While both the GOP and the Democratic party are filled with humans (work with me here) who are prey to all the foibles and cognitive biases that humans are saddled with, the idea that Democrats and Republicans are equally reflexively partisan simply doesn't hold up.
As the article notes, as an example, while Republicans polled as stoutly opposed to Obama's militarily striking Syria for its gas attacks back in the day, they are gung-ho over Trump doing so. Democrats polled … come up with largely the same numbers against the whole idea regardless of who's in the CinC chair.
Similarly, while Republicans feel the economy is doing yugely better than it was just a few short months ago (and well before any significant impact could be expected from any Trump policy changes), Democrats … don't seem to have significantly changed their opinion on the matter.
This isn't to say that Dems are all cool, rational, consistent philosophers, and GOPers are hot-headed knee-jerk hyper-partisans (or even that all Dems are alike or all GOPers are alike). But in at least these two cases, the suggestion that "Well, that's how people on both sides react when their guy is in charge or not in charge" simply doesn't hold water.
On Syria, ‘reflexive partisanship’ doesn’t apply to both parties
GOP voters opposed Obama’s approach to Syria because it was Obama’s approach, and support Trump’s offensive because it’s Trump’s offensive.
plus.google.com – Photo – Google+
Ummm …yeah. They don't call him "Obomber" for no reason.
But +Dave Hill , how can our useless press maintain the illusion of centristism and the "View-from-nowhere" that they cling to to justify not actually doing their jobs with out the constant parroting of "Both side do it"?
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-PTVRITkMMrw/WOlZP3heSdI/AAAAAAAFbls/FPbrzCs9rpsHRzTskA3vNYxpuRD7LWGlQCJoC/w480-h320-p-rw/001