Polarization in Us Politics

Beginning with a contextualization of America surrounding the 2004 presidential election. This was the first election since the 9-11 attacks and the beginning of the war on terror. Many Americans uneasy, and the state of the nation was unstable. With this fear and instability,

In recent discussion of Democrats and Republican parties, a controversial issue has been whether or not the U.S. should expand their options from more than a two party system. On the one hand, some argue that there should be more choices other than between the two Democrat Party and Republican Party. From this perspective, voters have more of a variety when they vote. On the other hand, some argue that the U.S. should remain as a two party system. In the words of Gary Johnson, one of this view’s main proponents, “The Republicans and Democrats have spent decades trading power back and forth between themselves, and in doing so, have managed to install a two-party duopoly that completely controls America’s political process.” According to this view, Democrats and Republicans are dictating other parties opportunities to get elected. In sum, then, the issue is whether there should be other options rather than a choice between the Democrat and the Republican Party. I agree with Gary Johnson’s view that the Democrat and Republican Parties are controlling America’s

Polarization in the United States today exists on two levels: polarization in the electorate and polarization in the elite. While separate, these two groups are perpetually intertwined. Polarization in the electorate refers to the movement of voters toward ideological extremes, and the ideological gap between voters on either side has been increasing in recent decades (Kuo). A study conducted by Pew Research Center in 2014 confirms the proliferation of polarization in the electorate: it found that since 1994, voters agree more intensely with their party’s policies and view the policies of the opposing party as a “threat to the nation’s well being” (“Political Polarization”). One factor that has led to this increase is the utilization of new technologies by the media, which allow voters to access more information than ever before. This broad scope of available information allows the public to be selective in what they consume (Kuo). As a result, many people participate in confirmation bias, meaning they seek out sources that share their beliefs; this strengthens their preexisting opinions and their level of partisanship. Another factor that increases political polarization in the electorate is geography. Republican voters tend to live in suburbs or rural areas, while Democrat voters are more likely to live in urban areas (Kuo). These geographic boundaries impact polarization because

In the book, Culture War?, by Morris Fiorina, the myth of a polarized America is exposed. Fiorina covers issues such as why Americans believe that America is polarized, that Red and Blue State people aren’t as different as they are made out to be, and that the United States is not polarized along traditional cleavage lines. This book even covers perspectives on abortion, homosexuality, and whether or not electoral cleavages have shifted. A large point of Fiorina’s is his take on the 2004 election. He ends the book with, how did our great nation get to this position of proclaimed polarization, and how do we improve from here?

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, Polarization is defined as the “division into two opposites”. (Merriam-Webster) Political Polarization refers to the perceived division of ideologies espoused between the two major political parties in the United States. The topic of political polarization is one frequently referenced in the media and in political discussions. Does political polarization actually exist or is it a myth? In this paper, this question will be analyzed and examined and a conclusion will be reached.

As a consequence, polarized Congress will only fall under a gridlock that will obstruct the legislation process. However, I believe that there are ways in improving political polarization. Firstly, the journalistic coverage of public officials is in dire need of adjustments. Media should shift their focus and resources on the extreme members of Congress. This process will force those legislators to be more moderate in order to keep their positions. Lastly, people just need to vote. Even though “87 percent of registered voters voted in the 2012 presidential election, this only represents 42 percent of the total U.S population” (openstax, 249). This is an alarming number for a democratic country since all citizens are encouraged to participate under a democracy. If there are more people voting, officials are forced to appeal to a broader spectrum of

When the word partisanship comes up, our minds can think of numerous things; in this case partisanship with the help of other reasons can explain the dysfunction of the government in the area of politics. To begin, one could ask how exactly does partisanship affect politics today. Jim Douglas does an excellent job of showing how partisanship is affecting our government and why it is important to stop it. He does this in his speech, "Beyond Partisanship." "Partisan rhetoric is abundant, while solutions are scarce. The result is a Washington [or political system] that is broken"(Douglas 104). Here, Douglas tells his audience that instead of looking for compromises or achieving results in politics partisanship is allowing

While Fiorina’s claims that Americans polarization is a complete myth, counter to Fiorina’s belief, Abramowitz with his book The Disappearing Center argues that Americans are in fact polarized. Abramowitz brings much evidence to refute Fiorina, but does it really counter Fiorina’s argument, or merely talk past him while adding some studies and fancy statistical data? The first argument that Abramowitz uses to refute Fiorina is the Engaged Citizen Argument that can be found on page 4. Abramowitz argues that citizens who care about government and politics, pay attention to what political leaders are saying and doing, and participate actively in the political process. Specifically, on page 4 and 5 Abramowitz describes how partisan-ideological

Studies conclude that citizens who tend to classify themselves as either conservative or liberal tend to have opposing political and policy views (p. 571). This means that social opinions alone does not have a significant or resilient influence in elite or mass polarization. This leads us to our next variable, partisan elections.

I truly agree to the statement of Fareed Zakaria on why political polarization has gone wild in America. He said over the last few decades, the rules of organizing American politics have changed. This is in regards to the changes in congressional rules that made it more difficult to enact large compromise legislation (Zakaria, 2011). This is the type of problem, we as citizens of this country and the nation will compel to face if no changes will occur.

The greater the difference in the parties’ voting behavior, the easier it was for voters to see a difference in the two parties. We know that voters take cues on how to vote from political elites. So, in this process, first, one should see policy demanders/opinion leaders push for elected officials, such as members of Congress, to vote along ideological lines. Second, as the members of Congress vote more along ideological lines, members of the electorate can see which party votes for liberal ideas and which party votes for conservative ideas. Then voters evaluate whether the ideas of the party of their choice line up with their issue preferences. If their issue preferences do not line up with their preferred party, then individuals change their party leaning. This change in party leaning should be reflected in party strength, as more people move toward one party, which should shift in party strength. If an ideological realignment was the cause of the realignment of the southern electorate, then one should see that as the parties became more polarized, the party strength of the conservative party, the Republican Party, should increase because of the predominance of conservative

It would be wrong the deny that the polarization of the American political parties has hurt our country but has greatly damaged our form of government by the use of filibusters by the minority to stop the majority from passing a by using juvenile tactics to make the opposing party look bad. The polarization of the American political system, parties and people themselves has worsened since this book was written but it can be alleviated. Political parties have become so extreme that work is not getting done and the bills that do get past committee and out on the floor for a vote are not passed but are put on hold. While I believe both parties are partially at fault with the Republican party carrying most of the weight.

Although the results of the 2016 presidential election contradicted months of numerous surveys conducted by pollsters and pundits predicting a Democratic victory, it should not have been surprising to individuals familiar with the current political science research on American politics. Despite the some opinions that the election of Donald Trump marked a political watershed, underlying factors such as partisanship, a topic with decades of research for those familiar with American politics, ultimately resulted in the business and real estate mogul in being inaugurated as the 45th President of the United States.

In the foreword of “The Best American Infographics 2016,” Gareth Cook mentions an infographic entitled “How the Parties Came Apart.” About it, he says, “Look, for example at “How the Parties Came Apart,” and how it uses red and blue for the parties, and then a gray that only catches when there are many connections across the partisan divide (mostly in the early years). And consider all the extraneous details that have been omitted. The story is strong.”

Researchers agreed that economic inequality and political polarization coincide with one another, because as one rises so does the other (McCarthy, Nolan & Poole 2003). The research for this study also seemed to support the idea that the political polarization increase in recent years is due to the fact that the gap had widened between voters who were republican and identified themselves as conservatives and democratic voters that identified themselves as conservatives. There was an increase in the number of republican voters identifying as conservatives while there was also a decrease in democratic voters who identify as conservatives.