What are the roots of the current divisiveness of American politics/discourse?

[OSR stands with Israel]

The 2004 election

[OSR stands with Israel]

2004 arguably was more divisive then this election if you look at the results. (Except for Iowa, New Mexico, New Hampshire) states that were Republican in 2000 went even more Republican and  states that were Democratic went even more democratic . At best most states stayed at same percentage they were in 2000 despite 2000 being a .5% Gore victory in popular vote while 2004 being a 2.5% Bush victory.

These are the things which in my opinion lead to the current polarization

Clinton Impeachment Trial
Bush v Gore case
Iraq War- This was the big one and when things really started to turn for the worse
Bush ramming his domestic agenda down the dems throat despite winning such a small victory
The Left going of the edge with their hated with Bush
GOP over the top love of Bush
The Divisive 2004 campaign(From that point on things the dominoes fell even more)


This is where I think Timmy and TD are wrong, I dont think we are in a Republican era right now I think we are in a polarizing era and divided era just like we were from 1860-1896. Remember with the exception of 1864-1865,1868-1871 that era was extremely polarization and neither side got what they wanted . Similarly since 2004 neither side has really gotten what they want.

[OSR stands with Israel]

this all why the far left called bush

-illegitimate
-war criminal
- a dictator
- somebody who is a threat to American democracy
- called him racist


All of these were so outrageous that DU , TYT , all the far left commentators should apologize for using such malicious lies against Dubya

[OSR stands with Israel]

this all why the far left called bush

-illegitimate
-war criminal
- a dictator
- somebody who is a threat to American democracy
- called him racist


All of these were so outrageous that DU , TYT , all the far left commentators should apologize for using such malicious lies against Dubya

so anybody from the far left willing to apologize for this

[OSR stands with Israel]

this all why the far left called bush

-illegitimate
-war criminal
- a dictator
- somebody who is a threat to American democracy
- called him racist


All of these were so outrageous that DU , TYT , all the far left commentators should apologize for using such malicious lies against Dubya

so anybody from the far left willing to apologize for this

For what?  Those are pretty standard lines used against any President.

Calling someone a war criminal you think is not outrageously bad .

[OSR stands with Israel]

this all why the far left called bush

-illegitimate
-war criminal
- a dictator
- somebody who is a threat to American democracy
- called him racist


All of these were so outrageous that DU , TYT , all the far left commentators should apologize for using such malicious lies against Dubya

so anybody from the far left willing to apologize for this

For what?  Those are pretty standard lines used against any President.

Calling someone a war criminal you think is not outrageously bad .

W may not classified a war-criminal, but his foreign policy decisions, especially the invasion of Iraq, was a complete disaster. He and his neocon administration lied the heck out of it and made stuff up to legitimate a war. Not to mention torture and all the stuff that ruined our standing in vast parts of the world. For sure, Saddam was a horrible dictator, but terrorism and ISIS are even worse. It's mostly the fault of Bush Administration, although I acknowledge that the end result was not W's intent. But they are the result of wrong decisions made by this administration. The other points on W are garbage, he's neither a racist nor was he a dictator, though his 2000 victory is at least questionable.

But if we're talking about hate for a president, we should also talk about the far-right and Tea Partiers and their bigotry and hatred for Obama. They floated the stupid idea that he was born in Kenya, that he's a muslim etc. They did everything to damage this president, mostly due to racism. They hate him more than they love America. For sure, Obama is not perfect and he made some mistakes. But what the Tea Party did with Obama is a disgrace- and shameful.

I agree , and what the far left also did to Bush was also disgraceful and shameful.

Bush had no reason to be hated as much as was before late 2007/early 2008 .

[OSR stands with Israel]

George W Bush is a war criminal bro

then so are Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama by that same definition .


In reality none of them are war criminals, and actually I would support heavily sanctioning, undermining their political stability , and in many cases go to war with countries who would arrest Clinton, Bush , or Obama just cause they disagree with their foreign policies.

[OSR stands with Israel]

George W Bush is a war criminal bro

then so are Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama by that same definition .


In reality none of them are war criminals, and actually I would support heavily sanctioning, undermining their political stability , and in many cases go to war with countries who would arrest Clinton, Bush , or Obama just cause they disagree with their foreign policies.

I must have missed when Barack Obama and Bill Clinton illegally invaded another nation or engaged in torture.

I think this is one of the things Republicans have learned: be as extreme as possible and then when called out on it, criticize the other side for using 'over the top rhetoric' and expect the lazy 'both sides do it/both sides are equally bad' crowd to jump in in defense and attack the 'over the top rhetoric.

What the Bush Administration did in foreign policy was materially significantly different from even the worst excesses of President Clinton or President Obama.

First of all the Iraq war wasn't illegal (by the US law it was legal ) . Obama did exactly what Bush did in Iraq , to Libya(regime change without being attacked by that country or being allied with a country who is our enemy ) .

Bill Clinton imposed harsh sanctions on Iraq ,which resulted in countless of Iraqis to die under the guise suddam still had WMD's.

[OSR stands with Israel]

George W Bush is a war criminal bro

then so are Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama by that same definition .


In reality none of them are war criminals, and actually I would support heavily sanctioning, undermining their political stability , and in many cases go to war with countries who would arrest Clinton, Bush , or Obama just cause they disagree with their foreign policies.

I must have missed when Barack Obama and Bill Clinton illegally invaded another nation or engaged in torture.

I think this is one of the things Republicans have learned: be as extreme as possible and then when called out on it, criticize the other side for using 'over the top rhetoric' and expect the lazy 'both sides do it/both sides are equally bad' crowd to jump in in defense and attack the 'over the top rhetoric.

What the Bush Administration did in foreign policy was materially significantly different from even the worst excesses of President Clinton or President Obama.

First of all the Iraq war wasn't illegal (by the US law it was legal ) . Obama did exactly what Bush did in Iraq , to Libya(regime change without being attacked by that country or being allied with a country who is our enemy ) .

Bill Clinton imposed harsh sanctions on Iraq ,which resulted in countless of Iraqis to die under the guise suddam still had WMD's.

1.It was illegal under international law, which is one of the reasons why Dick Cheney, I believe Donald Rumsfailed (and possibly George W Bush) rarely ever leave the United States.  Hard to know with George W Bush since he apparently never left the United States (except maybe to go to Mexico) before becoming President.

It is true that there are no outstanding warrants for the arrest of any of these people, but this is likely because they hardly ever travel outside the U.S except for Bush on the occasional charity mission and to go to state funerals: I.E where he has been invited by the state beforehand.

Dick Cheney came to Canada on one occasion and there were protests calling for his arrest.  Obviously he was not arrested, but he canceled a subsequent scheduled visit to Canada without giving a reason.

2.The bombing of Libya was to prevent Qaddafi from slaughtering his own people and was called for by the United Nations.

3.It may be true that the sanctions were killing innocent Iraqis, but they were enacted by the United Nations, not by the United States.

None of your claims are correct.

Edit to add on the sanctions part, it's hard to know what to believe was true from W. Bush Administration, but one of the stated reasons they gave for the placing of U.S troops in either Kuwait or Qatar (I forget where the U.S had their base of operations) was that these troops placed pressure on Iraq and other nations (I believe France was specifically mentioned) that were looking to end the Iraq sanctions.

So, again, hard to know what to believe, but one of the initial justifications in the lead up to the war was 'the United States has to ensure that, at the very least, the sanctions remain in place.'

It was only after the war, and the subsequent collapse of Iraq as a nation, that Republicans and other Iraq war dissemblers claimed a justification due to the sanctions killing thousands of Iraqis.

Any country who dares try to arrest bush should face severe consequences such as economic sanctions , destabilizing the countries politics , and in some cases we should go to war with them .

Also if an action legal under our laws it's legal, our laws supersede international law in every matter . Only time international laws should go above national law is if that country is a dictatorship .


But for America and any democratic republic they should put national law over international law.This is why I changed my mind about brexit and now support it cause anytime an international organization tries to pass laws what override national law they should be disregarded