Political Trends and Party Polarization in the United States
The following is a brief exploration of the major political trends in the United States from the 1960s to the present day. This commentary will explore the changing political coalitions within American society. It will also explore the role this process has had in the “re-polarization” of the American political process.
The most dramatic trend in American politics has been the shift of the South from a Democratic to a Republican stronghold. For over seventy years following the end of Reconstruction, the “Solid South” was the most reliable base of voters for the Democratic Party. However, by the late 1940s this crucial aspect of what became the New Deal Coalition was starting to break away. The crux of the issue here was civil rights, which national Democrats became increasingly warm to beginning in 1948. At first, Southern white voters began to seek alternatives in third party movements, such as Strom Thurmond’s Dixiecrats in 1948. The South remained a base of support in the 1950s, being the only region to support Adlai Stevenson’s two bids against Eisenhower. However, the South began to seriously split in 1960, as many voters selected the unpledged electors who would back Harry F. Byrd as a candidate. In 1964, with President Johnson having pushed hard for a new Civil Rights Act, the South actually became the strongest region for Republican Barry Goldwater. The tipping point came in 1968, when George Wallace ran on the American Independent line and Nixon made inroads in the South as well. By 1972, the South was the strongest region in a landslide year for Nixon.
Since the 1970s, Democrats made several bids to win back the South, with limited success. Southern governors Jimmy Carter (Georgia) and Bill Clinton (Arkansas) captured many Southern electoral votes in their successful bids in 1976 and 1992/1996, respectively. However, overall the South continued to trend heavily toward the Republican party, particularly in Congress. This was a major factor in the Republicans ability to win a majority in the House of Representatives in 1994, for the first time in 40 years. Again, the principle reason for this shift, particularly early on, was the support by national Democrats of legislation and policies advancing civil rights for African-Americans. Republicans, who were also backers in the 1950s and 1960s, found it electorally beneficial to play to racial politics. This strategy was first implemented by Richard Nixon campaigns for president (the “Southern Strategy”), and rather candidly outlined by Lee Atwater in the 1980s.
Southern whites have not been the only group to have shifted toward the Republican Party in the last few decades. Traditional Cold War liberals, who took a hard-line stance regarding Communism and the Soviet Union, also drifted toward the Republicans. This shift occurred primarily during the late 1970s and early 1980s, as these Democrats became disillusioned with the “human rights” message of Jimmy Carter and attracted to the confrontational rhetoric of Ronald Reagan. These “neoconservatives”, as they became known, played an especially key role in the foreign policy of President George W. Bush.
Another group that emerged within the Republican Party during the 1980s was the “Reagan Democrats”, blue-collar workers from primarily non-union households. The reason for this shift came from a number of sources. Some of these workers represented the “Silent Majority” that Richard Nixon had appealed to in his law-and-order campaign in 1968. Some were attracted to the economic and social conservatism expressed by Reagan. Others were wary of the racial policies advanced by the Democratic party. One major factor contributing to the increasing clout of this group was simply its rapidly growing size. In the 1970s and especially the 1980s, the decline of union power led many more blue collar workers to be nonunion than at any point than the Roosevelt Administration. Some of these voters did eventually return to the Democratic fold, but many of them stayed.
Both major parties also sought the votes of another relatively new group in the 1970s and 1980s: born-again evangelical Christians. Initially, Democrats had some success attracting these voters to their side, primarily due to the influence of candidate and President Carter himself. However, Republicans stepped in and swooped this bloc up shortly thereafter. Evangelicals were attracted to Reagan’s personal style. They also were generally more in line with Republican ideology, which was and still is more socially conservative than the Democrats’. Positions on abortion and eventually same-sex marriage have been particularly significant factors.
Democrats also managed to pull some voters to their side during this time as well. Perhaps the most prominent trend has been the emergence of the “gender gap”, in which women are more likely to vote Democratic than men. This gap was not evident until the early 1980s. Causes of this shift are numerous. The feminist movement led many women to back the more economically liberal policies of the Democratic Party. Democrats also proved to be more dependable backers of the Equal Rights Amendments, arguing for its ratification well into the 1980s. Democrats have also tended to be more supportive of the right to an abortion, as outlined in Roe v. Wade, and reproductive health services in general.
Democrats have also attracted the Latino vote at an increasing pace as well. In the early 1960s, the fastest growing group of Latinos in the United States were Cuban expatriates, who were relatively conservative and more supportive of Republicans. However, the immigration reform legislation passed in 1965 (by Democrats) led to major increase in Latinos coming into the United States, particularly from Mexico. As these new voters tend to be of lower incomes, they are generally economically liberal and thus more likely to support the Democrats. This effect has increased in recent years due to Republican opposition to further immigration reform.
These shifting voting blocs found themselves in coalition with groups already reliably in support of one party or the other. Democrats have depended on African-Americans and union workers since at least the 1930s. Jewish voters have also tended to be Democrats, particularly after Truman’s recognition of Israel in 1948. Catholics also have strong ties to the Democrats, as evidenced by support for presidential candidates Al Smith and John F. Kennedy. Republicans, meanwhile, have always relied on the support of WASPs (White Anglo-Saxon Protestants). Business has also been a backer of the Republican Party, dating back to the 19th century.
The consequences of all these changes has been a map consisting of sharply contrasting political geography. Democrats receive tremendous support from the Northeast and West Coast regions, while the South, Great Plains and much of the Mountain West. The Midwest and Southwest have emerged as the primary battleground areas, reflecting their more diverse demographics. In addition, Democratic leaning voters tend to find themselves concentrated in the nation’s urban areas, while Republicans dominate most of the rural and suburban areas. This fact, combined with gerrymandering practices by members of both parties, has led to a sharp decline in the number of competitive legislative seats at both the state and federal level.
One of the primary results thus has been a return to a polarized political climate. Both Republicans and Democrats have become much more ideologically “pure” as a result of these changes. Republicans have become almost uniformly conservative on economic, social and foreign policy positions. Democrats, to a lesser degree, are liberal on the same issues. Other major factors have driven this as well. Primary voters have become much more partisan than in the past due to an increase in the access to ideologically-driven media. Cable television and online blogs are principally responsible for this trend. In addition, party bases have energized by populist movements in recent years, with the Tea Party becoming infused into the Republican Party and the rhetoric of Occupy Wall Street injecting itself into the Democrats.
Thus, the United States finds itself at levels of partisanship and polarization not seen since the early years of the 20th century. The diverse nature of the New Deal Coalition allowed for many example of “bipartisanship”, usually due to Conservative Democrats joining Republicans in Congress. The breakdown of this coalition, which began in the 1960s and was largely complete by the 1990s, has led to divided government and political gridlock in Washington. Only time will tell whether or not this situation proves detrimental to the United States, although the early returns have not been positive.
The most dramatic trend in American politics has been the shift of the South from a Democratic to a Republican stronghold. For over seventy years following the end of Reconstruction, the “Solid South” was the most reliable base of voters for the Democratic Party. However, by the late 1940s this crucial aspect of what became the New Deal Coalition was starting to break away. The crux of the issue here was civil rights, which national Democrats became increasingly warm to beginning in 1948. At first, Southern white voters began to seek alternatives in third party movements, such as Strom Thurmond’s Dixiecrats in 1948. The South remained a base of support in the 1950s, being the only region to support Adlai Stevenson’s two bids against Eisenhower. However, the South began to seriously split in 1960, as many voters selected the unpledged electors who would back Harry F. Byrd as a candidate. In 1964, with President Johnson having pushed hard for a new Civil Rights Act, the South actually became the strongest region for Republican Barry Goldwater. The tipping point came in 1968, when George Wallace ran on the American Independent line and Nixon made inroads in the South as well. By 1972, the South was the strongest region in a landslide year for Nixon.
Since the 1970s, Democrats made several bids to win back the South, with limited success. Southern governors Jimmy Carter (Georgia) and Bill Clinton (Arkansas) captured many Southern electoral votes in their successful bids in 1976 and 1992/1996, respectively. However, overall the South continued to trend heavily toward the Republican party, particularly in Congress. This was a major factor in the Republicans ability to win a majority in the House of Representatives in 1994, for the first time in 40 years. Again, the principle reason for this shift, particularly early on, was the support by national Democrats of legislation and policies advancing civil rights for African-Americans. Republicans, who were also backers in the 1950s and 1960s, found it electorally beneficial to play to racial politics. This strategy was first implemented by Richard Nixon campaigns for president (the “Southern Strategy”), and rather candidly outlined by Lee Atwater in the 1980s.
Southern whites have not been the only group to have shifted toward the Republican Party in the last few decades. Traditional Cold War liberals, who took a hard-line stance regarding Communism and the Soviet Union, also drifted toward the Republicans. This shift occurred primarily during the late 1970s and early 1980s, as these Democrats became disillusioned with the “human rights” message of Jimmy Carter and attracted to the confrontational rhetoric of Ronald Reagan. These “neoconservatives”, as they became known, played an especially key role in the foreign policy of President George W. Bush.
Another group that emerged within the Republican Party during the 1980s was the “Reagan Democrats”, blue-collar workers from primarily non-union households. The reason for this shift came from a number of sources. Some of these workers represented the “Silent Majority” that Richard Nixon had appealed to in his law-and-order campaign in 1968. Some were attracted to the economic and social conservatism expressed by Reagan. Others were wary of the racial policies advanced by the Democratic party. One major factor contributing to the increasing clout of this group was simply its rapidly growing size. In the 1970s and especially the 1980s, the decline of union power led many more blue collar workers to be nonunion than at any point than the Roosevelt Administration. Some of these voters did eventually return to the Democratic fold, but many of them stayed.
Both major parties also sought the votes of another relatively new group in the 1970s and 1980s: born-again evangelical Christians. Initially, Democrats had some success attracting these voters to their side, primarily due to the influence of candidate and President Carter himself. However, Republicans stepped in and swooped this bloc up shortly thereafter. Evangelicals were attracted to Reagan’s personal style. They also were generally more in line with Republican ideology, which was and still is more socially conservative than the Democrats’. Positions on abortion and eventually same-sex marriage have been particularly significant factors.
Democrats also managed to pull some voters to their side during this time as well. Perhaps the most prominent trend has been the emergence of the “gender gap”, in which women are more likely to vote Democratic than men. This gap was not evident until the early 1980s. Causes of this shift are numerous. The feminist movement led many women to back the more economically liberal policies of the Democratic Party. Democrats also proved to be more dependable backers of the Equal Rights Amendments, arguing for its ratification well into the 1980s. Democrats have also tended to be more supportive of the right to an abortion, as outlined in Roe v. Wade, and reproductive health services in general.
Democrats have also attracted the Latino vote at an increasing pace as well. In the early 1960s, the fastest growing group of Latinos in the United States were Cuban expatriates, who were relatively conservative and more supportive of Republicans. However, the immigration reform legislation passed in 1965 (by Democrats) led to major increase in Latinos coming into the United States, particularly from Mexico. As these new voters tend to be of lower incomes, they are generally economically liberal and thus more likely to support the Democrats. This effect has increased in recent years due to Republican opposition to further immigration reform.
These shifting voting blocs found themselves in coalition with groups already reliably in support of one party or the other. Democrats have depended on African-Americans and union workers since at least the 1930s. Jewish voters have also tended to be Democrats, particularly after Truman’s recognition of Israel in 1948. Catholics also have strong ties to the Democrats, as evidenced by support for presidential candidates Al Smith and John F. Kennedy. Republicans, meanwhile, have always relied on the support of WASPs (White Anglo-Saxon Protestants). Business has also been a backer of the Republican Party, dating back to the 19th century.
The consequences of all these changes has been a map consisting of sharply contrasting political geography. Democrats receive tremendous support from the Northeast and West Coast regions, while the South, Great Plains and much of the Mountain West. The Midwest and Southwest have emerged as the primary battleground areas, reflecting their more diverse demographics. In addition, Democratic leaning voters tend to find themselves concentrated in the nation’s urban areas, while Republicans dominate most of the rural and suburban areas. This fact, combined with gerrymandering practices by members of both parties, has led to a sharp decline in the number of competitive legislative seats at both the state and federal level.
One of the primary results thus has been a return to a polarized political climate. Both Republicans and Democrats have become much more ideologically “pure” as a result of these changes. Republicans have become almost uniformly conservative on economic, social and foreign policy positions. Democrats, to a lesser degree, are liberal on the same issues. Other major factors have driven this as well. Primary voters have become much more partisan than in the past due to an increase in the access to ideologically-driven media. Cable television and online blogs are principally responsible for this trend. In addition, party bases have energized by populist movements in recent years, with the Tea Party becoming infused into the Republican Party and the rhetoric of Occupy Wall Street injecting itself into the Democrats.
Thus, the United States finds itself at levels of partisanship and polarization not seen since the early years of the 20th century. The diverse nature of the New Deal Coalition allowed for many example of “bipartisanship”, usually due to Conservative Democrats joining Republicans in Congress. The breakdown of this coalition, which began in the 1960s and was largely complete by the 1990s, has led to divided government and political gridlock in Washington. Only time will tell whether or not this situation proves detrimental to the United States, although the early returns have not been positive.
0 comments:
Post a Comment