Craze, if there are few to no neutral people have we reached the point where we are hopelessly divided ?
I don't think so. Because I think bias is inherent in human nature - it never hasn't been present in all of us.
I don't even want to cast it in a bad light, really. I'm just as biased as anybody else. I do make a good faith effort to be cognizant of it. Because having biases (which we all have) and seeing things through their filters, while considering or presenting ourselves as neutral and objective, necessarily puts us in a place of falsehood. It's not our biases, preferences, and passions which close our minds towards alternative views and arguments. It's an unchallenged denial that we even have biases, preferences, and passion which closes our minds.
Anybody who is so convinced that their views are not just the right ones but are indeed the only valid ones almost certainly isn't going to be receptive to anything -- be it fact or argument -- which might call them into question. So I just don't think genuine neutrality is attainable when passions and biases are involved.
As a passionate Colts fan, it's not hard for me to be neutral when two NFC teams I don't care about are playing each other. But that's not the case when it's two AFC teams that, for instance, I expect the Colts might be competing with for a playoff spot -- let alone when it's the Colts themselves.
However, I can't imagine a sports fan being in a state of denial about any bias they have in favor of the team they support. But when it comes to peoples' opinions about political issues, candidates, parties, etc., I think a lot of people discount, deny, downplay, or simply aren't even aware of their biases.
This is why a whole bunch of people who were outraged by allegations from Paula Jones and Juanita Broaddrick that Bill Clinton was sexually inappropriate with them seem totally oblivious to E. Jean Carroll's similar allegations about Donald Trump. And vice versa.
In truth, these people are entirely motivated by political bias -- while convincing themselves (and hoping to convince others) that they're actually motivated by outrage over the alleged actions of Clinton/Trump. It's easy to say they're being deliberately disingenuous. But I think it's probably more often the case that they're just in denial about the dispositive role their political bias plays in how they view those two situations.
So why don't I think we're hopelessly divided? Because I think, in spite of our biases and passions, we still occupy a lot more common ground than we realize. At least, certainly hope that's the case -- because, if it's not, then you're right to use the word "hopelessly" in this question.