THE PARTY DIVIDE

As the last posting stated, this blog is now concerned with the current polarization of the national political landscape.  The divides facing the citizenry can be detected on many fronts.  Regularly, Americans have been divided, to varying degrees of intensity, along political party lines.  Political parties can be traced back to the origins of the government.  Then the split was between the Federalists and the Democratic-Republicans.  Currently, the popular musical, Hamilton, can give the reader an overview of that division.

          But, as the last posting indicated, the division today seems significantly more intense, one in which socializing with those of the other side has become an issue.  Political party division is but one factor or area upon which one can find polarization taking place.  One research group that has looked into this arena has been the Pew Research Center.  The reader is encouraged to look up their various reports concerning this and other issues that the Center has investigated.  It basically conducts survey research projects into these contemporary issues.

          This posting, in reporting the writer’s research into polarization, shares one such report.[1]  That report was issued just the other day, June 25.  It looks at one example of this divide, how Democrats and Republicans view various aspects of the coronavirus pandemic.  This posting will share a sample of Pew’s findings in relation to six more specific issues – how do members of each party feel about how those issues should be considered or treated by government or the people?

          First, here are some of the particulars of the study.  Pew conducted a national survey from June 16-25.  The survey questioned 4,708 adults through the Center’s American Trends Panel.  Here, the study gives the reader an indication of how the citizenship is divided in one area of concern.  Guiding this posting’s effort is to see if the writer can garner information as to the nature of the reputed polarization many have reported and is but one attempt to garner a better understanding at what is causing Americans to be so at odds. 

The last posting introduced the reader to a journalist, Ezra Klein, and his recently published book that offers a comprehensive overview of the divide.[2]  With this posting, the writer is sharing with the reader a “progress report” of the writer’s efforts to research this topic.  What follows is arranged in relation to six “issues” that the Pew report identifies.  The Pew findings are merely listed without much commentary by this blogger.

Issue 1:  Has the COVID 19 crisis turned the corner, allowing for more normal times?

·       61% of Republicans and Republican leaning independents believe the “worse is behind us” and 38% believe “the worse is still to come” (56% believed this latter opinion in April);

·       23% of Democrats and Democratic leaning independents believe the “worse is behind us” and 76% believe it is “still to come” (87% believed this latter opinion in April).

Issue 2:  General Concern over Coronavirus – how has the spreading of the disease taken place?

·       62% of Americans are fearful of having been instrumental in spreading the disease (30% very concerned); 51% are concerned they will get the disease and require hospitalization (24% very concerned).

·       45% of Republicans are concerned about unknowingly spreading the disease or contracting it; 35% of Republicans worry about contracting it and needing hospitalization; in April, 58% worried about unknowingly spreading the disease and 47% worried about contracting it.

·       77% of Democrats are very or somewhat concerned they will spread disease and 64% of getting the disease.

·       From April until June, blacks’ concern about individually spreading the disease is up 8 points (from 64% to 72%).

·       During that time, whites’ concern about individually spreading the disease is down 8 points (from 65% to 56%).

Issue 3:  What is the impact of ordinary Americans’ behavior in spreading the disease?

·       87% of Americans believe actions of ordinary Americans have a great or fair impact on how the disease spreads;

·       59% believe that impact is great, 73% of Democrats believe this impact exists to a great degree; 44% of Republicans agree.

Issue 4:  To what degree do people feel comfortable with “opening” the economy?

·       44% of Americans feel comfortable eating out in a restaurant (22% in mid-March); 79% feel comfortable going to a hospital (57% in mid-March); currently, 65% of Republicans feel comfortable eating at a restaurant vs. 28% of Democrats (in mid-March:  29% of Republicans vs. 16% of Democrats felt that way).

·       18% of Americans feel comfortable attending a crowded party (that breaks down to 31% of Republican and 8% of Democrats); 23% feel comfortable attending indoor sporting event or concert.

·       53% of Americans feel comfortable at a hair salon or barber shop; 77% feel comfortable entertaining family and friends at home; 79% feel comfortable going the grocery store.  In each of these Republicans and Republican leaners feel comfortable at a higher rate than Democrats and Democrat leaners (widest span exists in terms of going to hair salons and barber shops) – actual percentage amount not listed.

Issue 5.  To what degree has the disease affected the economy?

·       General assessment of the economy in January was 57% believed it was excellent or good, in April and June this positive assessment was/is shared by 25% of those surveyed.  In these later surveys, 46% of Republicans find the economy excellent or good; only 9% of Democrats agree.

·       Republicans are much less likely to see the continuance of government stimulus is necessary as compared to April; Democrats continue to see a stimulus as necessary. 71% of Americans favor a new stimulus package is needed (beyond $2 trillion already enacted), down from 77% in April, the decrease has come entirely among Republicans; 51% of Republicans still say it will be necessary, 47% say it will not be needed (66% in April said it was needed). Democrats overwhelmingly continue to believe additional economic stimulus is needed (that’s 87%, unchanged since April).

Issue 6.  How do Americans feel about other government aid?

·       88% of Americans support helping homeowners, renters, and businesses.  This includes large numbers in both parties.

·       91% of Democrats support helping state and local government, 58% of Republicans agree; overall 58% support that assistance.

·       77% of Democrats favor extending unemployment benefits ($600/week), 39% of Republicans agree; overall, 60% of Americans support the extension.

·       53% of Americans (in both parties) favor temporary cut in workers’ Social Security and Medicare taxes to help in meeting problems associated with the coronavirus outbreak.

          Pew Research Center characterized these findings with the following summary statement:

In every case, the differences between Republicans’ and Democrats’ levels of comfort far exceeds other demographic and even geographic differences. Across all six items, the average partisan gap in levels of comfort is nearly twice as big as the gap between whites and nonwhites and is far larger than the gap between men and women, those living in urban and rural communities, and the gap between younger and older Americans.

Americans’ level of comfort with each of these activities has risen across the board since the middle of March, when many states began to implement stay-at-home orders and other measures to slow the spread of the coronavirus.[3]

As these words are written, the virus pandemic seems to have taken an even more dire projection.  As of this date, the national rate of infection has hit 50,000 per day and a reputable government expert warned that that number can reach 100,000 per day.  This increase is being experienced in many of the Western states generally considered “red” states.  Whether this trend will affect the responses of future surveys, time will tell.

          If party affiliation accounts for so much of how people feel, this tendency further politicizes how Americans face the challenges the disease poses on them.  One should remember, party identification is but shorthand for an array of feelings concerning issues the nation deals with at a given time and if divisions can be associated with that identity, divisions are further legitimized in the hearts of citizens.

---

[1] “Republicans, Democrats Move Even Further Apart in Coronavirus Concerns,” Pew Research Center, June 25, 2020, accessed July 2, 2020, https://www.people-press.org/2020/06/25/republicans-democrats-move-even-further-apart-in-coronavirus-concerns/ .

[2] Ezra Klein, Why We’re Polarized (New York, NY:  Avid Reader Press).

[3] “Republicans, Democrats Move Even Further Apart in Coronavirus Concerns,” Pew Research Center.

NEXT: POLARIZATION

With this posting, this blog shifts direction.  It will, though, continue to address the concern over the prevailing obstacles that confront civics educators in any attempt to institute a communally oriented curriculum.  Specifically, the blog focuses on the challenges one faces in following the guidance of federation theory in devising such curricular strategies. 

Leading up to this posting, this blog has looked at the ubiquitous challenge of immaturity, the general political culture that has adopted, as prominent, the natural rights construct in defining governance and politics, and the general curricular outlook in civics that is based on a natural rights view. This posting moves on to add one more area of concern, the political landscape current civics teachers face in their efforts to encourage good citizenship; that is the level of polarization the citizens of the US currently face.

The writer is reminded that this bifurcated politics is not a first-time event or condition in American history.  He is currently reading Ted Widmer’s Lincoln on the Verge[1] that traces the political environment of another time – that time between Lincoln’s election in 1860 and his assuming the responsibilities of the presidency in 1861.  Of course, Widmer relates a good deal of the developments that resulted in the division leading to the threatened dissolution of the Union.

          What seems to this writer to be so bizarre is that one can readily trace the current sources of division to the issues that faced the nation in the nineteenth century.  A lot has to do with race, a lot of it has to do with the conflicts between the urban centers and the rural areas.  And a lot of it has to do with the effects of technology – in those days, the advent of railroad travel had its divisive effects and today, the recent growth in social media[2] is having its effects. 

What is a bit paradoxical, for example, is that these technologies initially promised that they would serve to unite Americans.  They did to an extent, but they also did the opposite.  For example, for a variety of reasons, most railroad lines were constructed in the North and most of those lines linked East to West instead of North to South.[3]

Before moving on, this writer believes an editorial comment should be made.  He has purposely avoided expressing his opinions over those issues that seem to be so divisive today.  He does have an opinion and he definitely falls on one side of the divide.  His promotion of federation theory will indicate some bias when it comes to the contentious debates of this time.  Therefore, the reader might surmise where this writer falls. 

But these upcoming research concerns – research that is meant to instruct the writer as to the nature of the prevailing division – call for an objective approach and he will attempt to hold to that.  Of course, the reader will decide how successful the writer is.  So, with the reader’s forbearance, this writer will share with him/her his research findings concerning this subject. 

The first bit of questioning is:  has the US come about this polarization suddenly or is it the product of long-standing divisions that have simmered under the surface and erupted lately?  For example, has the bifurcation between urban centers and rural areas just popped up in the last few years or have they been there more or less under wraps? 

To assist the writer, he is initially counting on the work of the journalist, Ezra Klein.[4]  To shed light on this question, Klein asks, what do the election results of 2016 indicate.  Do they reflect a shift in the opinions of Americans?  If they do, then what would suggest that Americans have gone through some basic change?  Perhaps the election results do not identify what the changes are specifically – they might hint at them since the voters’ preferences do reflect choices between policy proposals of the candidates – but only if there was a change in how people voted.

So, what did Klein find?  He begins by agreeing that some of the candidates’ positions probably caused this close election to go in one direction as opposed to the other, but do the numbers vary significantly from prior elections?  Klein summarizes his findings by writing,

The 2016 election didn’t look like a glitch, he [Larry Bartels, political scientist of Vanderbilt University] said.  It looked, for the most part, like every other election we’ve had recently.  The simulation was, if anything, too stable, like we had unleashed tornadoes and meteors on our virtual city and only a few windows had shattered.  It was normalcy that was unnerving.[5]

To give the reader a sample of Bartels’ findings the following can be offered:

·       Using exit polling, Trump in 2016 won 52% of male voters compared to McCain’s 48% in 2008, Romney’s 52% in 2012.

·       Trump won 41% of women, McCain won 43%; Romney won 44%.

·       In 2004, Republican Bush won 58% of white voters; McCain won 55%; Romney won 59%; and Trump won 57%.

If any change took place, it was probably the sharp support Trump received among whites without college education, especially in key states – e.g., Michigan and Pennsylvania.  In 2016, the one item one can cite as outstanding is the nature of Trump himself – what he represented.

          And that, according to Klein indicates how polarized Americans are.  That is, given the bizarre nature of Trump’s candidacy, according to Klein, the results illustrate how “locked into our political identities [Americans are]. … [Currently] there is virtually no candidate, no information, no condition, that can force us to change our minds.  We will justify almost anything or anyone …”[6]  The result is “a politics devoid of guardrails, persuasions, or accountabilities.”[7]

          Of course, these quotes do not hide Klein’s biases, but the information upon which his conclusion is based are straight statistics that are not biased in what they include.  In addition, it seems Klein is merely reporting the research results Bartels discovered.  This writer finds Klein’s reportage as uncontroversial.  To the extent his stated conclusion is true, a further question becomes, why have Americans’ politics become so toxic.  This blog’s writer needs to do more research.

---

[1] Ted Widmer, Lincoln on the Verge (New York, NY:  Simon and Schuster).

[2] See Andrew Marantz, Antisocial:  Online Extremists, Techno-Utopians, and the Hijacking of the American Conversation (New York, NY:  Viking).

[3] Ted Widmer, Lincoln on the Verge.

[4] Ezra Klein, Why We’re Polarized (New York, NY:  Avid Reader Press).

[5] Ibid., xi.

[6] Ibid., xiii.

[7] Ibid.