When members of the non-executive party make statements to the effect of, "we're not doing anything you want until we get something we want", this is what happens. Both parties do it and this is why the two party system is broken. I'm starting to like the Libertarian Party myself.

 

The problem isn't so much Congress hold the White House hostage. To a lesser extent that's their job. They keep the President in check, and historically it's worked fairly well. The problem is the 2 parties fail to negotiate. They have a serious "me first" mentality. They refuse to compromise and this is why Washington is broken. Every political confrontation has become a war, and it needn't be. They forgot long ago that the reason for the 2 party system was to maintain communication.

 

Gridlock is a design feature, and it's unfortunate that the merkin public education system doesn't seem to get this into peoples' heads.



Here's a simple way I've explained it to people:

If you are an angel and the other party is the devil, you would never compromise with them, right? Why would you communicate with him, even? He's THE bad guy!

Both parties consider themselves the angel and the other party the devil.

The only way to fix the government in the USA is for you, personally to get involved. So we're screwed.

 

It's not a design feature. it NEVER used to be that way. Reagan may have had some sh*t-brained policies, but he never had a problem crossing the aisle and sh*t got done. Now, the only things crossing the aisle are the flaming bags of sh*t being thrown back and forth. So, what happened? The same thing that screwed to economy screwed the political system... deregulation. The American political system is no longer running the country... It's too busy running for re-election.

 

Well, I see someone beat me to this. Still, gridlock is NOT a design feature, quite the opposite actually. Seriously, you blame public education but promote the completely opposing ideal. What is the deal with THAT?





Sad but true





Well, speak for yourself. I got involved locally. What's your excuse?

 

It IS a design feature. They used to have FIST FIGHTS on the floors of legislatures. When people disagree and you can't get things done, it prevents BAD things being done which was the whole idea.



Reagan won out a lot because he was willing to get his face in front of a camera/microphone and he would say things directly to the people in a way that made it not only understandable, but inspired people to lean on their representatives, which is what really makes them vote the way constituents want. Unlike all the presidents after him (and most before, for that matter).

 

There have been almost ZERO fights in Congress since the Civil War.



As for your second statement, you're just wrong. Call any Congressperson who was serving then and they will tell you about the famous meetings between Reagan and Tip O'Neill. The following chart should give you a nice visual of what I'm getting at:



3xgJOY6.png