National Divide
The election produced divisions that have grown more cruelly precise by the day, splitting the presidential race, Congress, and now the courts almost exactly in half.
Ironically perhaps, students of polarity in American politics are themselves divided about the consequence of it all.
To some, the bisection is as benign as it is remarkable. No great issues are involved, such as a civil rights crusade or a decision to go to war, it is noted. What's at stake in the contest may be nothing more than the contest itself.
"This is more a disease of the political class than the country," says Princeton University political scientist Fred Greenstein, who nevertheless sees the potential for real trouble.
A darker view is that democracy's very weights and measures are in doubt, risking loss of faith in a system people have taken for granted.
"There's a fundamental democratic assumption that's been called into question here," said Kathleen Hall Jamieson of the University of Pennsylvania. Her polling indicates people harbor growing doubts about whether their votes count.
The U.S. Supreme Court's 5-4 decision Saturday, which stopped manual recounts in Florida, revealed a fault line that has run through one branch of government to the next from Election Day forward.
The decision, favoring George W. Bush over Al Gore, overturned another tie-breaking court ruling a day earlier, a 4-3 decision by the Florida Supreme Court. The nation's high court takes up the case again Monday.
A CNN/USA Today Gallup Poll conducted Sunday found a nearly even split over whether the court should allow the recount to continue: 47 percent for a recount and 49 percent against, with a margin of error of four percentage points.
The Nov. 7 election resulted in a nearly tied popular vote for the presidency, a near tie in Florida and the same in a few other states. The closely divided voters in Washington state gave the country a Senate split right down the middle.
Jeffrey Goldfarb, a sociologist who studies cynicism, is worried about the public's morale and unity. He says the protracted contest has intensified passions that are much deeper now than when people voted.
By breaking so thoroughly along partisan lines, with each party's adherents making decisions favoring the party, the struggle has lacked an element that could heal, he said, such as someone acting out of type or against self-interest.
"If there were political figures who acted with courage in the way that John F. Kennedy profiled courage, we would be in a much better situation right now," said Goldfarb, who teaches at New School University in New York.
Yet some historians who look at the waxing and waning of a polarized electorate say that absent big issues, there is probably not much to fear.
They note, too, that times of great policy turmoil have often produced clear mandates for presidents, a real taking of ides. Franklin Roosevelt, with his Depression-era New Deal, was one such leader.
This time, candidates and voters rushed to a crowded middle ground. Without distinct choices, people found it hard to choose. And to many, it does not greatly matter.
"We've gotten a very odd draw of the cards and for various reasons, including the presence of provocateurs, there's been an intensification of heat on the part of politicians," Greenstein said. "I just think there's not enough dry tinder to set up a political conflagration."
Just in case though, members of two famous feuding families appealed for togetherness over the weekend.
"I don't know how the two parties can make amends because their feelings are so deep-seated," said Bo McCoy, a descendent of the Kentucky McCoys. "But maybe by looking at our families it will help. We've buried the hatchet."
In Mingo County, W.Va., Sheriff Tennis Hatfield, a direct descendant of the Hatfield family, agreed.
"We're all good neighbors and friends down here," he said. "We associate together and we help each other. ... I think the nation could learn from it."