Hajoon “HJ” Yun
Dr. Parrish
ISM II
25 Sep 25
In the last 30 years, the United States has gone through a political transformation. Now more than ever, Americans seem to be polarized and on the extreme ends of the political spectrum. Both the 2020 and 2024 presidential elections were marked with the highest level of petty politics, personal attacks, and voter dissatisfaction. New research shows, however, that Americans may not be as polarized or divided as first perceived.
Americans across the spectrum share many of the same sentiments on the hottest policy issues. For example, around 40% of Republicans and 80% of Democrats support a federal assault weapons ban (Kleinfeld). However, only 18% of Republicans feel gun violence is a major problem (Kleinfeld). Despite a significant overlap in the same issues, it is apparent that only one side is willing to take action and publicly support the policy proposals.
Although the vast majority of the political spectrum seems to agree on many issues, data has shown that both major political ideologies have moved further apart in recent years. The gap between belief and actions can be attributed to both sides holding misconceptions about the opposing party’s preferences and platform (Kleinfeld). The misconception grows bigger as the range of political involvement comes closer and closer to the edge. For progressive activists (far-left) and devoted conservatives (far-right), the perception gap is close to 4% - emphasizing the need for party leadership to push out messages of unity and bipartisanship.
The issue with entrusting party leaders to emphasize the importance of political bipartisanship is that most political leaders are more polarized than the average American (Kleinfeld). Even if American voters are less polarized and less extreme, party leaders often choose the most extreme candidates over moderates due to a self-fulfilling prophecy that the more extreme a candidate is, the less likely it is that they will lose their seat. In 2013, Republican party chairs selected a ratio of 10 extremist candidates for every 1 moderate while the Democrats selected a ratio of 2 extremist candidates for every 1 moderate (Kleinfeld). Since primaries are dominated by party loyalists, most voters are left with no choice but to vote for one of two extremist candidates in most elections.
Polarization can be broken down into specific categories such as emotional and ideological polarization. While Americans are less ideologically polarized, they seem to be more emotionally polarized. Emotional polarization is the term used to describe the development of animosity in one group directed to another group. In the political context, affective polarization is used to describe how strong one party’s sentiment is towards the opposing party (Kleinfeld). Social media has been the fuel behind the rise in affective polarization, creating echo chambers and algorithms that cater to users’ political views.
Polarization is on the rise. However, labeling the various categories of polarization is vital to understand the roots behind it. In this first part, the article explores what the reality vs. data show. Although the data shows that Americans are less polarized than they believe, the reality and atmosphere feels the hottest it's been in modern times. Through more data analysis, the roots behind polarization can be uncovered, one statistic at a time.
.
.
.
Works Cited
Kleinfeld, Rachel. “Polarization, Democracy, and Political Violence in the United States: What the Research Says.” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 5 Sept. 2023, carnegieendowment.org/research/2023/09/polarization-democracy-and-political-violence-in-the-united-states-what-the-research-says?lang=en.