"RealClearPolitics’" Jay Cost has assembled strong evidence of this trend, including the increased gap (now at an all-time high) between Democratic and GOP support for presidents early in their (first) term, the rising number of states that voted strongly for one party over the other in presidential elections, the shrinking number of members of one party voting for the other party’s presidential candidate, growing negative feelings of members of one party for the other party, and the increasing ideology displayed by U.S. House members in their voting—Democrats voting liberal, Republicans voting conservative.
Former Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson, after noting this trend, takes on Obama for advancing a heavily liberal agenda that forces Republicans into strident opposition (his debt-exploding budget bill passed both houses of congress without a single Republican supporter). Hadn't Obama run a campaign to end partisan divisions? The problem is, as Gerson himself says,
Roosevelt and Reagan, in their time, were polarizing presidents precisely because they were ambitious presidents. They believed that some national goals were worth the sacrifice of amity. A decisive leader is sometimes a divisive leader.
Obama is happy to be in the Roosevelt-Reagan mold—personally affable and disarming as he pushes his partisan agenda. Campaign promises of something different? So yesterday.
No comments:
Post a Comment