Conflict can be good because it opens minds, breeds creativity and impedes stagnation. However, too much conflict can be harmful if it fails to get anything done whatsoever. This is the same problem with the Congress that is now at its most polarized in over a hundred years. There used to be some overlap within the parties when it came down to voting, “moderate Republicans often voted to the left of the most conservative Democrats” (Moss). This is no longer the case especially if we look at how the Congress passed the Medicare bill in 1965 while the Obamacare did not get one single vote from Republican in …show more content…
From electorates to our Congress, everyone is affected by how extremely competitive the bipartisanship has become. In 1796, George Washington forewarned that political factions will destroy national unity. Despite his foreboding, political polarization has proved its constructive merits within the last century. As previously mentioned, there is nothing wrong with conflict as long as it is a case of conflict displacement. However, the country is seeing more of conflict extensions which are evident especially in the political campaigns for the upcoming elections. Nonetheless, a quick way to fix this destructive problem is to give independent candidates more exposure in order to moderate the bipartisanship. All in all, political polarization has become more than an idea now and has taken a life of its own. It has come to the point where the government would rather have shutdowns than compromise on issues. It is no longer a constructive conflict but more of a destructive threat to the United State’s ability to solve actual problems. The United States of America has always benefited in the concept of inclusivity and it is about time that we also apply that to our elections and