I kind of liked the idea of having one party control the executive and the other the legislature. Kept a bit of a lid on Government, always a good thing.
One thing people usually overlook when they talk about the dominance of the Democratic Party from Roosevelt until Johnson was that the government was divided govt despite the huge Democratic majorities, especially in the House. The Dixiecrats and the northeastern wing of the party often were at odds with each other, and what came to be called the "Rockefeller" wing of the Republican Party would as often vote with the northeastern Democrats as not.
Voltaire said something about religion that may apply here: when you have one religion that is dominant, you get tyranny, when you have two that are about equal, you get civil war, when you have many religions, you get tolerance. I think we're getting a kind of civil war here, but one of the religions isn't really quite clear about its foundations, while the other may be clear but its members are actually "clear" about different things, though they are loath to admit this, since their current political strength derives from their electoral unity. Each group thinks it can maneuver to get most of it what it wants from this not really totally kosher coalition, but what they each really want is often mutually exclusive. |
