Was 2020 peak polarization?

[Roll Roons]

I wonder if it may have actually been. Love or hate Trump, no one can deny that he was extremely polarizing, and now he's out of the White House and without his biggest platform.

We've already seen online misinformation, one of the biggest causes of polarization, drop significantly. This article also discussed how the Senate confirmation hearings for Biden's cabinet have been relatively civil: https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/19/republicans-take-on-bidens-cabinet-but-without-the-trumpian-fury-460482.

[Catalyst138]

I think this is a possibility many people are overlooking. The general assumption is that polarization will continue indefinitely, but this isn’t the only time the country’s been extremely polarized (the Gilded Age of the late 19th century was similar)

And it is pretty clear that polarization was at least accelerated by Trump. There were Democrats being elected in North Dakota and Indiana as recently as 2012, and Dems had congressional seats in places like Idaho during Obama’s first term. But 2016 was the first election with no ticket splitting at all in the Senate. Elections were more nationalized than ever with Trump looming over American politics.

It’s not impossible that during the Biden administration, the country becomes less polarized (especially if he doesn’t do stuff like pack the courts, which I doubt he will). But it’s also possible that Trump was only a minor factor and that polarization will stay the same in the near future.

[Chips]

Possibly.

[dw93]

Time will tell, I wouldn't be surprised if this were in fact the case.

[pbrower2a]

Quite possibly. It's mostly an urban-rural divide with rural areas (except the Black Belt of the South) being super-heavily R (maybe 80-20) and urban and suburban America heavily D (about 65-35). The difference between Illinois and Tennessee isn't that Illinois is a "northern" state and Tennessee is "southern"; it is that Tennessee is much more rural. Memphis and Nashville are strongly R; Knox (Knoxville) and Hamilton (Chattanooga) are almost even -- but neither Nashville nor Memphis has much of a suburban fringe.  No, Tennessee has not been a hotbed of political reaction from seeming antiquity; Al Gore is from there. Tennessee used to have the reputation of the most progressive state in  the South, at least in its politics; that is over. Oh, is it over!  Illinois has Greater Chicago and huge swaths of rural area. Democrats still win Peoria (Peoria), Champaign (Champaign), McLean (Bloomington). Rock Island (Moline), and Winnebaco (Rockford) Counties, but put those counties together and you have much less than the population of either Nashville or Memphis.

But Democrats have Greater Chicago, and that matters for statewide totals. Oh, does that matter!

       

[Ferguson97]

I'm gonna go with when we had a literal Civil War.

[freepcrusher]

I think this is a possibility many people are overlooking. The general assumption is that polarization will continue indefinitely, but this isn’t the only time the country’s been extremely polarized (the Gilded Age of the late 19th century was similar)

And it is pretty clear that polarization was at least accelerated by Trump. There were Democrats being elected in North Dakota and Indiana as recently as 2012, and Dems had congressional seats in places like Idaho during Obama’s first term. But 2016 was the first election with no ticket splitting at all in the Senate. Elections were more nationalized than ever with Trump looming over American politics.

It’s not impossible that during the Biden administration, the country becomes less polarized (especially if he doesn’t do stuff like pack the courts, which I doubt he will). But it’s also possible that Trump was only a minor factor and that polarization will stay the same in the near future.

the question then is - if Clinton had won - would things be better or worse?

[MT Treasurer]

'Polarization' is mostly an overused buzzword, and you could argue that the country has never not been 'polarized' in one way or another. What people are referring to is the lack of ideological diversity within the two parties, and even more so in the Democratic Party (which in turn reduces the desire to compromise among base voters from both parties) against the backdrop of a lifestyle/cultural clash (aided by the forces of globalization, automation, and an excessive consumer culture), and that is unlikely to change any time soon. Party coalitions will probably 'depolarize' along race (I strongly doubt that this year's R gains with non-white working-class voters were a one-time thing) but the cultural (and economic) battlefield is alive and well and the battle lines are here to stay.

[brucejoel99]

I think this is a possibility many people are overlooking. The general assumption is that polarization will continue indefinitely, but this isn’t the only time the country’s been extremely polarized (the Gilded Age of the late 19th century was similar)

And it is pretty clear that polarization was at least accelerated by Trump. There were Democrats being elected in North Dakota and Indiana as recently as 2012, and Dems had congressional seats in places like Idaho during Obama’s first term. But 2016 was the first election with no ticket splitting at all in the Senate. Elections were more nationalized than ever with Trump looming over American politics.

It’s not impossible that during the Biden administration, the country becomes less polarized (especially if he doesn’t do stuff like pack the courts, which I doubt he will). But it’s also possible that Trump was only a minor factor and that polarization will stay the same in the near future.

Yeah, it could definitely end up going either way depending on what happens over the course of the Biden administration.

[Hope For A New Era]

I really hope so.

The few Biden approval polls we have so far seem to show some hint of it? We'll see if he can keep them as high as they are.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

Hard to beat the Civil War era in that regard...

However I really do hope that geographic (urban/rural) polarization, which is currently monstrous in the USA, is going to abate.

[astrohuncho]

Certain indicators like political stress index show Civil War esque factors for beyond polarization infact major unrest, although this is a very different situation from then. I genuinely think it will escalate, 2020 is not the peak.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

There is also the risk when assuming that things cannot get worse, because often life tends to find a way to make sure that very thing is what ends up happening.

Not saying it will be the case here but it is a possibility and one that people need to be careful about obviously.

[Samof94]

I'm gonna go with when we had a literal Civil War.

Think of a slavery based NRA and multiply it by 100.

[Flyersfan232]

I wonder if it may have actually been. Love or hate Trump, no one can deny that he was extremely polarizing, and now he's out of the White House and without his biggest platform.

We've already seen online misinformation, one of the biggest causes of polarization, drop significantly. This article also discussed how the Senate confirmation hearings for Biden's cabinet have been relatively civil: https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/19/republicans-take-on-bidens-cabinet-but-without-the-trumpian-fury-460482.

you literally posted this after the 6th.

[Flyersfan232]

I wonder if it may have actually been. Love or hate Trump, no one can deny that he was extremely polarizing, and now he's out of the White House and without his biggest platform.

We've already seen online misinformation, one of the biggest causes of polarization, drop significantly. This article also discussed how the Senate confirmation hearings for Biden's cabinet have been relatively civil: https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/19/republicans-take-on-bidens-cabinet-but-without-the-trumpian-fury-460482.

look under any comment of rush Limbaugh death on twitter

[Devils30]

Not necessarily, places like Hunterdon NJ, Delaware OH, Hamilton IN, Ozaukee WI could be the next phase of the realignment. Of course if Miami-Dade goes R then we should look more closely at whether we are really polarized or whether its a natural shift of the parties coalitions.

[pbrower2a]

Let's contrast 2020 to 1976. Both were close in electoral votes and the popular vote.

Ford by 10% or more 32
Ford by   5% to 10%  65
Ford by 9% to 5% 126
Carter by 5% or less 153
Carter 5% to 10% 49
Carter by 10% or more 89

Carter had a strong regional appeal, winning all former Secessionist states except Virginia, and losing the Old Dominion just barely. Even with that he ended up with only 89 electoral votes decided by 10% or more. I'm guessing that for a short time America had the New South in which blacks and whites had yet to divide on a partisan basis. That of course is over.

Except for Florida (17) and Michigan (Ford's home state, 21), states with 15 or more electoral votes in 1976 went one way or the other by less than 5%.

Consider this: fully 279 electoral votes were decided by 5% or less.  

Obviously the political life of America was quite different in 2020 from what it was in 1976. The two main Parties are clearly different in ideology to the extent that people vote largely on identity The rural-urban divide in politics is extreme polarization. It is easy for people to know nobody who voted for the Other Side. Winning elections is now a matter of getting out marginal voters for one while discouraging the marginal voters of the Other Side from voting. There were conservative and liberal elements in both Parties in 1976; until we see a realignment, likely with younger pols supplanting the older and often more fanatical ones that we now have, we will not see that again.

 

[Bootes Void]

More likely 2016 was but 2020 is tight there as well

[Hope For A New Era]

More likely 2016 was but 2020 is tight there as well

It certainly seemed like it at the time, but if you look at the results it was clearly much less polarized than 2020. I mean, Missouri almost ended up with two Democratic senators.

[smoltchanov]

Hope so. In addition to other reasons - it became utterly uninteresting to observe US politics from abroad: you can basically predict positions on almost all important issues for 98+% of Democratic candidates and 99+% of Republican after seeing a letter behind their name. That's why i prefer 1960th-1970th period, when you could find almost every type of candidates in both parties - even really conservative Democrats and really liberal Republicans. Now it's so boring....

[pbrower2a]

Hope so. In addition to other reasons - it became utterly uninteresting to observe US politics from abroad: you can basically predict positions on almost all important issues for 98+% of Democratic candidates and 99+% of Republican after seeing a letter behind their name. That's why i prefer 1960th-1970th period, when you could find almost every type of candidates in both parties - even really conservative Democrats and really liberal Republicans. Now it's so boring....

It's as if the Parties have become brand names, and that the Parties control their "product" (elected officials) like a manufacturer controls the taste of a soft drink. You don't expect a wildly different taste from normal with a soft drink.

Here's the problem: the system creates little room for any genuine moderates, people who can buck a party line on some principle. We have politicians who think it fine that some people think it acceptable to thwart the results of an election. We have the potential for totalitarian-style personality cults. Maybe because Democrats are more diverse they are less vulnerable... but one can't fully be sure. 

[Del Tachi]

I'm guessing that for a short time America had the New South

Yes, and now we live in the Old South once more, lol.  FFS....

[Samof94]

I'm gonna go with when we had a literal Civil War.

1860 was basically two elections.