COMMENTARY: Trump win brings repeat of a feat not seen in 131 years

Some of the elements of our fascination stem from the simplest turns of events, and it certainly applied to yours truly last week on Election Day.
Just when we thought the 2020 Presidential election was an unusual race, we now get another one with a unique place in history. 
I’ve had a fascination with the presidents since I was 8, and it all started when my mother brought me this little 12-page book from Fidelity National Bank (now Capitol One) in Baton Rouge.
It was “The 1976 Presidential Handbook,” a promo item that explained the duty of a President, the succession and the listing of each Chief Executive. 
I learned all 38 of them at the time, and I discovered that one of them served two non-consecutive terms. 
That president was Grover Cleveland, who also had the distinction of the first to get married in the White House. 
But it was the two non-consecutive terms that fascinated me. How could anyone do that? Why would anyone do that?
Aside from those simple thoughts from an 8-year-old, I wondered if that could ever happen again. 
The Donald Trump victory over Vice President Kamala Harris puts him in company with Cleveland, whose two terms were from 1885-89 and 1893-97. 
Most people aren’t familiar with Cleveland, maybe because he was known for honesty, courage and common sense. 
Other than that, some recognize his name as the man on the $1,000 bill, which was discontinued in 1969.
He lost to Benjamin Harrison but was voted back in office for one more four-year term. 
For at least 47 years, I didn’t think a situation like Cleveland’s would ever happen again.
I was wrong, but, considering it did not happen for nearly 130 years, I figured it made sense to think it was improbable.
I’m glad I didn’t place money on it — especially a $1,000 bill.
What happens during the next four years is anybody’s guess. Without doubt, divisiveness will likely continue. 
I don’t see that changing during the next four years, because I don’t anticipate either side will budge.
Divisiveness, by the nature of a two-party system, is nothing new. But it’s much deeper and far more intense these days.
I can look back, however, on the 1980s, when then-President Ronald Reagan and House Speaker Thomas “Tip” O’Neal had some tough battles. 
O’Neal was critical of Reagan’s management style, and there were obvious philosophical differences between the Republican President and his adversary from the Democratic Party. 
They sparred and bickered constantly, but with a sense of jest.
O’Neil: “Mr. President, you make my job miserable.”
Reagan: “Well, Tip, that’s the best news I’ve heard all day.”
Aside from their philosophical differences, they had a mutual respect and long friendship. 
They were also able to work out give-and-take deals offered up by both sides of the House and Senate floor.
In the 11th hour, they’d hash things out, and both sides would get more than they expected. 
I’d love to see those days return in Washington. 
Considering how both sides handle issues nowadays, I’m not holding my breath — even for a $1,000 bill.