Secondly, until relatedly recently, the political parties were not well sorted in the "liberal" and "conservative" (or low LWA and high LWA), so going very far back into the 20th century is not going to be particularly meaningful.
I think it's also debatable whether Obama is abusing executive orders. He's hasn't issued significantly more than George W Bush did (many fewer than Reagan or Nixon), and it's hard to argue his actions are more extreme than Lincoln issuing the Emancipation Proclamation executive order, Eisenhower's segregations of schools, FDR creating the WPA, etc. Obama certainly is far from perfect, but it's clear there's a narrative coming from Republicans whose attitude about the government and presidential power varies more with who the current president is. I would say that Obama's valuing of safety of privacy concerns does show a bit of RWA, since that's a trade-off folks with high RWA scores tend to be willing to make (and other people, when fearful or under threat).
And as far as the Blue Dog Democrats: them moving into the Republican party is the primary reason why the political parties are better sorted today, with conservatives (higher in RWA and SDO) ending up in the Republican party, and liberals (tending to be lower in both) ending up in the Democratic party. The parties being TOO well sorted is the cause of some of our political dysfunction. Without a leavening of liberals, conservatives generate a appealing, comfy hermetically sealed echo-chamber of straight-forward (but tough!) principles. Liberals become idealistic believers in overly complex theories and fail utterly to be unified or connect their message with the emotional truth of people's lives.
Also, successful Gerrymandering has also created problems, mostly because of the creation of "safe" districts. The irony of safe districts is that conservatives no longer want to compromise for fear of getting "Tea Partied" from the right later on. This creates an active disincentive to want to partake in any kind of bipartisan compromise. It's difficult to negotiate with people will not compromise in any respect. If you look at Obama earlier in his presidency, he tended to "pre-compromise" and start negotiating from a position that he assumed would be palatable to conservatives. This led to articles like "Why is Obama Such a Wimp?" and "Another preemptive compromise from the White House."
As far as SJWs, they are definitely attempting to exercise social control, but in the (purported) service of various minority groups. People low in RWA tend to believe in individual autonomy in the private sphere, and one could argue that SJWs are trying to create greater freedom and scope for the personal autonomy of oppressed groups. Of course, there's the added dimension the online SJW may be acting in pursuit of social kudos of some kind, but that's often an issue in the public sphere. And, yeah... I'm a grumpy middle-aged man and I find them super irritating, too.