"American political leaders are often tempted to assume that electoral victories are based upon deep and wide-spread public support for the victorious party's agenda. Yet the appearance of political power often masks the reality of fragile political coalitions. Unfortunately, attempting to govern through "triangulation" or bi-partisanship is not necessarily a recipe for political success either." To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Explain your position using evidence from American elections from 1992-2016 (you can use additional evidence as well, if you so desire.)
I have already answered this question, but would like some more details. My stand is that this statement is correct. Can you provide answer to the following questions?
1. How is this connected to the debt ceiling crisis in 2011?
2. Why was the health care reform considered a case of bi-partisanship?
3. The Problem of triangulating those typically regarded as other parties' issues is that it left them politically vulnerable. (They are likely to be abandoned by their core supporters) Can you provide an example?
4. Moreover, the problem of trying to govern as a centrist and trying to appeal to not only your hardcore supporters but to more marginal supporters and people in opposing party is that it ends up being very expensive than the national government is able to bear. Is there an example?