I respect your thought process, but disagree that it is Trump. He cast a spotlight on the already gaping wound in unity. Obama stood at a precipice and threw unity into the abyss. I am not sure where it began, but instead of unity after the election cycle it became us vs them. Sadly, only politicians benefit whole "we the people" suffer
Disunity has been a longtime companion to American political history. Fortunately., we have contained the worse and perhaps often benefited from opposing critiques. Brash perhaps, rather than brave, we've heated up many rooms with our rhetoric. The present, however, seems to have gone further. Traditionally the more uncivil vitriolic speech has been from the outside, the fringe partisans. And all political leaders have been partisan. Not sure exactly how you meant the Obama example. He was partisan, and as a never published early book manuscript shows (when still at Harvard Law School) more radical than he subsequently governed while President. Nevertheless, he surely was civil in his speeches and measured in his advocacy. Not all his followers to be sure, but he was almost a model of good manners while President. And I think that took some patience and not a little clear intent. In my blog I was not objecting to the partisanship, but the shouting and the "I don't expect or want you to reply" attitude of some many. I think Trump has contributed to this. Or at least many of his more zealous followers have taken to the intellectual barricades and thrown words like bombs, intending explosions not conversation. And I would certainly call for sanity during every Presidency and a serious exchange of ideas, views, facts, and experiences.
I believe that Obama could have done a better job uniting the country after racially charged incidents. I agree he appeared well in public, but I see that as the first black president he could have done more to calm the incidents that boiled out of control. MLK, Jr. did not believe violence was the answer and I agree. How does destroying a local business, often times owned by a minority in the neighborhood, make things better?
As far as I don't want a response, long before Trump appeared on the scene I have dealt with many fellow graduates from Heidelberg who refuse to listen or read, but simply spout their opinion or view and there is no other. There are people who I have learned to converse and debate with over the years, it it helps expand my view. One reason I am no longer registered to either party, but am now an independent. The solution is not with our politicians, it is with us, the people, to remember how to heal and communicate. Again, I cannot pinpoint when it happened, but career politicians are no longer encouraging that. Lincoln face a similar world of discontent and hate, but he managed to encourage healing. What modern politician has done this?
I respect your thought process, but disagree that it is Trump. He cast a spotlight on the already gaping wound in unity. Obama stood at a precipice and threw unity into the abyss. I am not sure where it began, but instead of unity after the election cycle it became us vs them. Sadly, only politicians benefit whole "we the people" suffer
Disunity has been a longtime companion to American political history. Fortunately., we have contained the worse and perhaps often benefited from opposing critiques. Brash perhaps, rather than brave, we've heated up many rooms with our rhetoric. The present, however, seems to have gone further. Traditionally the more uncivil vitriolic speech has been from the outside, the fringe partisans. And all political leaders have been partisan. Not sure exactly how you meant the Obama example. He was partisan, and as a never published early book manuscript shows (when still at Harvard Law School) more radical than he subsequently governed while President. Nevertheless, he surely was civil in his speeches and measured in his advocacy. Not all his followers to be sure, but he was almost a model of good manners while President. And I think that took some patience and not a little clear intent. In my blog I was not objecting to the partisanship, but the shouting and the "I don't expect or want you to reply" attitude of some many. I think Trump has contributed to this. Or at least many of his more zealous followers have taken to the intellectual barricades and thrown words like bombs, intending explosions not conversation. And I would certainly call for sanity during every Presidency and a serious exchange of ideas, views, facts, and experiences.
I believe that Obama could have done a better job uniting the country after racially charged incidents. I agree he appeared well in public, but I see that as the first black president he could have done more to calm the incidents that boiled out of control. MLK, Jr. did not believe violence was the answer and I agree. How does destroying a local business, often times owned by a minority in the neighborhood, make things better?
As far as I don't want a response, long before Trump appeared on the scene I have dealt with many fellow graduates from Heidelberg who refuse to listen or read, but simply spout their opinion or view and there is no other. There are people who I have learned to converse and debate with over the years, it it helps expand my view. One reason I am no longer registered to either party, but am now an independent. The solution is not with our politicians, it is with us, the people, to remember how to heal and communicate. Again, I cannot pinpoint when it happened, but career politicians are no longer encouraging that. Lincoln face a similar world of discontent and hate, but he managed to encourage healing. What modern politician has done this?