problem is, the edges had a larger decision in picking the candidates and now the center average Joe is like fuckkkkk.

 

[Abezal]

Murica split in a few nations would be interesting, same goes for china and russia.

 

[Lead]

I don't see what's supposed to be so scary about Clinton. Regardless of whether you like her, she's a similar caliber of candidate to Kerry, McCain, Romney, Dole, Bill, and Bush 41 (better than some, not as good as others, but in that group). Much better than Bush 43 or Reagan, and a tier below Obama. Trump is the worst major candidate that I'm aware of.

She's the status quo certainly. I don't get how people could think her nomination would completely ruin or change the country. It will keep it on a similar course to the past 16 years in many ways.

I do find myself comparing Hillary to Bush 41 a lot. Well qualified but not a great campaigner that is going to get their first term due to the popularity of their predecessor. For the same reason, I think it's very possible she wins and loses re election if the GOP presents any type of sensible choice next time after this disaster on their side

 

[Lead]

Well yeah, that's a two party system.

Generally, you see when one party goes extreme, the other seeks the center and governs. What TS is trying to say is both are getting more comfortable with abandoning the center. I would say with clinton, she would be a representation of the one coming to the middle out of the two but this election really doesn't follow the rules. The concern was Bernies popularity made trump Bernie a possibility in the GE

 

[J. Bernie Cunningham]

I don't see what's supposed to be so scary about Clinton. Regardless of whether you like her, she's a similar caliber of candidate to Kerry, McCain, Romney, Dole, Bill, and Bush 41 (better than some, not as good as others, but in that group). Much better than Bush 43 or Reagan, and a tier below Obama. Trump is the worst major candidate that I'm aware of.

That's exactly why I don't like her to be honest. I'll take her over Trump by a country mile but she gives me flashbacks about how Bush 1 set his son up to continue the Cheney dynasty with Bush 2/Iraq. The fact that it was so clearly built towards makes me worried she owes too many favors.

 

[klnOmega]

People divide, but that doesn't mean too much for our way of life really.

Things are pretty much the same under Obama, as they were under Bush, as they were under Clinton. As crazy as the rhetoric of everyone is, no one actually does too much crazy. Obama screams about banning guns, but they never get banned. Trump will talk about banning Muslim immigration, but I'd bet it never happens.

 

[Harmonica]

Murica split in a few nations would be interesting, same goes for china and russia.

Prerequisite for such a split is territorial racial or ideological homogeneity, depending on the basis on which the country is to be divided, which America simply doesn't have.

 

[Rod1]

China isnt coming anyway closer to the US without some social crisis of their own, how long will the chinese want to live in poverty in order to further the geopolitical agenda of the elite?