Voters Say The Political System Is Too Divided To Solve The Nation's Problems

The chart above reflects the results of the New York Times / Siena College Poll -- done between September 22nd and 27th of a nationwide sample of 1,313 registered voters, with a 3.2 point margin of error. 

Voters View Democrats As The Most Divided Party

 

The charts above reflect the results of the Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between July 13th and 16th of a nationwide sample of 1,404 registered voters, with a 3 point margin of error.

Democrats Must Unite Behind Biden To Defeat Trump

 

The Democratic Party voters overwhelmingly chose President Joe Biden to be their nominee in the 2024 election. And even though Biden had a bad debate, most of them are still on the Biden bandwagon. So are party leaders. Sen Schumer, Rep. Pelosi, Rep. Clyde, Rep. Ocasio-Cortez, Rep. Jeffries, and others have all made it clear they are backing the president. Add to this the fact that President Biden has made it very clear that he's staying in the race.

Sadly, there are still some fair-weather Democrats and media whiners that want Biden to withdraw from the race. They don't think he can beat Trump in November. But they are not helping to keep Trump out of the White House. It makes no sense to abandon the nominee and choose someone else just four months before the election. They are just dividing the party and making it more likely that Trump can win (even though most Americans don't want him).

I think both sides can agree that the most important issue in this election is making sure Trump can't win. He's just too crazy, and he would put our democracy in danger.

But there's only one way to defeat him. Democrats must unite behind the candidate the voters chose - Joe Biden. And they must fight and work hard to see Biden re-elected.

Biden is our nominee! Don't fight him - support him!

U.S. Is Divided Into Red & Blue - SC Decision Made It Worse

The United States is fast dividing itself into two parts -- one red and one blue. The recent revealing of the Supreme Court decision on Roe vs. Wade being overturned just makes that division worse. Here is Robert Reich's take on this serious situation:

The Supreme Court’s upcoming decision to reverse Roe v. Wade (an early draft of which was leaked Monday) doesn’t ban abortions; it leaves the issue to the states. As a result, it will put another large brick in the growing wall separating Blue and Red America.

Some say we’re on the verge of a civil war, but that’s not right. It won’t be a formal secession (we tried that once) but a kind of benign separation analogous to unhappily married people who don’t want to go through the trauma of a formal divorce. We are already quietly splitting into two America’s – one largely urban, racially and ethnically diverse, and young; the other largely rural or exurban, white, and older – each running according to different laws and with different sources of revenue. 

The split is accelerating. Red ZIP codes are getting redder and blue ZIP codes, bluer. Of the nation's total 3,143 counties, the number of super landslide counties — where a presidential candidate won at least 80 percent of the vote — jumped from 6 percent in 2004 to 22 percent in 2020.

Surveys show Americans find it increasingly important to live around people who share their political values. Animosity toward those in the opposing party is higher than at any time in living memory. 42 percent of registered voters believe Americans in the other party are “downright evil.” Almost 40 percent would be upset at the prospect of their child marrying someone from the opposite party. Even before the 2020 election, when asked if violence would be justified if the other party won the election, 18.3 percent of Democrats and 13.8 percent of Republicans responded in the affirmative.

While Red states make it nearly impossible to get abortions, they’re making it easier than ever to buy guns — even easier to carry concealed guns without a permit. They’re suppressing votes. (In Florida and Texas, teams of “election police” have been created to crack down on the rare crime of voter fraud, another fallout from Trump’s Big Lie.) They’re banning the teaching of America’s history of racism. They’re requiring transgendered students to use bathrooms and join sports teams that reflect their gender at birth. They’re making it harder to protest; more difficult to qualify for unemployment benefits or other forms of public assistance; and almost impossible to form labor unions. And they’re passing “bounty” laws — enforced not by governments, which can be sued in federal court, but by rewards to private citizens for filing lawsuits — on issues ranging from classroom speech to abortions to vaccinations.

Blue states are moving in the opposite direction. Several, including Colorado and Vermont, are codifying a right to abortion. Some are helping cover abortion expenses for out-of-staters. When Idaho proposed a ban on abortions that empowers relatives to sue anyone who helps terminate a pregnancy after six weeks, nearby Oregon approved $15 million to help cover the abortion expenses of patients from other states. Marylandand Washington have expanded access and legal protections to out-of-state abortion patients. One package of pending California bills would expand access to California abortions and protect abortion providers from out-of-state legal action. 

After the governor of Texas ordered state agencies to investigate parents for child abuse if they provide certain medical treatments to their transgender children,California lawmakers proposed making the state a refuge for transgender youths and their families. Another California proposal would thwart enforcement of out-of-state court judgments removing children from the custody of parents who get them gender-affirming health services. California is also about to enforce a ban on ghost guns and assault weapons with a California version of Texas’ recent six-week ban on abortion, featuring $10,000 bounties to encourage lawsuits from private citizens against anyone who sells, distributes or manufactures those types of firearms.

The new separation extends even to government revenue. A little-noticed trend is toward a growing share of total government taxing and spending occurring in the states — thereby making Blue states (which are overall wealthier than Red states) more financially autonomous.

For years, the inhabitants of Blue states have been sending more tax dollars to the federal government than they get back (in the form of federal assistance to the poor, education, social services, and infrastructure), while Red states have been sending Washington fewer dollars then they receive back. But the significance of this Blue state subsidy to Red states is declining as an ever-larger percentage of total federal and state taxes paid by the inhabitants of Blue states are being spent in such Blue States. (A record half of all government revenue is now raised and spent by state and local governments.)

We’re also seeing more coordination among Blue states. During the pandemic, Blue states joined together on policies that Red states rejected — such as purchasing agreements for personal protective equipment, strategies for reopening businesses as COVID subsided, even on travel from other states with high levels of COVID. (At one point, New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut required travelers from states with high positivity rates — Arkansas, Florida, North and South Carolina, Texas, and Utah — to quarantine for two weeks before entering.)

We are splitting more quickly than anyone imagined. But the split raises a host of questions. For one, what will happen to the poor in Red states, who are disproportionately people of color? “States rights” was always a cover for segregation and harsh discrimination. The poor — both white and people of color — are already especially burdened by anti-abortion legislation because they can’t afford travel to a Blue state to get an abortion. They’re also hurt by the failure of Red states to expand Medicaid eligibility under the Affordable Care Act; by Red state de facto segregation in public schools; and by Red state measures to suppress votes. 

One answer is for Democratic administrations and congresses in Washington to prioritize the needs of the Red state poor and make extra efforts to protect the civil and political rights of people of color in Red states. The failure of the Senate to muster enough votes to pass the Freedom to Vote Act, let alone revive the Voting Rights Act, suggests how difficult this will be. 

But Blue states have a potential role here. They should spend additional resources on the needs of Red state residents, such as Oregon is now doing for people from outside Oregon who seek abortions. They should prohibit state funds from being spent in any state that bans abortions or discriminates on the basis of race, ethnicity, or gender. California already bars anyone on a state payroll (including yours truly, who teaches at Berkeley) from getting reimbursed for travel to states that discriminate against LGBTQ people (as of now, that list includes Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Montana, North Carolina, South Carolina, North Dakota, South Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, and West Virginia).

Where will all this end? Not with two separate nations. What America is going through is less like a civil war and more like Brexit – a lumbering, mutual decision to go separate ways on most things but remain connected on a few big things (such as national defense, monetary policy, and civil and political rights). We’ll still be America. But we’re becoming two versions of America. The open question is analogous to the one faced by every couple that separates — how will we find ways to be civil toward each other?

Is There A Common Good That We Can Agree On?

The United States is very divided at this time, with red and blue people disagreeing -- sometimes violently. Is it beyond repair? Or is there still a common good that we can all agree on for the good of the country?

The following is part of what Robert Reich has to say about this:

We’ve gone through the shameful first anniversary of the attack on the U.S. Capitol and of the refusal of 147 members of Congress (all Republicans) to certify all the electors from states that voted for Biden, on the basis of no evidence of fraud. So far, no political figure has been charged with any criminal wrongdoing. We’ve seen 34 voter-suppression bills enacted by 19 Republican state legislatures; at least 8 give state legislatures the power to disregard election outcomes. More than 400 additional voter suppression measures are now being prepared. And we are now witnessing a struggle in the Senate to reform the filibuster so that voting rights legislation can be enacted. All of which raises a basic question: Is there still a common good? . . .

Is there a common good that still binds us together as Americans? Yes, and it’s not the whiteness of our skin, or our adherence to Christianity, or the fact that we were born in the United States. We’re bound together by the ideals and principles we share, and the mutual obligations those principles entail.

After all, the U.S. Constitution was designed for “We the people” seeking to “promote the general welfare”—not for “me the selfish jerk seeking as much wealth and power as possible.” During the Great Depression of the 1930s and World War II, Americans faced common perils that required us to work together for the common good. That good was echoed in Franklin D. Roosevelt’s “Four Freedoms”—freedom of speech, of worship, from want, and from fear. The common good animated many of us – both white and Black Americans—to fight for civil rights and voting rights in the 1960s. It inspired America to create the largest and most comprehensive system of public education the world had ever seen. And it moved many of us to act against the injustice of the Vietnam War, and others of us to serve bravely in that besotted conflict.

Americans sharply disagree about exactly what we want for America or for the world. But if we are to participate in the same society we must agree on how we deal with our disagreements, our obligations under the law, and our commitment to democracy.

It’s our agreement to these principles that connects us, not agreement about where these principles lead. Some of us may want to prohibit abortions because we believe life begins at birth; others of us believe individuals should have the right to determine what happens to their bodies. Some of us want stricter environmental protections; others, more lenient. We are free to take any particular position on these and any other issues. But as political equals in this democracy, we are bound to accept the outcomes even if we dislike them.

Our central obligation as citizens is to preserve, fortify, and protect our democratic form of government. We must defend the right to vote and ensure that more citizens are heard, not fewer. We must require that presidents be elected by the will of the people, and prevent political parties and state legislatures from disregarding the popular vote. We must get big money out of politics so the moneyed interests don’t have more political power than the rest of us.

Democracy doesn’t require us to agree. It requires us to agree only on preserving and protecting democracy. This meta-agreement is the essence of the common good.

Those now attacking American democracy are attacking the common good that binds us together. They are attacking America.

We must join together — progressives and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans, inhabitants of blue states and of red states, business leaders as well as leaders of nonprofits and of the public sector — to rescue American democracy from those who now seek to destroy it. There is no time to waste.

This Chart Shows How Divided This Country Really Is

 

The chart above is from the Pew Research Center. It shows just how divided this country is. In a survey conducted between September 30th and October 5th, about 89% of Trump voters said lasting harm would be done to the country if Biden was elected president. About 90% of Biden supporters said lasting harm would be done to the country if Trump was re-elected.

Joe Biden has a monumental task ahead of him in trying to unite the United States.

Trump Is Waging A Campaign Of Fear And Division

Most presidents run on their record when trying to get elected to a second term. Donald Trump can't do that. He can'y do it because his first term was marred by incompetence, dishonesty, and corruption.

So, he's taking another path -- a campaign of fear and division. He's trying to scare White voters into believing that other races, religions, and ideologies are going to replace them. He's a bigot, and he's counting on Whites to be so frightened that they will accept his bigotry.

Here's part of what Roger Cohen says about Trump's campaign in The New York Times:

Donald Trump has been all about the fear of replacement, or as it’s sometimes called, “the great replacement.” His has been the stand — I am tempted to say the last stand — of whites against nonwhites.

Of America-first nationalists against migrants; of straight people against L.G.B.T.Q. people; of the gunned-up against the unarmed. Of Trump against all those he believes would replace the likes of him.

All means have been used — lies, brutality, incitement. But fear has been Trump’s main weapon. Fear, which depends on pitting one group against another, is the currency of the Trump presidency. It is therefore no surprise that the America that is about to vote is probably more fractured than at any time since the Vietnam War. . . .

America is particularly susceptible to fear today because the world has changed in unsettling ways. Power has migrated eastward to Asia. America’s recent wars have been unwon. By midcentury, non-Hispanic whites will constitute less than 50 percent of the population.

It is frightening to see an industry disappear, like coal in Kentucky. Trump understood that he could be the voice of that fear. He would build a wall to keep those brown people out!

He is an impostor. He puffs out his chest, Mussolini-style, but he is a bone-spur coward. A narrow ramp makes his limbs tremble. He is good at getting the blood up. He is good at undoing. He is not good at getting anything constructive done.

Less than 20 days.

America will decide whether to opt for the future or burrow self-destructively into some warped fantasy of the past. It will decide whether to reinvent itself again or turn mean and further inward.

As Edward R. Murrow remarked, “We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home.”

That was in 1954, at the height of McCarthyism. For Senator Joseph McCarthy, the danger to the Republic came from Communist infiltration of American life. The real danger came from his obsessions. From the purges and blacklists that branded countless Americans as un-American.

Murrow, a great journalist, stood up to McCarthy.

Donald Trump does business the McCarthy way. He deals in specters: immigrants, and Muslims, and brown people, and Black people, and L.G.B.T.Q. people.

As with McCarthy, however, the real danger comes from Trump’s obsessions, not from these imagined enemies. . . .

Is it unreasonable to see renewal in a 77-year-old man, Joe Biden? No. We live in the real world, where the perfect cannot be the enemy of the good. Indecency demands the restoration of decency. That’s ground zero of this election. The choice was starkly evident in the televised town hall events Thursday as Trump spouted wild far-right conspiracy theories while Biden had the self-deprecating honesty to say that if he lost, it could suggest he’s “a lousy candidate.” Biden is not a lousy candidate; he is a good man, a brave man. I doff my hat to any parent who survives with such dignity the loss of two of his four children.

Of McCarthy, Murrow observed: “He didn’t create this situation of fear; he merely exploited it — and rather successfully. Cassius was right. ‘The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.’”

The fault is in ourselves. Time for Americans to look in the mirror — and realize their America is irreplaceable if it is lost.

Are We As Hopelessly Divided As The Media Says?

If you listen to the cable news shows these days, as I do, you will come away with the notion that the United States is hopelessly divided -- divided between right and left, and between Republican and Democrat.

The top chart shows the public now believes that. About 83% of Americans (including 83% of Republicans, 87% of Democrats, and 86% of Independents) say the gridlock and divisiveness in our politics is a serious problem.

But the poll also showed some hopeful signs. Many of those questioned (82% of Republicans, 67% of Democrats, and 76% of Independents) say there is more common ground among Americans than the media and politicians say -- and both parties believe about half of the people in the other party could be reached out to and talked with. That's encouraging.

It's sad that our politicians want to paint those who disagree with us as enemies. They are not. They are simply people who disagree with us about some issues. In the past, we have been able to find compromises that help to move the country forward for the good of everyone. We need to get back to that. Compromise is not a dirty word, and neither side is going to always get everything they want.

The survey also listed (in bottom chart) some things we could do to heal the country's divisions.

These charts are from the USA Today / Public Agenda Hidden Common Ground Survey done between October 14th and 21st of a national sample of 1,548 adults, with a 2.6 point margin of error.

Public Still Sees Trump As A Divider - NOT A Uniter

This chart reflects the results of the latest Politico / Morning Consult Poll -- done between August 5th and 7th of a national sample of 1,960 registered voters, with a 2 point margin of error.

Donald Trump claims he is not a racist, and says he's a uniter that's bringing the country together. The public doesn't see it that way. By a 26 point margin, they say he has done more to divide the country than to unite it.

Public Says Trump Has Divided U.S. & 2019 Won't Improve

These charts reflect the results of a recent Monmouth University Poll -- done between November 9th and 12th of a national sample of 802 adults, with a margin of error of 3.5 points.

Is Donald Trump the "great uniter" that he promised to be in the 2016 campaign? Most Americans say NO! About 62% of adults say the country has become more divided under Trump, while only 11% say it's become more united.

And they don't think it will get any better in the coming year. About 74% say it won't get better in 2019 (with 34% saying it will get even worse, while 40% say nothing will change). Only 21% thinks the country will become more united next year.

Divided: Rural Vs. Urban (With Suburbs As A Wild Card)

 The election last Tuesday made something very clear -- this country is very divided. It is divided between a Democratic electorate in urban areas and a Republican electorate in rural areas -- with the suburbs being the wild card that could now go either way. On election day, those suburbs went mainly for Democrats, and that is why they now will have control over the House of Representatives.

Here is how Frank Bruni describes this division in The New York Times:

Perhaps the main takeaway from Tuesday’s results is just how big a split exists between the more and less densely populated areas of the country. That’s much of the explanation for the Democratic Party’s gains in the House versus the Republican Party’s success in the Senate, which was owed to largely rural states. Democrats continue to own cities, and the midterms show that they are exerting more and more dominance over suburbs and over the college-educated Americans, especially women, there.

But what a mess this could make on Capitol Hill, which is plenty messy already. The looming disarray was especially well captured in Mike Allen’s Axios AM newsletter this morning, the lead item of which was titled, “Two Americas: amplified, tearing apart.”

Allen noted that the “Democratic strategy of targeting women, minorities and the young was vindicated with the new House majority. We saw record liberal turnout in many suburbs.” Meanwhile, he added, “The Republican strategy of targeting men, whites and rural voters was vindicated with the larger Senate majority. We saw record conservative turnout in Trump country. The net result: Two parties with two wildly different bases and philosophies are pulling farther and farther apart — and are certain to double down on divisiveness heading into 2020.”

Is Nancy Pelosi Really A Problem For Democrats ?

I'm not surprised that the Republicans are trying to demonize Rep. Nancy Pelosi. She used to be the Speaker, and Republicans want to convince Americans that somehow she would be terrible for the nation if the Democrats regain the House majority and she were to again become Speaker. That's to be expected, and Democrats return the favor by doing their best to demonize Paul Ryan (the current Republican Speaker).

But I'm hearing more and more from Democrats (mainly those in the party's left wing) that Pelosi is somehow hurting the party and should be replaced if Democrats regain the majority. Is that true? Is Pelosi a drag on the Democratic ticket this year?

For an answer I went to the new Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between March 10th and 13th of a national sample of 1,500 adults, with a margin of error of 3.1 points.

The charts show that Pelosi is no more unpopular with all adults and with Independents than Paul Ryan is, and both are equally popular within their own parties. If Pelosi is a drag on the Democratic ticket, then Ryan is equally a drag on the Republican ticket. And both are more popular than their counterparts in the Senate.

The upshot of this is that those who would vote against a Democrat because of Pelosi is probably a Republican, and wouldn't vote for a Democrat no matter who the prospective Speaker could be. This election is not about Pelosi or Ryan. It is about the direction that Trump and the Republicans are taking this country.

I can understand that the party's leftists would like to see a leftist as Speaker. I wouldn't mind seeing that myself. But the attacks on Pelosi coming from members of her own party are out-of-place at this time. The only important thing right now is for Democrats to unite and unseat as many Republicans as possible -- for the good of the country.

Nancy Pelosi is not the devil incarnate. She actually did a credible job the last time she was Speaker (and was largely responsible for shepherding Obamacare through the House).

If the Democrats elected to the House want to replace Pelosi next January, I don't have a problem with that. If they want to make her Speaker again, I don't mind that either. She has been a loyal Democrat for a long time. But either way, this is not the time to be squabbling over her. This is the time to unite to create a blue wave this November.

7 Charts Showing The Generational Divide In The U.S.

These charts show the results found about the generational divide in America by the Pew Research Center. I found them interesting, and thought you night also.

Public Believes You Can't Govern By Dividing People

If you have to win a campaign by dividing people, you’re not going to be able to govern. You won’t be able to unite them later if that’s how you start. -- President Obama

The chart above is from a new Rasmussen Poll -- done on October 22nd and 23rd of a random national sample of 1,000 likely voters, with a 3 point margin of error. It shows that a large majority of Americans (63%) agree with President Obama that a candidate that wins by dividing Americans (Trump) cannot effectively govern. President Bush offered a similar statement also. 

Trump squeaked out a win in 2016 by appealing to the hatred of a minority of Americans. He is now having trouble trying to govern, and wants to blame everyone else for that (even members of his own party). But the truth is that he killed his own chance to govern effectively by promoting a policy of division (and continues to do that).

Bernie Supporters Are Trying To Divide The Democratic Party

The Democratic Party is truly a "big tent" party. It encompasses many different political views -- liberals (progressives), moderates, and even some reasonable conservatives. And candidates of all three persuasions (even the conservatives) would represent this country better than the extremists of the right currently being put forward by Republicans.

Sadly though, there is now a segment of the party that doesn't believe this -- some of the more hardcore Bernie Sanders supporters. They attack any Democrat that doesn't agree with Sanders 100%, and their actions are dividing the party. Unfortunately, Bernie Sanders either won't or can't control those supporters, and that could cause trouble for the party in 2018 -- because these "democrats" want a purity test applied to all Democratic candidates.

I agree with most of the ideas put forward by the Bernie supporters (progressive ideas), but I think it's a mistake to apply any kind of purity test to Democratic candidates. This is a nation that has always preferred moderation in politics. The voters tend to vote against extremists (on either side), and while they want changes, they want those changes made in moderate steps. I wish that wasn't true, but it is -- and an all or nothing attitude will just hurt the party and the country.

The following article, written by Gabriel Debenedetti, is from Politico. I post only a part of it, but the whole thing is well worth reading if your love the Democratic Party. Mr. Debenedetti writes:

Prominent Democrats are increasingly riled by attacks from Bernie Sanders' supporters, whose demands for ideological purity are hurting the party ahead of the 2018 midterms and 2020 presidential election, they say.

But it’s not just the outside agitators that Democratic lawmakers, operatives, and activists are annoyed with: They’re tired of what they see as the senator’s hesitance to confront his own backers, either in public or through back channels.

Tensions boiled over recently when a handful of Sanders loyalists bashed freshman Sen. Kamala Harris — a rising star in the party and potential 2020 hopeful — as an establishment tool. Democrats were also rankled that other prominent Sanders allies said support for single-payer health care should be a litmus test for candidates.

In response, Democratic senators and outside groups have begun telling Sanders and friendly intermediaries that if he wants to be a leading figure for Democrats ahead of 2020’s presidential election, he needs to get his supporters in line — or at least publicly disavow their more incendiary statements.

The confrontations, they insist, threaten party unity ahead of a critical midterm election cycle, when Democrats have a shot at winning the House and several governor’s offices. . . .

The mutual mistrust goes beyond the establishment vs. insurgent divide that defined 2016’s presidential primary. Some Democrats from the progressive wing of the party agree that he needs to do more to rein in his supporters.

If Sanders intends to lead the party, said one Democratic operative who’s worked with him, requesting to speak anonymously like many others for fear of reprisal from Sanders backers, “you don’t get to wash your hands of all of this.”. . .

Democrats' frustration about Sanders' unwillingness to confront his backers has intensified since it first emerged during the 2016 campaign. . . .

Many Democrats are concerned that Sanders no longer has any control over the vast political network surrounding him after his 2016 campaign manager Jeff Weaver left the helm of Our Revolution in June. That national political organization, Sanders' post-campaign creation, is now led by former Ohio State Senator Nina Turner, who was a strident supporter of the Vermonter and a Clinton critic in 2016.

Last month, Democrats across Capitol Hill were quick to circulate a BuzzFeed report in which Turner called the DNC “dictatorial” and “insulting.” They were concerned that a group with the reach of Our Revolution’s could be doing significant damage to the party’s efforts to re-engage with Sanders voters. . . .

Sanders, now a member of Senate Democrats’ leadership team, never publicly condemned or endorsed Turner’s remarks. People close to him say he views Our Revolution as a separate entity from the political team he controls.

Public Says The Country Is More Divided Under Trump

During the campaign, Donald Trump claimed to be a uniter and said he would unite the country. It hasn't worked out that way. In fact, a substantial majority of Americans (59%) say the country is more divided under Trump, while only 10% say it is more united. Another 28% say it is about the same as before he was elected.

These numbers are from a new Rasmussen Poll -- done on June 18th and 19th of a random national sample of 1,000 likely voters, with a 3 point margin of error.

Trump Is Not The Great "Uniter" He Said He Would Be

Donald Trump made many promises during the presidential campaign -- none of which have been kept so far. One of those promises was to be a uniter -- bringing Americans together for the good of the country. That's just another broken promise.

If anything, Trump has been just the opposite of a uniter -- he's been a divider. Only 11% of the population believes he has made the country more united, while 34% say it has stayed the same and 52% say he has further divided the country. And those feelings are generally the same across gender, age, and racial lines (with far more saying he's been a divider than say he's been a uniter).

These numbers are from a recent Monmouth University Poll -- done between March 2nd and 5th of a random national sample of 801 adults, with a margin of error of 3.5 points.

The United States Is A Very Divided Country

The charts above are from a new survey by the Pew Research Center -- done between January 4th and 9th of a random national sample of 1,502 adults, with a margin of error of 2.9 points. It shows the United States is a divided country right now -- with 86% believing it is more divided than in the past.

If Trump and the congressional Republicans were smart, they would reach out to Democrats to find compromises that could bring the country together. I doubt that will happen though. In the last few years, the Republicans have shown no interest in any kind of compromise (regardless of how good it would have been for the country).

I hope I'm wrong, but I expect them to continue to try and force their extremist right-wing agenda on all Americans -- and that will insure the current divisions not only continue, but grow even wider.