Political Polarization : Economic Inequality And Political Polarization

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.

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.

The main purpose of the article by Matt Motyl titled, “Liberals and conservatives are (geographically) dividing” is that political parties’ affiliations are dividing the U.S. This can be seen through the locations many Americans live such as liberals going to more urban areas as opposed to the conservatives to go to less populated areas in rural states (Motyl, 2014). The author uses the Ideological Enclavement Theory to explain the division of people in the U.S through ideological-segregated enclaves (Motyl, 2014).

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.

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.

From 1972 to 2004, Abramowitz points out that the correlation between ideology and party identification rose from .32 to .63 showing an increase over time from a more moderate stance to a more polarized one in the engaged electorate. In the 1984 to 2004 ANES, the least interested and least informed Americans were shown to be in the middle of the liberal-conservative spectrum, while the more informed and active constituents were more likely to be more polarized. From the 2006 Cooperative Congressional Election Study (CCES) data, Abramowitz states that even Independents leaned more liberal or conservative than weak Democrats or weak Republicans respectively. Again, nonvoters made up forty-one percent of the center of the distribution affirming that only the nonvoters are non-ideological and non-polarized. In regards to social groups, Abramowitz concluded that religious commitment mattered more than social status, but overall, voter’s ideological beliefs made a greater impact on party loyalty than being part of any social

Political Polarization in America Today it is common to hear politicians and journalists refer to “today’s polarized America” and lament the effects of polarization on American political discourse. But what exactly is this polarization and is it really so destructive?

One of the greatest challenges to the development and implementation of public policy has been the inability of Congress and the president to overcome partisan polarization. This is evident in the many partisan clashes over policy between Republicans and Democrats in Congress and between Congress and the White House. Partisan polarization has become increasingly evident

In “Income Inequality: The Public and the Partisan Divide,” Blendon and Benson explain the issue of income inequality and the need to address it. The importance of explaining this problem provides insight for the people who are not educated about the topic, hopefully triggering more public awareness. Blendon and Benson support their opinion by discussing that the two major political parties in the U.S. agree that income inequality is a problem that must be recognized, but cannot come up with a synopsis on how to take care of it. Also, they describe how different perspectives cause different ideas for fixing the issue. Blendon and Benson explain how partisan views towards the role of government are one of the perspectives towards how the income

It is not uncommon for voters in the 20th and 40th percentiles to support a Republican candidate despite the economic trends associated with the political party. This concept enforces Bartels’ notion that “voters in a two-party system sometimes sacrifice secondary concerns to support candidates who share their views on the issues they care most about, (Bartels, 64). The growing conservative trend in California has given rise in the priority of public policy issues among voters. Over time Americans nation-wide have come to view inequality as “both natural and unobjectionable,” therefore decreasing the likelihood that lower income individuals will aim to achieve greater forms of equality among the more affluent, (Bartels,

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.

If one stops and takes a look at our political system today, one could be surprised by the remarkable progress that we have accomplished in this great country of ours. Many people believe that all is good in the USA, and that our political system could not be any better than it is today. However, this isn't true, our political system is taking a dive towards the worst. Who might the culprit be behind this decline of the political system in America today? The answer to this, is none other than polarization and partisanship. One might wonder, how exactly does this spread? The answer lies in social media. Americans will be able to find common ground and become less polarized, in a political sense, if and only

The Core lecture was titled “Me, Myself, and I, D or R: Politics through Red and Blue Colored Glass” and lectured by Alex Theodoridis, who is a doctor of political science. The main argument of the lecture was that polarization will continue to increase between the parties until they are no longer able to close the gap of polarization. The main 3 groups of the lecture focus on were psychology, aggregate, and 2016 election. Psychology is basically how all individuals group themselves with it each of the parties. The way many identify themselves in each parties are our attachment to the parties, influence from parents, and new perspective change. Under these condition we identify ourselves to the parties. This explains that much of identification are influence by many factors and much polarization does come to play. From the article “Polarization in the Age of Obama” explains that polarization can affect us in deciding whether or

From looking at the graphs, there is a clear correlation between party allegiance and how whether or not the government should reduce income differences. Where 58% of Democrats think that the government should reduce income differences, only 31% of Republicans think that they should. This is most likely because Republican ideals favor less government intervention in business. They often believe that restricting the market will result in fewer jobs. Democrats would often say that reducing the income differences will give more money to consumers, who will buy more things which is good for the economy. Something else that I have noticed from talking to Democrats and Republicans is that Democrats often believe that the poor are taken advantage of by the rich and they should be compensated. Republicans often think, in my experience, that the rich are rich because they worked hard for it and shouldn’t have their money taken from them to benefit the people that they don’t think worked as hard.

This past week we discussed briefly, The Disappearing Center, specifically the Polarization in the Age of Obama and how there is an expanding gap between the ideals of the republicans and democrats. In his book, Alan I. Abramowitz argues that polarization is most prevalent in those who are politically engaged, who provide support for the campaigns of elected officials (mainly those who provide money), and those who feel as though they are connected to the candidate and actively support the campaign. At the beginning of most presidencies, the president generally starts off with an approval rating above fifty percent, much like in the case of President Obama, who had sixty percent approval rating among the American people. Even though there