Influences Of Polarization In Presidential Politics

Forgette Richard, Garner Andrew, and Winkle John. “Do redistricting principles and practices affect US state legislative electoral competition? State Politics and policy quarterly, 20(9) (2009): 151 175.

     In the following essay I will be talking about the disadvantages and advantages of partisan elections for state politics. I will also examine the last couple year’s election results and costs. Finally, I will discuss if partisanship made a difference in the vote, as well as if a judge should be decided by partisan vote. In the next couple paragraphs I will talk more specifically about these topics.

* Tolson, Franita, Partisan Gerrymandering as a Safeguard of Federalism (December 19, 2010). 2010 Utah Law Review 859 (2010); FSU College of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 470. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1674507

Although Burr was never able to reach 50% in the polls, he exceeded that threshold on Election Day and defeated Ross by almost 6%. In order to analyze the political climate further, I will be comparing the exit polls for both Trump vs. Clinton and Burr vs Ross. This will help explain why Ross was entering the Senate race with a disadvantage despite media pundits arguing that higher turnout in presidential election years should benefit Ross. Although Five Thirty Eight gave Clinton the slight edge to defeat Trump in North Carolina, Trump’s was able to carry the state with a modest performance. Although Real Clear Politics had Burr winning by an average of 2%, that was certainly below the 5.7% final result. In a three way race between Trump, Clinton, and Johnson, Trump was predicted to win North Carolina by about 1%. The actual results, however, showed Trump winning by about 4%. Although this paper is focusing on the Senate race, it’s certainly important to note the impact that a presidential candidate can have on the electoral map, particularly

Over the past three decades, the distance between parties has continued to grow steadily. As their distances increase it has become harder for presidents to receive votes from both parties.

Many Americans are aware of the polarization that exists within them and within the government. However, people do not realize the extent of the polarization and the effect that it has on government functions. Susan Page, author of “Divided We Now Stand” explains that many Americans are aware of the increasing polarization, when a political party influences the stance of a person, and that citizens believe that polarization influence politicians more than it influence them. However, Page argues that voters are to blame as well. She uses a survey to illustrate the choices that Americans make on a certain policy. The results of the survey show that Democrats and Republicans choose the stance of their political party, regardless of their own personal opinions on the actual policy (Page). Page’s point proves that politicians are not the only ones that contribute to the government’s dysfunction, and that voters might want to re-evaluate how they process their information and their choices if they wish to see a change.

The United States has a federalist government meaning that it works similarly on two different levels; nationally, and on the state level. This means that not only are elections held on the national level, but every year state-wide elections exist where different issues are voted upon in state-wide referendum. Although these occur every year, mainly they have been seen as only being important, and therefore watched by the people within that state, rather than nationally. Even so, within the past few years, these state elections have become more important nationally. Whether that is through the issues being voted on, or the trends that winning seats may prove for further upcoming elections, these state-wide elections are becoming more important for individuals nationally.

All 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives were up for reelection in 2010. In the 2010 U.S. House election, the average amount spent by Super PACs in 87 districts was $242,580; see Table 1 and Figure 1 for average spending by outside entities and challengers. The maximum about Super PACs spent was $912,503 in Colorado’s Fourth Congressional District, where Cory Gardner (R) defeated incumbent Betsy Markey (D). The average independent expenditures by political parties in 94 districts was $1,238,897. The maximum outside party spending was $4,289,706 in Michigan’s Seventh Congressional District, where Tim Walberg (R) beat incumbent Mark Schauer (D). The average challenger spending was $704,692 in 366 districts. Figures 2, shows the

Party Polarization is a defining feature of contemporary at both the elite and activist levels. Party polarization is defined as “the division between the two major parties on most political issues, with members of each party unified around their party’s positions with little crossover” (371). One explanation for party polarization is how the congressional districts are being sorted and how those districts play a role in the congressional elections. The congressional districts are drawn to favor one political party, republican or democrat, over another; in other words, they are “safe districts”. This is done by drawing a district in such a way that there is a clear majority of one party or the other. Lawmakers want to do this because it eliminates the competition within the general election.

Abramowitz’s argument that the American electorate have become more polarized and that the moderate center is disappearing is more of a quantitative argument than a qualitative one. Based on election studies and exit polls, Abramowitz’ observations include the correlation between engagement, party identification, religious and social groups, ideological realignment, and education on the idealization and polarization of the public. Contrary to Fiorina, “there is no disconnect between the political elite and the American people. Polarization in Washington reflects polarization within the public, especially within the politically engaged segment of the public” (Abramowitz 2010, x). According to the ANES (American National Election Studies), the

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.

There has long been a disagreement over the manner of the shift in party strength in the South. Some have argued that the realignment of southern politics started at the top. Others argue that the realignment was fueled by success of down ballot candidates, which led to ambitious Republican politicians seeking and finding success higher up the ballot. Besides the change in the dependent variable, there is also a change to models 5 and 6, which include the state party index variable. This will allow a test of the top down/bottom up question on the southern realignment. This will be further assisted by the inclusion of the variable for percentage of the major party vote for the Republican candidate for

It is hard to believe that just 4 short years ago, it was unclear whether West Virginia was predominately Democrat or Republican state. In the 2012 elections, electors in West Virginia voted split ticket (voting one party for president and the other for senate) more than any other state in the Union (Vavreck). In that year, the state voted 62.3 percent for Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential candidate, but also voted 60.6 percent for Joe Manchin, the Democrat presidential candidate (West Virginia Secretary of State). Also, one of three of West Virginia’s members of the House of Representatives was a Democrat, the Governor was a Democrat, and most of the constitutional officials were Democrat. Both the state House of Delegates and

Davis, Frost, and Cohen expand on a growing problem in American politics: gridlock. Increasingly over the last fifteen years or so, Washington has seen what the book calls a “partisan divide”. This means that politics have become so polarized on each side of the aisle, that it has caused a divide on how the country should be ran. The authors have worked extensively inside Washington over the last three decades, making this book high accurate on the events that have spiraled and created the lack of cooperation. They constitute this lack of cooperation on many different issues; including gerrymandering, money in politics, and the media. I will focus on those four developments as to what has caused this divide the most.

1: In the last few years I have found a keen interest in politics, almost every day I consume political media from podcasts such as “Abe Lincolns Top Hat” to TV shows such as “Real Time with Bill Maher”. Last year I volunteered with Congressman Raja Kirshnamorrthi to help his campaign, that experience helped me show how the political process happens. It was very humbling to know that someone like me can be involved in politics and make a difference for my country. As the 2016 election came and went I saw how much politics can divide the country, I would do my own personal case studies by talking to, and looking at twitters of Democrats and Republicans and discussing their opponents. I found that both sides could not see the good in each other and literally to a point of hatred of each other. My initial research question was “how does political polarization effect our education and how that effects other aspects of life such as the environment.” I knew on the first day of English 102 that I wanted to talk about political polarization, but, I later learned we would have to base our papers off Alfie Kohn. So, originally my idea was to fuse the idea of education with polarization, but I found that it would be too difficult to make that happen and by then I learned that we didn’t need to use Kohn so was able to create a