Does Partisanship Affect Politics Today?

Generally speaking, anyone who lives in the United States of America knows that there are two main political parties—the Republicans and the Democrats. Having two main parties has its advantages and, of course, its disadvantages. For example, in By the People James E. Monroe and Rogan Kersh (301) point out having this type of system creates “predictability and stability.” However, they also declare (301) it can “lead to a gridlock.” This is not a new concept either as there has been a divide since the beginning of both parties. The two parties more often than not disagree on various issues, while rarely agreeing on what is best for the country.

The growing ideological gap between the United States’ two major political parties, in other words, rising levels of political polarization, has had a negative impact on American politics as it results in Congressional inefficient, public apathy, and economic inequality.

The increasing importance of big money in campaigns has also heightened the polarization within Congress. Candidates have been forced to develop strong views on the most polarizing topics, such as abortion, LGBT rights, and gun regulations. If a candidate does not express strong views on these topics, wealthy Republican or Democratic super PACs are not likely to back them. This has caused more gridlock in Congress as many members are not willing to compromise on these important topics (La Raja

Sometimes this takes the form of wooing legislators, including legislators of another political party or ideological persuasion. When polarization and partisanship make such wooing hard if not impossible, that same ambition is likely to take the form of aiding the election of candidates who can be counted on to support one's

In order to understand the concept of political polarization one must first understand the meaning of ideology. Ideology is defined as “a manner or…content of thinking characteristic of an individual, group, or culture.”(Merriam-Webster) Voting based on ones ideology is considered a rather recent phenomenon. Prior to the rise of ideological based voting, candidates were selected and scrutinized based on their own personal attributes and characteristics rather than their ideas. Prior to the 1970’s, there was not a huge difference in ideology between the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. For example, take for instance the House and Senate votes on the passage of the Social Security Act in 1935. In this vote both Democrats and Republicans were widely in support of its passage. (SSA) This is in stark contrast to today when neither party can agree on the future of Social Security. Another example would be the passage of the landmark Voting Rights Act

There are many of us who are disillusioned by the American Political system, over the years we have become increasingly cynical, viewing politicians as extensions of Corporate America, the good OLE boys from the South and the Eastern Elite. For such politicians, politics itself was a life long destiny, full of ambition, finesse, and struggle for power, yet a severe lack

Over the course of time, the United States Congress has gradually become polarized or partisan. In essence, Congress has been divided into polar sides. I believe the links provided are outdated and the data that needs to be analyzed has been removed. However, Darrell Issa, my representative, is proved to be partisan to the Republican party. According to OnTheIssues, Representative Issa’s stance on abortion(pro life) and gun control (less gun control) mirrors that of the Republican party (OnTheIssues, “Every Political Leader on Every Issue”). Consequently, having a polarized Congress is unhealthy for the government.

Political dysfunction is no surprise to the American Populace; in fact, today it’s almost expected. As we see with the fairly recent presidential elections between Republican Nominee [now president] Donald Trump and Democratic Nominee and Senator Hilary Clinton, our current political system is amuck. It is asinine, it’s crazy, it is viscous, and above all else, it is in shambles. This paves the way for the million-dollar question we are all left racking our brains to answer – what happened to us? This question, along with the answers to such is examined by author Mike Lofgren in his book The Party is Over, and is the topic of this essay paper. More specifically, today I would like to dive a bit deeper and explore the answer to a question a

The politics of the United States is one of the most advanced in the whole world. But even at this stage, the politics is dominated by pettiness that stems from partisanship. This has ensured that no issues is ever passed amicably through the national legislative housed. Every debate is viewed through the lenses of partisanship.

In making the polarization bigger and beyond the legislative politics; the beginning of a highly ideological

Republicans and Democrats have clearly divided themselves among the issues of; political beliefs, religion, race. This in turn creates 2 separate teams that constantly battle each other to advance their cause at the expense of the other. And due to the constant battles we see today, it has created a political environment filled with hostility and one way thinking. (Alan I. Abramowitz and Stephen Webster, 2016) state in their article “The rise of negative partisanship and the nationalization of U.S. elections in the 21st century””supporters of each party have come to perceive supporters of the opposing party as very different from themselves in terms of their social characteristics, political beliefs and values and to view opposing partisans with growing suspicion and hostility. (Mason, 2015)” As an illustration this statement is backed up by one of the questions that was asked during the interviews that I conducted. The question read “would you consider listening to someone from the opposing camp try to persuade you to vote for their candidate?” Nine out of ten gave me a variation of how they would not listen to the other side's point of view on their candidate. One memorable quote from an interview read this “Hell no! Any democrat should be ashamed of themselves for voting for a criminal like Hillary Clinton. And because of her Democrats in my opinion have lost all

Thomas Mann of Brookings Institutions writes that, “in addition to the decline in competition, American politics today is characterized by a growing ideological polarization between the two major parties”. In addition to his opinion, political data has shown that political polarization is increasing and is more readily seen in the way the American government functions in the political sphere. In an article by the University of Rochester’s Campus Times they wrote “In 1950, the American Political Science Association’s Committee on Political Parties wrote a report called “Toward a More Responsible Two-Party System.” The report said that party leadership in Congress was far too lenient when it came to dissent within the party ranks, allowing members’ difference in positions to not be as important as they should. They said that in order for there to be a healthier democracy in the US, the country needed cohesive, top-down parties with clear agendas that can be carried out when in the majority. It also needed a cohesive minority party to criticize the majority party and act as an alternative.” While both the Campus Times and Thomas Mann suggest that polarization is somewhat necessary and is increasing, whether or not the necessity or increase is beneficial to American politics and government is debatable. In this paper, I argue that while polarization can be both unbeneficial and beneficial, for the most part is has proven to be unbeneficial for American politics and government.

When you observe the graph that the American National Election Studies has created, you begin to notice a pattern. This pattern would be that there was either an increase or decrease in the strength of the people's partisanship for each party around the time that a new president came into office. It seems that every single time that there was a change in the political leader of our country that people either felt very strong partisanship or very little. This must have to do with the idea that with each new president, the new issues arising in the country will be handled a certain way. Furthermore, how said issues are handled by those in office affect the partisanship. These new issues

There are many theories as to how or why political polarization was formed, and the impact it has on government in modern day. Polarization has varied significantly over the years ever since the 1970’s. However, what is the true cause and can it be explained? This paper will discuss some theories on how political polarization came about, and analyzes some accounts of polarization overall. Defining political polarization is vital into developing an understanding of how or why it was initially formed.

We live in a world blanketed by the darkness of ignorance. Instead of blindly searching for the black or white answers, we must defeat the enemy by moving toward common ground. Currently in politics, we see the negative effect of polarization as the presidential campaign has become candidate centered rather than issue centered. We see the candidates resort to bully-like tactics where they attack each other personally, rather than focusing on the issues at hand. While it is said that polarity is an integral part of nature, we need our differences to bring us together as a whole, rather than drive us apart. Polarization is inevitable due to the unique design of every individual, but issues are seen as either black or white, when really