WASHINGTON _ The next president will get only a slim mandate to govern, and thanks to Washington's relentless, toxic partisanship, it's unlikely they'll get much done.
Voters Tuesday sent mixed messages: Most saw the election as a mandate, and voters have routinely said they want Washington's gridlock to ease. Yet they don't like or trust the presidents who would lead the way, and the new president can't proclaim he or she has a unified nation behind them.
Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are the most unpopular White House candidate in decades, limiting their ability to rally the nation or a Congress paralyzed by partisan warfare.
Just 4 of 10 voters Tuesday in early exit polls said they were excited or optimistic about either Trump or Clinton. Last week, 61 percent of likely voters disapproved of Trump and 57 percent disapproved of Clinton, a McClatchy-Marist Poll found. President Barack Obama was seen that way by 46 percent of voters on Election Day 2012.
Adding to the frustration was the campaign, largely devoid of debate over issues, dominated instead by accusations about who is more irresponsible, hateful and corrupt.
"There's no big mandate for change of a policy nature," said Lee Miringoff, the director of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion.
There is a mandate, at least a narrow one, for the new president to take the country where he or she has promised. The numbers are not overwhelming, as only 55 percent of voters in a Morning Consult/POLITICO exit poll see a mandate. Twenty-three percent don't see a mandate and 22 percent did not know or had no opinion.
Democrats were more optimistic, as 62 percent saw a mandate compared with 55 percent of Republicans and 42 percent of independents.
The new president will try to use the mandate to bring people together. "The distrust will put pressure on both parties to work together," said Michael Feldman, a Democratic consultant who was a senior adviser to Vice President Al Gore.
But he warned, "That doesn't mean they'll be successful. There are huge, huge obstacles."
Some Republicans have already talked about looking into impeaching Clinton. Democrats will endure a split between liberals, led by independent Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, and pragmatists over Cabinet nominees, health care policy and other matters.
Among Republicans, many key lawmakers distanced themselves from Trump. Conservatives and center-right lawmakers are at odds over whether to stand on principle or seek compromise.
None of this Capitol Hill turmoil will help a new president use the mandate.
"Given the unpopularity of both Clinton and Trump, I think you are going to see more legislative independence no matter who wins," said Jonathan Felts, who was a White House political director for President George W. Bush.
Trump and Clinton have already embraced nearly all of the big ideas that have polarized Washington for years. The new president will add some of his or her own, but congressional leaders have most of the pieces already in place.
Congressional Republicans are eager to repeal and replace Obamacare. Trump agrees. Clinton and Democrats are determined to keep the law and offer improvements.
Immigration appears headed for another stalemate. Democrats tend to favor a comprehensive approach, combining a path to citizenship for many immigrants who are already in the U.S. illegally with a crackdown on border enforcement.
House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., prefers what he calls "stages and pieces, not some big massive bill," starting with tighter border security.
One presidential plank no mandate will save is Trump's calls for a wall between the U.S. and Mexico. Objections from Democrats, who will have enough Senate strength to block any such proposal, will doom this idea. And if not, Trump's plan to have Mexico pay for it is likely to go nowhere.
"No mandate will be big enough to get Mexico to pay for the wall," said Felts.
The two parties are somewhat closer on tax code changes, and have been for some time. They've been stuck for years on whether to impose higher taxes on the super-rich.
Clinton wants people with adjusted gross incomes of more than $1 million to pay a minimum of 30 percent in taxes, similar to plans Democrats have pitched for years. She'd also impose a 4 percent surtax on income of more than $5 million.
Ryan and Trump want to collapse the current seven personal income-tax rates into three. The top rate would be 33 percent instead of the current 39.6 percent.
The combat starts almost immediately. Typically, the president-elect nominates members of the Cabinet by Christmas. Congress holds hearings and votes so the new team is in place by Jan. 20, Inauguration Day.
The norm is usually that the Senate goes along with the nominee unless there's a smoldering controversy. This time, there's no guarantee.
"It's going to be difficult to get appointments confirmed," predicted Darrell West, vice president and director of governance studies at Washington's Brookings Institution, a research center.
Historically, a new president had his team in place by Jan. 20 and pointed to voter support to push a top priority: Ronald Reagan's 1981 tax cut, Bill Clinton's 1993 deficit reduction plan, George W. Bush's 2001 tax cut and Barack Obama's overhaul of the health care system.
That momentum eased the path for ideas that would have been far more difficult to push in later years. That's hardly a sure thing this time.
"The next president is going to have a really hard time," said Quentin Kidd, the director of the Wason Center for Public Policy at Christopher Newport University in Virginia. "The level of dysfunction that frustrates people is not going to go away."
