Posted on 12/12/2020 5:05:44 AM PST by MtnClimber
What are the scenarios awaiting polarized America when the last legal stage is complete, all Is are dotted and Ts crossed, and the winner is officially declared?
As uncertain as the odds of the presidential election outcome, one thing is clear: whoever becomes the winner, he is unlikely to alter long-running political divides within the country. Sure, America has faced worse divisions in the past and survived — at great cost — but with polarization set to deepen over time, the country could face paralyzing political sclerosis or even calls for secession, as argued by many observers.
Study after study after study suggests that the impact of political partisanship appears to be increasing and shows just how much our political identity today is a part of our views of a wide variety of other aspects of life, which often are not directly related to politics. Why is this concerning? In the long run, polarization and partisan conflicts lead to inaction, as ideologically rigid "my way or the highway" mentalities lower the probability of achieving the compromise that should be at the heart of legislative functioning (like the 2018–19 government shutdown or the standstill in COVID relief legislation). The partisan tensions between the federal and certain local governments showed themselves in full during the different approaches in handling national summer protests, when Democrat governments were eager to "destroy the village in order to save it" and continuously refused any help from Trump.
Another aspect is societal. As argued by Frank Newport, Ph. D. of Gallup, any functioning society needs to develop and maintain its social institutions, but partisans on both sides increasingly see institutions in the U.S. not as beneficial and necessary, but as part of an effort by the other side to gain advantage and to perpetuate its power.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
.
I think there’s going to be a lot of buyers remorse should she get in power.
Too little, too late.
On that, we both agree. And thank you for disagreeing without being disagreeable. It is a pleasure to exchange information with you.
Not hard to find
Foster v. Love, 522 U.S. 67 (1997)
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/522/67/
China also cares about getting their people to work.
BAM - got it right on right out of the gate!
So we can understand the enemy’s communication.
Thank you. Very interesting.
Not being a lawyer myself, what did you make of it?
I’m not a lawyer either. I just skim stuff like that, looking for the highlights. Wonder why this hasn’t been used in any of the recent suits?
Wonder why this hasn’t been used in any of the recent suits?
—
That is my question also - You’d think with all the brouhaha about voting times and places, some hotshot legal eagle would have brought that point up and ended the mess years ago. (or at least used it in some voting case before the Court)
We need poll taxes and literacy tests as well; while thrown up by the left as Jim Crow barriers to blacks, plenty of states had them. The poll tax itself hearkened back to the Founding Fathers’ insistence that only taxpayers vote.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.