The Polarization Of America 's Political Parties

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.

Susan Page offers powerful support in the form of ethological appeal, logical appeal, and the use of imagery to convey readers the separation of political parties in her article, Divided We Now Stand. The rhetorical strategies Page uses help achieve her purpose of demonstrating the American people are to blame for the divided line between our citizens. Page chose these detailed and affirmative strategies to show American citizens that blaming the government for the country’s separation in wrong.

In his essay “Polarized Parties Are Good for America”, Matthew Yglesias asserts that the two-party system is ideal for America. He begins by stating that polarization is bad for elites, as it leaves little to no room for “self-styled players”. He then suggests that the two-party system is beneficial for voters, insisting that having clearly labeled candidates creates a “menu” that allows the masses to know what they’re voting for from the start. He concludes by stating that the problem isn’t in partisanship, but with the small number of parties. In this essay I will prove that the two-party system is bad for America.

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.

According to the Pew Research Center, partisan polarization has been an issue for many Americans for a long period of time. Meaning, that those Americans are not in complete agreement with either republican or democratic parties, their ideas, and standards. In response, the Pew Research Center made an anonymous survey in an attempt to find and categorize people’s typology. If one were to take the quiz, their answers would create the their new typology and show how it may correspond with either partisan parties. When I took the Pew Research Center quiz, I found out that I am in the Faith and Family Left typology category. I agree with my given typology to a certain extent. Due to the limited number of answers of the quiz and the way questions were worded, it forced me to make uncomfortable choices, which weakened my ability to agree with my results. Although, the quiz did include all government issues and involvements, I think the most prominent issue is foreign involvement, specifically, the Islamic State in which the government will have to become more active and continue to be involved in with the Islamic State.

Amidst the past eight years of lackluster economic advancement, America’s prowess and respect declining worldwide, increasing government involvement in daily lives, and a President seemingly unwilling to take a solid stance on a the global threat of terrorism, the transfer of power between political parties in the White House is not so stunning. Due to the two-party system, this is not an unprecedented phenomenon. The American people are constantly seeking a political party to garner their attention and adapt to changing times, opinions, demographics, and attitudes (Cohen) and this results in the alternation of power between the two key political parties.

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

James Campbell’s book is a political masterpiece that outlines how American voters are divided across the United States. Campbell provides a totally new perspective on the polarization with a historically context on how and why voters are politically divided. Campbell’s argument may seem indirect, but he provides circumstantial evidence and empirical evidence to support his claim of polarization. Polarized is significant to understanding American polarization, and surprisingly other books fail in comparison due to their lack of empirical evidence. Campbell’s book was written in 2016 which provides updated information that can help explain the cause of 2018 election polarization among voters.

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.

Recently, Party polarization in the US has been gaining more attention. Some claim that it is a recent phenomenon, but in fact polarization has been ongoing ever since the 18th century. Political polarization is when an individual makes a decision on an issue, policy or candidate solely based on the political party they identify with or with their chosen ideology. In the 1790s, the Jeffersonian Republicans and the Federalists were polarized over tariffs, the national bank and federal versus state and citizen power. Between the 1830s and the 1840s, polarization took form between the Whigs and the democrats. In the 1850s polarization was focused on the issue of slavery, agrarian and currency issues. In the 1930s it was welfare and in the 1960s

The United States is growing more and more polarized every year. Not only is the government refusing to cooperate with itself, but its very people are splitting into two allegiant parties. US citizens either conform to party ideals or risk losing all representation. This positive feedback loop forces people to polarize their ideas of themselves and others. People are seeing each other as either Republican or Democrat, not the complex mix they really are. America needs to drastically change how it views its citizens and politics.

The Constitution has nothing to say about political parties. Nowhere does it define political parties or explicitly specify that there should be two dominant parties. Nevertheless, America has had a strong two party system for last 150 years, a degree of party stability and endurance that can be found in no other nation (Landy and Milkis, 451). This system of two dominant parties has both its advantages and its drawbacks, the same as any system will. The two strong parties simplify and stabilize American politics from both the citizens’ and the politicians’ point of view and allow for government to be unified across the separation of powers built into the Constitution

Ever since the 1960s ideological conflict and political polarization have evolved as more factors have come into play. Examples of important factors that have fueled the evolution of these two topics are abortion, the death penalty, gay marriage, gun control, illegal immigration, Euthanasia, drug, war, and religion. These factors are important topics that over the years have caused the evolution of ideological conflict and political polarization and have caused such divide amongst the people of America when it comes to their views and stance on specific things. In my opinion I believe to the utmost degree that ideological conflict and political polarization poses a major threat to the effective functioning of the democracy in America today.