The divisive rhetoric is part of a deliberate campaign to spread unrest by China and Russia, among other actors. The Citizens United ruling gave them unlimited spending power.
Don't take my word for it, this guy could see it coming 12 years ago:
And you’d think that reducing corporate and even foreign influence over our elections would not be a partisan issue. But of course, this is Washington in 2010. And the Republican leadership in the Senate is once again using every tactic and every maneuver they can to prevent the DISCLOSE Act from even coming up for an up or down vote.
--BHO
"last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests - including foreign corporations - to spend without limit in our elections"
In response to this criticism of their recent ruling, Justice Samuel Alito shook his head and appeared to mouth "Not true."
Imagine a world where there was no other country but the United States, and even feel free to go back to 2010 or even earlier, if you want. Would politicians now somehow stop actively agitating and otherizing? Would the media stop doing the same as well? After all, it sells.
And on the individual (or grassroots) level it's really no different. Post bias affirming rage-bait drivel and get all the dopamine-hit-generating upvotes in social media one might ever want. Measured analysis? Meh, who cares about that.
And in the "real world" as well. As but one example higher educational attainment is strongly associated with dramatic increases in the perception gap [1] in society. And that gap is one of the primary driving factors in the divisiveness at all levels from politicians on down to you and I.
The conclusion? Americans have a deeply distorted understanding of each other. We call this America’s “Perception Gap”. Overall, Democrats and Republicans imagine almost twice as many of their political opponents as reality hold views they consider “extreme”. Even on the most controversial issues in our national debates, Americans are less divided than most of us think.
This would be a great time to explain why More In Common is not part of the propoganda effort. You have offices in France, Germany and the UK (according to your web page) yet you focus on the USA. You also have an 8 month old account with a few non-sequitur posts.
TL:DR; I've been doing this since 'palestine' would clumsily summon the I***i bots.
Yet it's funny how BHO's party whipped up the Trump + Russia connection, fed that fiction to their left leaning media co-conspirators, and both enties played pile on (the BS).
Yet BO didn't have anything to say about that. He's a great spokesperson. A great orator. But there are too many instance where credibility is questionable. The Paris Climate Agreement immediately comes to mind.
The divisive rhetoric is part of a deliberate campaign to spread unrest by China and Russia, among other actors. The Citizens United ruling gave them unlimited spending power.
Don't take my word for it, this guy could see it coming 12 years ago:
And you’d think that reducing corporate and even foreign influence over our elections would not be a partisan issue. But of course, this is Washington in 2010. And the Republican leadership in the Senate is once again using every tactic and every maneuver they can to prevent the DISCLOSE Act from even coming up for an up or down vote.
--BHO
"last week, the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests - including foreign corporations - to spend without limit in our elections"
In response to this criticism of their recent ruling, Justice Samuel Alito shook his head and appeared to mouth "Not true."
--BHO