The Rise of Polarization in American Politics

[RoshawnMarkwees]

The polarization has always been there.

The difference between today and 30 (or 200) years ago is, I believe, the scope or scale of the polarization.

An unanticipated outcome of the invention of radio and TV and cable and the Internet and smart-phones and tablets and lions and tigers and bears, oh my.

More informed people = more broad-scale intensity of opinion, as well as diversity of opinion.

I disagree with the result. Instead of people being more informed (that would require effort) they are more easily brainwashed and conditioned by the intensity and immediacy of electronic media. Brainwashers on the left have dominated media and have succeeded the most with the brainwashing.

I suggest we differentiate between (1) those willing to use technology to do their own self-informing vs. (2) sheeple who simply eat what they're fed.

I see things trending towards (1), while you appear to see the residual and modest dominance of (2) as remaining operative over the long haul.

That might be a result of where we live. I'm surrounded by a black county but live within a much smaller, isolated white left wing town. I see blind left wing partisanship everywhere here.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You know..............even though Bill Clinton had his problems with the GOP during his presidency, he at least managed to work with them enough to leave office with a net surplus for the budget.

I think the polarization started under Jr. right after the 9/11 attacks, because we started to think in terms of "us and them". Remember what Jr. said? If you're not with us, you're against us.

Politicians then took rhetoric like that and used it not only against terrorists, but started to also use it against anyone that wasn't in agreement with them. You could see it when terms like "Nazi" and "Communist", as well as others started to surface when commenting about other politicians they didn't like.

That trend continued on, and really came to the forefront after Obama was elected, where it grew even stronger until we currently have the fracturing of not only our political system, but fracturing of the individual parties as well. Look at the way parts of the GOP talk about other parts.

The only way we're going to fix this is for the politicians to dial down the rhetoric, but it probably won't happen, because it's the inflammatory language that really seems to stir parts of the base, which the politicians then translate into donations and campaign funds for their next election.

 

[bedowin62]

You know..............even though Bill Clinton had his problems with the GOP during his presidency, he at least managed to work with them enough to leave office with a net surplus for the budget.

yes; proving obama is no clinton. also you mean republicans worked with clinton despite his trampling the law and perjury?

I think the polarization started under Jr. right after the 9/11 attacks, because we started to think in terms of "us and them". Remember what Jr. said? If you're not with us, you're against us.

what part of this ^ isnt true? if you arent against islamo-fascism, arent fighting it, you are enabling it or ignoring it or rationalizing it

Politicians then took rhetoric like that and used it not only against terrorists, but started to also use it against anyone that wasn't in agreement with them. You could see it when terms like "Nazi" and "Communist", as well as others started to surface when commenting about other politicians they didn't like.
the left excels in this

That trend continued on, and really came to the forefront after Obama was elected, where it grew even stronger until we currently have the fracturing of not only our political system, but fracturing of the individual parties as well. Look at the way parts of the GOP talk about other parts.
it came to the forefront under obama because OBAMA USED THIS TACTIC

The only way we're going to fix this is for the politicians to dial down the rhetoric, but it probably won't happen, because it's the inflammatory language that really seems to stir parts of the base, which the politicians then translate into donations and campaign funds for their next election.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Hey bedowin62, remember when McConnell and Boehner got together right after the election and told the Republicans that their purpose in life was to make Obama a one term President?

Sounds like the right started with those tactics first.

 

[bedowin62]

Hey bedowin62, remember when McConnell and Boehner got together right after the election and told the Republicans that their purpose in life was to make Obama a one term President?

Sounds like the right started with those tactics first.

i'm trying to be nice; you're not making it easy. what you're saying is well, idiotic

BOTH PARTIES want the other guy to serve one term

to deny that is just moronic. now the actual record shows obama and his Party WILLINGLY voted FOR and CONTINUED nearly every Bush policy long after he was gone.
that is your problem; it's not the job of the opposition to roll over and play dead for your failed Progressive community organizer

 

[auditor0007]

This is a really great article that thoroughly discusses how the American political climate has changed over the past thirty years and how it has led to what many believe is the greatest polarization in the history of American politics.

Rise of polarization

Were we to chart on a graph the rise in polarization in Washington, it would correlate with the broadcast changes that began with Downey. Consider that every year for the last three decades, the National Journal has been tracking the ideological leanings of Congress. That analysis suggests we are at an all-time high for polarization.

In 2014, and for the fourth straight year, every Senate Republican was more conservative than every Senate Democrat, and every Senate Democrat was more liberal than every Senate Republican. (The House is similarly divided.) Resist any temptation to think it has always been like this. According to the Journal, in 1982, on Ronald Reagan's watch, "58 senators and 344 House members had voting records that put them between the most liberal Republican and the most conservative Democrat."

There were so many Republican Senate moderates during Reagan's time in the White House that they had their own weekly gathering, the Wednesday Lunch Club. Members included Alan Simpson, Ted Stevens, Nancy Kassebaum, John Heinz, Arlen Specter, Bob Packwood and Bob Dole. Today there would be no members showing up for lunch.

Here's another barometer of change in the last 30 years: According to tabulations from Congressional Quarterly, as late as the 1970s, the typical member of one party voted with his colleagues just over 60% of the time. Those numbers have risen every decade. In 2010, Democrats voted together 91% of the time, and Republicans 89% of the time.

Unfortunately, those able to reverse these trends have ceded the debate to the loudest voices. A Gallup survey released in January found that more Americans regard themselves as independent (43%) than Democrat (30%) or Republican (26%). But any ground gained by the nonpartisan ranks continues to be offset by higher political interest resting at the political extremes. It's all about passion. As documented by Pew Research Center this past spring, liberals and conservativesexceed moderates and independents in their level of political interest, which translates into voter participation.

Read the entire article here: Morton Downey He drove us into our national ditch - CNN.com

As for the polarization, it can be best seen right here at USMB. Outside of a very limited number of posters, USMB is filled with absolute partisan ideologues.

The author has a radio show on SIRIUS/XM. He's a former HW Bush campaign aide and a former Republican. Good show.

I enjoy listening to him as he is one of the few reasonable voices when it comes to political discussions.

 

[auditor0007]

The parties have always been at each others throats. We are nothing special.

Actually, I don't remember it being like this thirty years ago, and the fact that representatives in Congress consistently crossed the aisle to vote for or against their own party at times is proof of this as it almost never happens currently.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

You know..............even though Bill Clinton had his problems with the GOP during his presidency, he at least managed to work with them enough to leave office with a net surplus for the budget.

I think the polarization started under Jr. right after the 9/11 attacks, because we started to think in terms of "us and them". Remember what Jr. said? If you're not with us, you're against us.

Politicians then took rhetoric like that and used it not only against terrorists, but started to also use it against anyone that wasn't in agreement with them. You could see it when terms like "Nazi" and "Communist", as well as others started to surface when commenting about other politicians they didn't like.

That trend continued on, and really came to the forefront after Obama was elected, where it grew even stronger until we currently have the fracturing of not only our political system, but fracturing of the individual parties as well. Look at the way parts of the GOP talk about other parts.

The only way we're going to fix this is for the politicians to dial down the rhetoric, but it probably won't happen, because it's the inflammatory language that really seems to stir parts of the base, which the politicians then translate into donations and campaign funds for their next election.

The current level of polarization began when Al Gore lost the election of 2000. That's when the mask fell off the Democratic Party.

The only way we're going to fix this is to wrest the education system away from the Democrats. It has produced two generations of ignorant, psychologically-malleable sheep, and will continue to do so until stopped.

 

[ABikerSailor]

You mean, when Jr. stole the election from Gore.

 

[MACAULAY]

The polarization has been going on from the beginning of the country, but there are times when its particularly troublesome. Two times have been as bad as today.

Adams and his party of control freaks, the forerunners of today's Democrats....appropriately called Federalists....got control...passed the Sedition Acts and were putting people in jail for criticizing the Adams Administration. It was Political Correctness run amuk...as today

That's why Jefferson ran against him...beat his ass, and veered the country back to individual freedom and initiative...The Era of Good Feelings followed and the Federalist Party died out.

Then there was the drift to War that occurred in the 1850's in which 600,000 died.

Don't know which will happen this time....The Socialist Obama has just over 500 days left to derange the Constitution and the American way of life. How much more damage can he do?

Fortunately, there is a strong field of up and coming Jeffersonians....Carson, Fiorina, Rubio...to name just three that can beat Bill Clinton's bogus wife.

 

[Pogo]

The polarization has been going on from the beginning of the country, but there are times when its particularly troublesome. Two times have been as bad as today.

Adams and his party of control freaks, the forerunners of today's Democrats....appropriately called Federalists....got control...passed the Sedition Acts and were putting people in jail for criticizing the Adams Administration. It was Political Correctness run amuk...as today

That's why Jefferson ran against him...beat his ass, and veered the country back to individual freedom and initiative...The Era of Good Feelings followed and the Federalist Party died out.

Then there was the drift to War that occurred in the 1850's in which 600,000 died.

Don't know which will happen this time....The Socialist Obama has just over 500 days left to derange the Constitution and the American way of life.

Fortunately, there is a strong field of up and coming Jeffersonians....Carson, Fiorina, Rubio...to name just three that can beat Bill Clinton's wife.

"Forerunners of today's Democrats".... "Jeffersonians"...

Just yesterday, this guy was claiming the opposite, that Tom Jefferson invented Democrats. Then there's Special Ed, who never tires of claiming Jefferson started the Republican Party --- even though TJ died 28 years before its inception.

Jefferson's a busy guy. Plays for both sides, depending on what the poster needs at the time. In reality, Jefferson's "Democratic-Republican" Party was related to neither. Both our modern parties were formed after D-R had gone away. Same with the Federalists.

As for the idea of a strong central government with big influence, that's been with us forever; it was a feature of the Federalists, obviously, and when they died out a new party called the Whigs carried the banner, and when they withered, another new party called the Republicans took the ball. Today it's fused into both parties, to the point where they're mutually indistinguishable.

Pray, what war took place in the 1850s that killed 600,000? That Millard Fillmore, I knew we couldn't trust him. He was a Whig.

And btw "sedition" has jack squat to do with "political correctness". It has to do with direct political power.

Oh, and "Bill Clinton's wife" --- classic.
But there's no war on women.... no war on women... no war on women... no war

 

[BluesLegend]

The parties have always been at each others throats. We are nothing special.

Actually, I don't remember it being like this thirty years ago, and the fact that representatives in Congress consistently crossed the aisle to vote for or against their own party at times is proof of this as it almost never happens currently.

Our government has simply become more corrupted than before. Lies, corruption, patronage, kick backs, ignoring federal laws, ignoring the US Constitution, ignoring rulings by federal judges. Its putrid.

 

[Skylar]

The parties have always been at each others throats. We are nothing special.

The degree of polarization is higher today than its been in the past.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The parties have always been at each others throats. We are nothing special.

Actually, I don't remember it being like this thirty years ago, and the fact that representatives in Congress consistently crossed the aisle to vote for or against their own party at times is proof of this as it almost never happens currently.

Perhaps not this bad 30 years ago, but the origins of today's hyper-partisanism began during Vietnam/Pentagon Papers/Watergate – when substantive governance was replaced with hot-button politics, wedge issues, and the perception of compromise as surrender and capitulation.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Pretty much, just have to wait a few years for the older conservatives to die out and then we can just steamroll all their ideology out of the country. It's the only viable solution.

Wouldn't that just make our politics more polarized? What good does alienating people with a certain ideology do for reducing the polarization in our politics? Your post speaks for the exclusivity of your party, one that says it is diverse and tolerant of all views. No, you aren't.

 

[Windship]

This was all predicted back in the late 60s. What you hear from the Democrats today matches the same lunatic crap the Leftist counter-culture of the time spouted. Some of those people and/or their supporters are now running the country. There can be no compromise with them.

Is that what u want?...compromise? Lmao. After we gave the insanely greedy corporations everything they want for 45 years?!! At the expense of jobs, infrastructure, taxes, education, border patrol, etc, etc and then, for the companies and business' here? we let the illegals in for cheap labor. Are you fkn kidding? The right has gotten almost everything they wanted for the last 45 years!! THATS WHY WE ARE SO SCREWED UP IN THE U.S.!
"compromise"?...fuuuuuck me.

 

[Skylar]

The parties have always been at each others throats. We are nothing special.

Actually, I don't remember it being like this thirty years ago, and the fact that representatives in Congress consistently crossed the aisle to vote for or against their own party at times is proof of this as it almost never happens currently.

Perhaps not this bad 30 years ago, but the origins of today's hyper-partisanism began during Vietnam/Pentagon Papers/Watergate – when substantive governance was replaced with hot-button politics, wedge issues, and the perception of compromise as surrender and capitulation.

Take a look nominate scaling method on congressional and presidential political polarization. Its never been this bad. The republicans lead the charge of polarization in the late 80s and continue to do so. The democrats have been playing catch up.

Political Polarization

On an electorate level, there is also a move from the middle. More people are becoming independent. But more people consider themselves strongly liberal or strongly conservative. So it seems to be more of an abandonment of party in defining one's view of political ideology.

Since the Citizens United ruling, self identified liberals has climbed steadily, reaching all time highs of about 24%. Conservatives down 2 points from their 2010 peak, now at 38%. And self identified moderates has absolutely plummeted. Down from 43% in 1992 to 34% today. With most of those moderates becoming liberals (up from 17% to 24%).

I suspect that the rise of self identified liberals is strongly tied to the sense of a rise in corporate power with the Citizen's United Ruling. As the role of big money in politics has never been as widespread and as obvious as it is right now.

 

[bedowin62]

YAWN

all I see is a bunch of left-wing nutjobs spewing hate in the name of tolerance. there is no rise in "self-identified liberals", they just come out of the woodwork. the rise of the Tea party and other groups is a direct response to liberal/progressive overreach. it's also the reason Dems lost the House and the Senate

 

[bedowin62]

This was all predicted back in the late 60s. What you hear from the Democrats today matches the same lunatic crap the Leftist counter-culture of the time spouted. Some of those people and/or their supporters are now running the country. There can be no compromise with them.

Is that what u want?...compromise? Lmao. After we gave the insanely greedy corporations everything they want for 45 years?!! At the expense of jobs, infrastructure, taxes, education, border patrol, etc, etc and then, for the companies and business' here? we let the illegals in for cheap labor. Are you fkn kidding? The right has gotten almost everything they wanted for the last 45 years!! THATS WHY WE ARE SO SCREWED UP IN THE U.S.!
"compromise"?...fuuuuuck me.

you left-wing loons didn't "give" anybody anything; your Donkey Party is neck-deep in rich corporate interests but just cant admit it

 

[bedowin62]

The parties have always been at each others throats. We are nothing special.

The degree of polarization is higher today than its been in the past.

and what Party is in charge?

hmmmmmmmm