Replies

Way back in #49 I told ya that. ""The Reagan era did not even come close, even though some nut bar did attempted to kill him."" Were talking about being divided right? The ding who shot Reagan had zip to do with politics. And the press had nothing to do with it either. The nutjob was trying to impress some celebrity. A mental case.

Again the level of division now does not compare to the Reagan Reagan era. Not even close.

The ding who shot Reagan had zip to do with politics. And the press had nothing to do with it either. The nutjob was trying to impress some celebrity. A mental case.

Dings get worked up by what they see and hear on TV, that is the point. I don't remember Reagan ever getting a fair shake from the Democrats or the press. I remember report after report at how stupid he was or how he was too old.

Reagan was successful despite a system that was polarized against him. You can't look at Reagan's successes and think "Oh! Reagan was successful because we just weren't as divided then as we are now". I think that diminishes just what Reagan accomplished. Reagan had to work with Tip O'Neal as speaker of the house, a Democrat.

Also in hind sight the Conservative politicians were sprinkled between the 2 parties. Over time Conservatives have drifted over to the Republican Party and the Northeast liberal republicans have drifted over to the democrat party. This gives the appearance of more polarization today but it was alive and well in the 80s.

In 2000 Walter Williams wrote an editorial "It's Time to Part Company" calling for secession of conservatives from the US and proposing taking Louisiana and Texas as the states that should form a new Conservative nation. He didn't write that because we had just started to become divided, he wrote that because he realized that we have always been that divided and that the only solution is to go our separate ways.