So for the past several years, we've had a Congress where the GOP dominates both houses. And the White House is occupied by a Democrat.
How has that worked out?
No, really.
We've had a Republican Congress posturing about what it wants to undo about the Obama legacy, about stopping the Obama Administration, about endless attempts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, about going to any length, even shutting down the government, in order to Stop. Obama. Any. Way. Possible.
Every indication is that the GOP will continue that into a Clinton presidency. For example, multiple GOP Senators have said that they will oppose any Supreme Court Justice nominated by Clinton. Not for what a given individual jurist seeks to do, or believes, or has a history on the bench about — but solely because Clinton has nominated them.
That, in turn, leaves us with a weakened Supreme Court. It means that ties go to — well, whichever lower Federal Court ruled. It means that law and precedent across the nation varies, fraying the threads that make us a United States.
We've had split Congresses before — one chamber Republican, the other Democratic. The result then was not necessarily gridlock, but compromise. Important issues had to be decided jointly. It wasn't necessarily pleasant, but government worked.
I'll confess I've an ideological bias. But outside of partisan politics, I can't see that another 4-8 years of a Republican-dominated Congress and a Democratic President is going to be of value to this nation. If you think that Hillary Clinton is a better choice for President, it makes no sense to vote that way and elect a Republican-dominated Senate.
Right now, after at one point standing at 2-1 odds on 538 that the Dems would take the majority in the Senate, it now stands at roughly 50:50.
If you are in one of those Senate swing states — Missouri, Indiana, North Carolina, but also New Hampshire, Nevada, Pennsylvania — please consider helping turn the Senate to the Democrats. Hell, given how goofy the Dems are, a slim Democratic majority is hardly a blank check to Wild Socialist Excess and Fiendish Leftist Witchery from The Hillary, in legislation or in judicial appointments. But it might mean that, in conjunction with a GOP-dominated House, we might get a Congress that halfway functions.
Wouldn't that be refreshing?
In Missouri, voted Blue.
I'm pretty sure that at some level the electorate is doing this on purpose: setting a president against an opposition congress for what people see as balance. I think there are a lot of people who would prefer government not do much, over government doing much in either leftist or rightist directions.
+John Bump There is probably some of that, and probably some of "my senator, right or wrong" as well (the power of incumbency).
I am okay with a bit of friction in the gears of government. I worry when the whole drive train seizes up because of it.
There is also a strong constituency that wants the whole drivetrain to seize up, and that's a completely different and serious problem.