No doubt on the obstructionism. The difference is I can see obstructionism coming from both side. For me in the senate, Reid, Schumer, McConnell, there isn't much difference. I do long for the days of Lott and Daschle, Mitchell and Dole, even Baker and Byrd. None of them being the party leaders in the senate would obstruct just to obstruct. None of them would have reverted to the nuclear option either. I suppose I'm just an old foggie waxing for the good old days.

I hate tribalism as you put it. I also hate Republicans automatically opposing any Democratic proposal and Democrats automatically opposing Republican proposals. Regardless of who proposes something, it ought to be considered on its merits, not by who proposed it or who is president.

Sure, there are issues where no compromise available. But I'd wager on 90% of the issues something could be worked out between parties. That is if they had a mind to.

I blame Hastert and his Hastert rule for this. That was the start. Prior to him, it was very possible for the minority party in the house to get legislation passed with some of the majority party voting for it. His rule, no legislation could be passed without a majority of Republicans being in favor of it.

I usually stick to my election forecasts without getting involved in too many issues. But I do believe that every piece of legislation and appointment should be brought to a vote on the floor of the senate. All this tabling of bills passed by the house, whether it was Reid tabling the bill or McConnell is just plain wrong in my book.
_________________________
It's high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first instead of their political party. For way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.