Is it better to have our government in total gridlock where nothing gets done; or have the house, senate, and presidency controlled by one party where something gets done but the minority party literally has little say?
both. gridlock is just stubborness, but total party control is like one child being locked out of a party because he has a yellow shirt on and all the other kids have red shirts on.
Damn total control is what brought us Obamacare! Total control is very dangerous, gridlock is better.
This is where we are screwed. One party rule doesn't work well , but either does gridlock. I'll go with gridlock because it doesn't last 4-8 years.
Gridlock: less insane laws getting passed, and possibly less spending? The less the bureaucrats can get done, the better off the rest of us I think!
Gridlock, one party rule generally doesn't work well