NationStates Jolt Archive

NOTE: I thought this was interesting. I've often thought the polarization between Dems and Reps was growing and now there's verification. Certainly doesn't bode well for us centrists. ;)


One Nation, Divisible (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/23/opinion/24ornstein.html?th&emc=th)


By NORMAN ORNSTEIN and BARRY MCMILLION
Published: June 23, 2005

There is a lot of talk about political polarization in Congress. But is it true? Well, yes. Keith Poole and Howard Rosenthal, social scientists at the University of Houston and Princeton, respectively, used systematic measures of liberalism and conservatism built around government intervention in the economy to chart roll-call votes in Congress. We have adapted their scores to look at the House and Senate in each decade from 1955 to the present. The result? Thirty-three percent of House members were near-pure centrists in 1955; in 2004, just over eight percent fit that category. Thirty-nine senators were centrists in 1955, compared with nine in 2004.

The differences are attributable to the emergence of the permanent campaign, the rise of partisan news media and, most of all, changes in Congressional redistricting. The expansion in the number of “safe” seats in the House that began in the 1980’s has put an increased importance on primaries, which favor more ideological candidates. A number of these sharp-edged representatives have then moved to the Senate, where they have helped widen the partisan gulf we have talked about — and now can see.

All you have to do is watch this forum to see the growing polarization. :)

All you have to do is watch this forum to see the growing polarization. :)

Aha! That's exactly the kind of thing a leftist/righty/hippie/warmongerer/liberal/conservative/Democan/Republicrat/ capitalistpig/communist/fascist/anarchist/sane/insane/right/wrong/fat/thin/ big/small/pepperoni/anchovy/us/them/law/criminals/good/bad/ugly/beautiful! would say! Very telling.

Aha! That's exactly the kind of thing a leftist/righty/hippie/warmongerer/
liberal/conservative/
Democan/Republicrat/capitalist pig/
communist/fascist/anarchist/
sane/insane/right/wrong/fat/thin/
big/small/pepperoni/anchovy/us/
them/law/criminals/good/bad/ugly/
beautiful! would say! Very telling.

LOL!!

Aha! That's exactly the kind of thing a leftist/righty/hippie/warmongerer/liberal/conservative/Democan/Republicrat/ capitalistpig/communist/fascist/anarchist/sane/insane/right/wrong/fat/thin/ big/small/pepperoni/anchovy/us/them/law/criminals/good/bad/ugly/beautiful! would say! Very telling.
ROFL! Well said! :D

Aha! That's exactly the kind of thing a leftist/righty/hippie/warmongerer/liberal/conservative/Democan/Republicrat/ capitalistpig/communist/fascist/anarchist/sane/insane/right/wrong/fat/thin/ big/small/pepperoni/anchovy/us/them/law/criminals/good/bad/ugly/beautiful! would say! Very telling.

Only a Nazi would say something like that.

Only a Nazi would say something like that.

Yeah, or I guess a feminazi. Sieg Heil, girls, right? RIGHT?? :p

Only a Nazi would say something like that.

And we all know that only an anarcho-pacifist green would respond like that, so there! ;)

And we all know that only an anarcho-pacifist green would respond like that, so there! ;)

Just like a baby-killer to respond like that.

Just like a baby-killer to respond like that.

Well only a vegan cannibal would call me a baby-killer. Aha! :D

*snip*

The differences are attributable to the emergence of the permanent campaign, the rise of partisan news media and, most of all, changes in Congressional redistricting. The expansion in the number of “safe” seats in the House that began in the 1980’s has put an increased importance on primaries, which favor more ideological candidates. A number of these sharp-edged representatives have then moved to the Senate, where they have helped widen the partisan gulf we have talked about — and now can see.

Some of the fighting is over pure political posturing, of course. This is true and always has been true and will continue to be true. But middle ground voters could then decided issues and the losing side could ‘learn’ to get used to it.

However, the media source and political posturing and hanging out with like minded individuals is not what has changed the climate and it’s not why the central has shrunk.

The central has shrunk because there are more polarizing issues that have been introduced since the 1950’s. Issues that some people feel like they ‘can’t compromise on (for whatever reasons) ever, even after they have lost, they ‘can’t get used to it.

Much like the polarized condition of the American politics in the 1850’s (Federal power or State power, Slavery etc., North v. South etc.,) people had to choose sides because there was no way to compromise anymore, the nation had to go one way or the other (on many issues), once and for all, and the desire for peace could not resolve the issues that wouldn’t go away via compromise.

Likewise, today, with Abortion vs. Choice, the Death Penalty and Religion in Society/Government, these issues, unlike other normal political issues, do not have room for middle ground stances and thus, the polarizing of the nation has/is occurring.

We’ll have to wait and see what happens…

Polarization, THAT is the word I forgot when I was talknig about what the electoral college deos to america, thanks for reminding me

I knew it! I'm going to go and liberate the Northern States! Who wants to help?

I don't know Eutrusca, I think the "core" issues, like balancing the budget, the concern for our troops and the Iraq war and things like health care etc.. most Americans seem inline and not divided, with of course the division of those for or against the war.

I think where the real divisions lay are in cultural and social values. That seems to be where I at least see right vs. left etc..etc.. things like gay marriage, abortion, sex on TV, religion, those seem to be the more dividing issues. When it comes to the core issues in America, I think the majority of people are on the same page on the most part.

I dunno, I'm no expert, it's just the way I see it, I could be totally off base. *shrug*

Yeah, and I suppose the rise of Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich and the right wing noise machine had absolutely nothing to do with the coarsening of public discourse. :rolleyes:

And Eutrusca--you're about as centrist as either of those guys mentioned above. You might as well drop the act, because no one's buying it.

And Eutrusca--you're about as centrist as either of those guys mentioned above. You might as well drop the act, because no one's buying it.

Eutrusca's "centrism" is like driving behind some dude going 35 in the passsing lane. He thinks he's in the center of the highway, even if people are getting increasingly riled at his blithe ignorance.

And Eutrusca--you're about as centrist as either of those guys mentioned above. You might as well drop the act, because no one's buying it.

Ah, but you see, an Internet quiz told him he was centrist! That makes him centrist, you know. (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9127070&postcount=113)

A partisan news media, coupled with their confusion of news and entertainment, has much to do with polarization. An ideologically driven alternative media, i.e. blogs, further separates people.

It's difficult for a moderate person to find a single news source that isn't biased to a large degree. I'm a news junky and have always sought information from multiple sources, including selecting specific anchors on specific channels. But Joe Workinguy can't really get unbiased news on one channel or from one newspaper anymore.

Maybe he is just personally centrist. His political arm seems to be throwing more to the Reps than the Dems, but that might just be the military influence.

Bull ca-ca. He is trying to undermine the political left.

Would it be asking too much for you guys to start your own thread?

Didn't your mother tell you that if "you don't have anything good to say then say nothing at all".

Maybe some people would like to have a serious discussion here - and you're contributing nothing.

Maybe some people would like to have a serious discussion here - and you're contributing nothing.

This is an EAT ("Eutrusca's Article Thread"). They don't contribute anything, ever.

Maybe some people would like to have a serious discussion here - and you're contributing nothing.

So - discuss something, already.

This is a good topic, why are some of you so insistent on polluting with personal attacks on Etrusca. I'm pretty sure he votes according to his conscience, not some party line. How Etrusca votes isn't really relvant to the topic of the thread anyway. Its about Centrism vs. Polarization in the Senate.

Commenting as an outsider (Canadian) I have to agree, I've seen a definite shift to polarization in the US Senate, with much less bi-partisan intitatives than I saw when I first started noticing American poltcs back in the late 80s. From what the article and some others have said, things we already changing back then, but the current situation is in visible contrast to the atmosphere of US politics as recently as the late 80's and mid 90s. The same sort of thing has been happeing in Canda, but its a quite recent development.

Yeah, and I suppose the rise of Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich and the right wing noise machine had absolutely nothing to do with the coarsening of public discourse. :rolleyes:

And Eutrusca--you're about as centrist as either of those guys mentioned above. You might as well drop the act, because no one's buying it.

in the case of television news":

...as opposed to the days before the Republicans had a voice on TV... when every network spewed liberal bias?

what's wrong with different views on TV?

don't whine about the fact that democrats no longer control all media

newspaper check:

if you want to know which way the local paper leans, check out their election endorsements.

The Tennessean endorsed Kerry in the latest presidential election. This didn't surprise me at all, since I know it's a liberal rag anyway, but it put my suspicions in stone.

http://explog.com/

Ok, the role of the US press in contributing to the political polarization of America. Particularly television news. Because newspapers tend to be read more by people who are interested in learning.

I posted earlier on this - agree, disagree?

Is the tv news media deliberately exaggerating polarizing issues to get market share, or worse yet to indoctrinate viewers with their particular version of political truth?

Polarization has occured because people allow others to label them. For example, if I was to call X a liberal that label would most likely stick. X may not be such but if I alled Y a conservative then the rest of thr group would choose a side. That si what American politicis is now, choosing a side and fighting relentlessly against the opposition.

For all REAL centrists. Do not worry. If the two sides continue to fight, stay out of it and do not be taken in by their propaganda bullshit. Both sides are at fault and in reality, it is the majority of the American peoples' fault for allowing this to happen.

I think U.S. politics has definitely become more polarized amongst the POLITICIANS. I mean, dear God, what has happened to the Democratic and Republican parties? I am disgusted with both of them. The Republican party has been hijacked by pseudo-conservatives, leaving all the others to clean up the mess they make. Bush is a left-wing corporatist interventist (a lot like FDR actually), and he STILL make feeble attempts to claim he's conservative. The only reason he has support is because of the fundementalist right that agrees with his stance on moral issues. It's insane. It makes me want to create a new political party to uphold what conservatism used to be about--small government, low taxes, low spending, low societal, foreign and economic intervention (ie: no corporate welfare, no unnecessary wars, no patriot act). Heck, if the true conservatives and libertarians unite, I think we stand a chance.

Now to the Democratic party. Geez. What the hell were they thinking electing DEAN as the DNC? I think the guys seriously on -- ome of the things he's said are ridiculous, and meanwhile you have others who want to exit Iraq now, and just forget about it. I mean, sure Democrats have a lot to complain about, but they aren't being constructive, rather just ranting and insulting. Republicans are doing the same thing back. The left is just becoming more left, and the right...well, they're becoming more left in many ways too, more they are certainly drifting towards m (I don't seriously think we live under t rule, but according to the political spectrum that's the direction we're heading).

Whatever happened to BIPARTISANSHIP, and tactful, inciteful debate? Whatever happened to cooperation? I think about all the problems we have to solve (energy situation, Iraq-Iran-N Korea-etc.. social security, the defecit, and feel hopeless because of who we have in the government to work with. We need some major changes...or...I to think about what might happen.

[END RANT] :headbang:

For all REAL centrists. Do not worry. If the two sides continue to fight, stay out of it and do not be taken in by their propaganda . Both sides are at fault and in reality, it is the majority of the American peoples' fault for allowing this to happen.

I completely agree. However, it's not just centrists that have to watch out, but basically any rational person. Our politicans are essentially giving us two choices--both are bad, and the sad thing is most Americans could care less. They apathetically allow this insanity to occur, they fall into propaganda, and take the easy route (aka the "non-thinking" route).

<snip>

They apathetically allow this insanity to occur, they fall into propaganda, and take the easy route (aka the "non-thinking" route).

I agree. Some poor solutions, a population largely ignorant of the issues, fed hand-selected baloney from the media designed to polarize further - and that kind of news reporting is now considered acceptable. The media pours fuel onto the fire and reports on the size of the fire.