>>>JR, I'd like to agree with you. There's only one problem - your view of the Obama administration has changed, now that they're out of power.
>
>What I recall re Victor's "holy wars" was dismay at the state forcing the Little Sisters of the Poor to include contraception in their healthcare plan. No change there. I also noted when Trump overturned that- he even went and visited the Little Sisters. Not as exciting as the imminent impeachment for obstucting justice under Stormy's Russian skirts and 123,342,243 lies per millisecond, but some of us notice what goes on in real life.
>
>I also supported individual mandate and remain dismayed at its eradication by current Congress. I struggle to understand Republican thinking- unless they're so partisan that dismantling ACA is worth any amount of blood spilled, not their own of course. So no change there, either.
>
>I expressed no opinion about "ripping" kids away from parents if they illegally cross a border, since previous administrations were given a pass on that one. But I'm also dismayed at the patronizing attitude shown towards people who cross the border with kids. Apparently the parents (assuming they are the parents) don't really know what they did or risked... and yet it's inhumane unless you release such incompetent people without supervision in the expectation they'll turn up later for a court hearing. Then you hear that more than 50% of Democrats believe illegal immigrants should be allowed to vote. If people are so worried about foreign interference in US elections, why not start there?
>
>>>Observation: you do seem to show great deference for whoever is at the wheel at the time. To a certain degree that's understandable, though there's a fine line between that and revisionist history.
>
>Alternatively, perhaps I agree or disagree with individual policies rather than fawning praise or demonization for the individual. As an example of policy, your healthcare funding is headed for the rocks and even higher costs because of the crude partisan political gridlock you've foist on yourselves. Somebody like Trump is your best hope at disrupting the deadlocks, but there's too much "resistance" and activist judges delaying progress by months or years before they can be overturned by a higher court. One of the major weaknesses of your system is that overtly political activist judges face no penalty or censure. As an example, the Hawaiian judge who blocked Trump's temporary travel ban even though Hawaii receives few if any travelers from dangerous places, took months to be overturned by a higher court- but there are thousands more like him and he just carries on and can do it again at will. It will only stop when Trump or somebody like Trump ignores a daft court order. Watch the heads explode when that happens.
>
>>>I'm not suggesting that 30 years from now, we'll see the same thing with the legacy of Trump. But this is definitely food for thought.
>
>When you see all the power arrayed against him, at a minimum he's smoked out things that ought to concern the citizenry. Right now there's a meme forming that society needs to decide between "resistance" and "growth." If that gets traction, the bubble dwellers have a day of reckoning coming.

I've noticed over the past several years that we seem to be doing more talking/listening about events than actually watching or participating in them.


When I (rarely) watch an NFL game there's more time spent (pre game, half time, post game) talking about the event than watching it


Baseball is off the charts. There are TV stations that do nothing but talk about baseball all day.


So, it's become with politics. The ad nauseum rehash of reactions to reactions has replaced good old politicking.

Not so at the local level though. There are some good local races coming up and I'll be out there knocking on doors.