A Nation ... Oddly Polarized

Americans understand that social inequality and discrimination are still a problem. More than half of Americans believe that to be true, and formal research supports their belief. 

Now note the differences between political parties.  

Less than 1 in 3 Republicans but almost 8 in 10 Democrats say discrimination is a significant problem. That's what political polarization looks like. What part is based on information?  Results are similar across party platform subject lines, and people of faith and conscience have a problem. 

When the racial discrimination question was first asked in 1994, the partisan difference was 13 points. By 2009, it was only somewhat larger (19 points). But today (2017), the gap in opinions between Republicans and Democrats about racial discrimination has increased to 50 points.

Regarding Islam, the details of which are unfamiliar to most, we find that no factual analysis underlies our strong opinions.  Other issues are positioned similarly by the parties. 

Now, 27% of Democrats and 36% of Republicans see the opposing party as a threat to national well-being, and biased media outlets fan the flame.

Perhaps the most troubling, the Pew Research Center (2014) found that this partisan trend is exaggerated at the polls; specifically, the more extreme an individual's political position, the more likely they are to vote. Now project the effect of that on candidates and governance over time ....

Recent studies conclude our political polarization is largely fear-based.  Today, we have the highest levels of straight-ticket voting since the American National Election Studies first began reporting in 1952.  The trend indicates we are voting against the opposition party rather than for individual candidates based on issues and information.  If, as the studies suggest, our partisanship is based on fear of (animosity toward) the other party, what risks and options do we have ahead of us.
______________________________________

How bad is this problem? In “The Strengthening of Partisan Affect,” Shanto Iyengar and Masha Krupenkin, political scientists at Stanford, note that

We find that as animosity toward the opposing party has intensified, it has taken on a new role as the prime motivator in partisans’ political lives.

Iyengar and Krupenkin argue that

the impact of feelings toward the out-party on both vote choice and the decision to participate has increased since 2000; today it is out-group animus rather than in-group favoritism that drives political behavior.

Along parallel lines, Alan Abramowitz and Steven Webster, political scientists at Emory University, argue that

one of the most important trends in American politics over the past several decades has been the rise of negative partisanship in the electorate.

__________________________________________________

Understanding the country is a citizen's task.