expat_panama
Gold Member
- Apr 12, 2011
- 3,864
- 797
from: America's Growing Ideological Gap Makes For Volatile Politics
J.T. YOUNG 4/07/2017
J.T. YOUNG 4/07/2017
As America's ideological divide is widening, its political divide is narrowing. While it is counterintuitive that a qualitative change in the American electorate could have an inverse quantitative impact on American elections, data bear that out.
Increasing polarization and political balance means even small shifts in voting can produce disproportionately large electoral swings and ideological shifts in governing — meaning much greater volatility in both.
To no one's surprise the nation's electorate is more deeply divided than formerly...
...polling in 2000 showed America's electorate to be 20% liberal, 29% conservative, and 50% moderate. Four elections later, exit polling found the electorate 26% liberal, 35% conservative, and 39% moderate.
Over sixteen years, liberals and conservatives increased at moderates' expense. Yet America maintained its balance: Both ends of the spectrum grew, thereby also increasing its ideological divide.
While voters' ideological separation was widening, the elections expressing their preferences moved in the opposite direction. Both the swing in election outcomes and the gap between the two major parties have fallen dramatically...
...small shifts in the popular vote that determine elections and trap the parties also have increasingly large impacts on governing after the election...
...Trump's share of the popular vote was 0.8% below Mitt Romney's and Hillary Clinton's 2.6% below Barack Obama's in 2012. Yet that roughly 3% swing prompted a movement of 100 electoral votes to the Republican. And few would argue against the idea that Trump's first 100 days will be significantly different from what Clinton's would have been.
If these three current trends continue — growing ideological separation, declining movement in the popular vote, and a shrinking margin between the parties — continuation of America's current politics seems inescapable. Elections will be more volatile and more hostile, and the consequences greater.
Increasing polarization and political balance means even small shifts in voting can produce disproportionately large electoral swings and ideological shifts in governing — meaning much greater volatility in both.
To no one's surprise the nation's electorate is more deeply divided than formerly...
...polling in 2000 showed America's electorate to be 20% liberal, 29% conservative, and 50% moderate. Four elections later, exit polling found the electorate 26% liberal, 35% conservative, and 39% moderate.
Over sixteen years, liberals and conservatives increased at moderates' expense. Yet America maintained its balance: Both ends of the spectrum grew, thereby also increasing its ideological divide.
While voters' ideological separation was widening, the elections expressing their preferences moved in the opposite direction. Both the swing in election outcomes and the gap between the two major parties have fallen dramatically...
...small shifts in the popular vote that determine elections and trap the parties also have increasingly large impacts on governing after the election...
...Trump's share of the popular vote was 0.8% below Mitt Romney's and Hillary Clinton's 2.6% below Barack Obama's in 2012. Yet that roughly 3% swing prompted a movement of 100 electoral votes to the Republican. And few would argue against the idea that Trump's first 100 days will be significantly different from what Clinton's would have been.
If these three current trends continue — growing ideological separation, declining movement in the popular vote, and a shrinking margin between the parties — continuation of America's current politics seems inescapable. Elections will be more volatile and more hostile, and the consequences greater.
