The Partisan Wide Like It Used To Be

TW: I always like a chart that tracks 100+ years of data. The chart above displays the partisan gap going all the way back to the post Civil War period. One can see partisanship decreasing post WWI and continuing at relatively low levels until the Reagan era at which point the line shoots more or less straight up. I suspect much of the low partisanship during the 1920-1980 period is a function of the "unnatural" alliances between the various factions of Democrats from the South and its traditional urban pockets. Correspondingly the Republicans were far more diverse as well with the old Eastern Rockefeller factions combined with the traditional Midwestern, rural conservatives.

Now that the parties have sorted out with less middle ground between the parties but with things like Senate cloture rules requiring compromise, governing has become very slow and pondering. Arguably putting even more power into the hands of lobbyists and entrenched interests which work with DC to create policy below the radar and outside traditional legislation.

Seminal events such as major wars, 9/11, GD 1.0 etc. have always been the impetus for significant governance changes. When those events happen the executive accrues tremendous power which is why it was so damaging to have Bush/Cheney in the WH post 9/11.

Ezra Klein from WaPo frets:
"...we could also agree that this level of polarization makes it virtually impossible to govern in a system that is designed to foil majorities and require a constant three-fifths consensus. It's not good if the country is virtually impossible to govern. Problems don't stop mounting while we try and figure things out. We could respond to this by making it easier for the majority party to govern and thus less likely that we have some sort of massive crisis that totally realigns our politics. I think that's actually less radical than waiting for some calamity to reshape our political system..."