07-17-2017, 11:20 AM
(This post was last modified: 07-17-2017, 11:29 AM by Eric the Green.)
Decisive victory for one side does not need to be violent, as you imply above. As I mentioned, 4T electoral victories have happened, although in one case (Lincoln), the decisive electoral victory itself triggered the civil war. That's possible too.
So the two cultures may not be able to live with each other, but one can win electorally and force the loser to stuff it and go along. That's what needs to happen. They cannot find middle ground, especially one in which "both factions get most of what they want." Compromise is not possible. One culture will need to succeed in pushing its values on the other, at least to the extent that the country moves on into a 1T in which further conflict is put on the back burner for a while. It's happened before in every 4T; why not this time?
I suppose if guns and the environment are "culture war issues," then "culture war issues" consist of every issue not obviously an economic issue-- which boils down to how it's doing, or at least (in Reagan's case) to convincing people they are doing well when they are not doing well.
Trump could pull the opposite case: his bumbling could convince people the country is suffering from his presidency, even though the economy is doing well for most people (which I'm not convinced that it is anyway). I don't expect the economy to continue doing well during his term, but especially not if he gets his way on anything in the congress.
I don't get your classification of Warren. His perspective is pretty-straight red, especially on the economic issue-- even if articulate and thoughtful.
So the two cultures may not be able to live with each other, but one can win electorally and force the loser to stuff it and go along. That's what needs to happen. They cannot find middle ground, especially one in which "both factions get most of what they want." Compromise is not possible. One culture will need to succeed in pushing its values on the other, at least to the extent that the country moves on into a 1T in which further conflict is put on the back burner for a while. It's happened before in every 4T; why not this time?
I suppose if guns and the environment are "culture war issues," then "culture war issues" consist of every issue not obviously an economic issue-- which boils down to how it's doing, or at least (in Reagan's case) to convincing people they are doing well when they are not doing well.
Trump could pull the opposite case: his bumbling could convince people the country is suffering from his presidency, even though the economy is doing well for most people (which I'm not convinced that it is anyway). I don't expect the economy to continue doing well during his term, but especially not if he gets his way on anything in the congress.
I don't get your classification of Warren. His perspective is pretty-straight red, especially on the economic issue-- even if articulate and thoughtful.