"Put simply, we’re still quite polarized.
....
One of the most consistent findings from the past 20 years of public opinion research is that each new president is more divisive than the last. George W. Bush was more divisive than Bill Clinton; Barack Obama was more divisive than Bush; Donald Trump was more divisive than Obama; and Biden may well end up more divisive than Trump, at least in terms of approval rating by partisan affiliation. Some of this reflects circumstances, some of it reflects the individuals, but most of it is a function of partisan and ideological polarization. Modern presidents have a high floor for public opinion but a low ceiling.

This is a major change from the 1970s and 1980s, when the public was less polarized and numbers could swing from the low 30s (even the 20s) to the high 60s and beyond.
....
Biden’s slide is noteworthy, but it is also exactly what we should expect given the structural conditions of American politics in the 21st century. But this cuts against the unstated assumption that a president should have an approval rating above 50 percent. It’s an assumption that, as Sam Goldman, a professor of political science at George Washington University, observed, is “another example of how we’ve adopted the deeply exceptional midcentury interlude as our baseline — partly because it remains our vision of normality, and partly because that’s when reliable data start.”
....
If we were to look farther back in time, to say, the late 19th century, we might find an era that, for all of its indelible foreignness, is closer to ours in terms of the shape and structure of its politics, from its sharp partisan polarization and closely contested national elections to its democratic backsliding and deep anxieties over immigration and demographic change.
....
American politics eventually broke out of its late-19th-century equilibrium of high polarization and tightly contested elections. In the 1896 presidential election, William McKinley became the first candidate in decades to win more than 50 percent of the popular vote, beating his Democratic opponent, William Jennings Bryan, by 4.3 percent.
....
What changed in American politics to produce more decisive national victories? Well, that’s not a happy story. Suffrage restrictions of immigrants in the North, the rise of Jim Crow in the South, and the success of capital in suppressing labor revolt and setting the terms of political contestation had removed millions of Americans from the electorate by the turn of the 20th century."

Long story short, a popular president
1) is more an exception than a norm, and
2) such exception was, at the beginning, the results of suppression.

Biden did not hold rally to shout loud and clear rhetorically seeking the
audience to agree to the fast withdrawal of the remaining troops from
Afghanistan.

IF the roaring replies from the crowds were "yes, yes, and yes", then he
should shout back to the audience, saying the boys out need to be home".

That would have aroused the opposition media and party to start writing more
about it for their next days' news front page.

Once that happened in news, there will be opinions and more opposed ideas of
what will happen next in Afghanistan,and etc., it will produce a spin into
getting out what the Americans want from the decision to be made to it.

Therefore, once there is a positive positions received in the media on the
audience's responses, responses from the opposition's party, responses from
the opposition media and internet.

Of there should be responses from the American people in the opposite camp,
then Biden should act and execute an order and an order ordering the
remaining troops in Afghanistan o return to US in a phased manner and
conduct.

Henceforth, if there is an unwarranted backfires on his order for the sudden
fiascos occurred in a hasty and hurried withdrawal, Biden could just deflect
the fiasco to the state department and defence department's for their
failings in completing the assigned task he had ordered faithfully to the
people's wish.

By that, Biden will still behind the wheel, while the blames went to the
defence department and state department for their incompetent staff for it.
Take the blame but to deflect to others to take the blames, instead.

"ltlee1" wrote in message
news:98056458-332f-4ea5-af09-9ca13c3c1c50n@googlegroups.com...

"Put simply, we’re still quite polarized.
....
One of the most consistent findings from the past 20 years of public opinion
research is that each new president is more divisive than the last. George
W. Bush was more divisive than Bill Clinton; Barack Obama was more divisive
than Bush; Donald Trump was more divisive than Obama; and Biden may well end
up more divisive than Trump, at least in terms of approval rating by
partisan affiliation. Some of this reflects circumstances, some of it
reflects the individuals, but most of it is a function of partisan and
ideological polarization. Modern presidents have a high floor for public
opinion but a low ceiling.

This is a major change from the 1970s and 1980s, when the public was less
polarized and numbers could swing from the low 30s (even the 20s) to the
high 60s and beyond.
....
Biden’s slide is noteworthy, but it is also exactly what we should expect
given the structural conditions of American politics in the 21st century.
But this cuts against the unstated assumption that a president should have
an approval rating above 50 percent. It’s an assumption that, as Sam
Goldman, a professor of political science at George Washington University,
observed, is “another example of how we’ve adopted the deeply exceptional
midcentury interlude as our baseline — partly because it remains our vision
of normality, and partly because that’s when reliable data start.”
....
If we were to look farther back in time, to say, the late 19th century, we
might find an era that, for all of its indelible foreignness, is closer to
ours in terms of the shape and structure of its politics, from its sharp
partisan polarization and closely contested national elections to its
democratic backsliding and deep anxieties over immigration and demographic
change.
....
American politics eventually broke out of its late-19th-century equilibrium
of high polarization and tightly contested elections. In the 1896
presidential election, William McKinley became the first candidate in
decades to win more than 50 percent of the popular vote, beating his
Democratic opponent, William Jennings Bryan, by 4.3 percent.
....
What changed in American politics to produce more decisive national
victories? Well, that’s not a happy story. Suffrage restrictions of
immigrants in the North, the rise of Jim Crow in the South, and the success
of capital in suppressing labor revolt and setting the terms of political
contestation had removed millions of Americans from the electorate by the
turn of the 20th century."

Long story short, a popular president
1) is more an exception than a norm, and
2) such exception was, at the beginning, the results of suppression.

Biden can blame that there are cowards in his State department and defence
department, there are disloyal civil servants who still support the Trump's
party while conducting military meeting with them.

Biden can blame the upending of an orderly withdrawal order in Afghanistan
airport was turned out to be their fiasco for it. The sudden withdrawal was
due to the stand down of weapons by the Afghans fighting for them instead in
Afghanistan. He can also b

"kerri" wrote in message news:sh30dm$s62$1@dont-email.me...

Biden did not hold rally to shout loud and clear rhetorically seeking the
audience to agree to the fast withdrawal of the remaining troops from
Afghanistan.

IF the roaring replies from the crowds were "yes, yes, and yes", then he
should shout back to the audience, saying the boys out need to be home".

That would have aroused the opposition media and party to start writing more
about it for their next days' news front page.

Once that happened in news, there will be opinions and more opposed ideas of
what will happen next in Afghanistan,and etc., it will produce a spin into
getting out what the Americans want from the decision to be made to it.

Therefore, once there is a positive positions received in the media on the
audience's responses, responses from the opposition's party, responses from
the opposition media and internet.

Of there should be responses from the American people in the opposite camp,
then Biden should act and execute an order and an order ordering the
remaining troops in Afghanistan o return to US in a phased manner and
conduct.

Henceforth, if there is an unwarranted backfires on his order for the sudden
fiascos occurred in a hasty and hurried withdrawal, Biden could just deflect
the fiasco to the state department and defence department's for their
failings in completing the assigned task he had ordered faithfully to the
people's wish.

By that, Biden will still behind the wheel, while the blames went to the
defence department and state department for their incompetent staff for it.
Take the blame but to deflect to others to take the blames, instead.

"ltlee1" wrote in message
news:98056458-332f-4ea5-af09-9ca13c3c1c50n@googlegroups.com...

"Put simply, we’re still quite polarized.
....
One of the most consistent findings from the past 20 years of public opinion
research is that each new president is more divisive than the last. George
W. Bush was more divisive than Bill Clinton; Barack Obama was more divisive
than Bush; Donald Trump was more divisive than Obama; and Biden may well end
up more divisive than Trump, at least in terms of approval rating by
partisan affiliation. Some of this reflects circumstances, some of it
reflects the individuals, but most of it is a function of partisan and
ideological polarization. Modern presidents have a high floor for public
opinion but a low ceiling.

This is a major change from the 1970s and 1980s, when the public was less
polarized and numbers could swing from the low 30s (even the 20s) to the
high 60s and beyond.
....
Biden’s slide is noteworthy, but it is also exactly what we should expect
given the structural conditions of American politics in the 21st century.
But this cuts against the unstated assumption that a president should have
an approval rating above 50 percent. It’s an assumption that, as Sam
Goldman, a professor of political science at George Washington University,
observed, is “another example of how we’ve adopted the deeply exceptional
midcentury interlude as our baseline — partly because it remains our vision
of normality, and partly because that’s when reliable data start.”
....
If we were to look farther back in time, to say, the late 19th century, we
might find an era that, for all of its indelible foreignness, is closer to
ours in terms of the shape and structure of its politics, from its sharp
partisan polarization and closely contested national elections to its
democratic backsliding and deep anxieties over immigration and demographic
change.
....
American politics eventually broke out of its late-19th-century equilibrium
of high polarization and tightly contested elections. In the 1896
presidential election, William McKinley became the first candidate in
decades to win more than 50 percent of the popular vote, beating his
Democratic opponent, William Jennings Bryan, by 4.3 percent.
....
What changed in American politics to produce more decisive national
victories? Well, that’s not a happy story. Suffrage restrictions of
immigrants in the North, the rise of Jim Crow in the South, and the success
of capital in suppressing labor revolt and setting the terms of political
contestation had removed millions of Americans from the electorate by the
turn of the 20th century."

Long story short, a popular president
1) is more an exception than a norm, and
2) such exception was, at the beginning, the results of suppression.