Negative partisanship

Last updated
An American protestor wearing a shirt in opposition to Donald Trump, showcasing negative partisanship against him Trump Protest Fountain Hills AZ (25925593096).jpg
An American protestor wearing a shirt in opposition to Donald Trump, showcasing negative partisanship against him

Negative partisanship is the tendency of some voters to form their political opinions primarily in opposition to political parties they dislike. [1] [2] Whereas traditional partisanship involves supporting the policy positions of one's own party, its negative counterpart in turn means opposing those positions of a disliked party. It has been claimed to be the cause of severe polarization in American politics. [3] It has also been studied in the Canadian context, [4] as well as in Australia and New Zealand. [5] Cross-national studies indicate that negative partisanship undermines public satisfaction with democracy, which threatens democratic stability. [6] Traditional partisans, on the other hand, are more likely to support their country's democracy, which promotes democratic stability. [6] [7]

Contents

United States

Alan Abramowitz, a professor of political science at Emory University, likens negative partisanship to a sports rivalry, where members of one side may have internal disagreements but are motivated to a far greater extent by hatred of the other side. According to his research, negative feelings towards the opposing political party have risen above positive towards one's own political party since the 1980s, along with the increase in straight-ticket voting. [3] The phenomenon of negative partisanship was further exacerbated during the 2016 election, in which both major candidates, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, received record low "feeling thermometer" ratings in a Pew Research Center study. [3] [8]

Rachel Bitecofer expands on Abramowitz's ideas, advocating a theory under which elections are fundamentally driven by voter turnout instead of swing voters as traditionally believed. In this framework, it is more important to turn out the base than appeal to ideological moderates. [9] However, some like David Wasserman of The Cook Political Report have challenged this view, noting the phenomenon of Obama-Trump voters, or Americans who voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and/or 2012 and Donald Trump in 2016. [9]

The Rise of Negative Partisanship

In today's society, partisanship in the United States has been transformed by two different trends. First, partisanship and ideological identity have become closely aligned. Democrats are overwhelmingly liberal, and Republicans are overwhelmingly conservative. This specific alignment strengthens the bonds between partisans and their political parties. The second trend that has transformed partisanship is the rise of negative partisanship. The American National Election Studies collected data for a feeling-thermometer scale to study the feelings of the people towards the parties. For the Democratic Party, the average rating went from 59 to 49 degrees from 2000 to 2016. [1] On the other hand, there was a drop from 54 to 43 degrees from 2000 to 2016 for the Republican Party. [1] Since the American National Election Studies created the feeling-thermometer scale in 1968, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have been the most unpopular major-party candidates. [1] Even more so voters hate the opposing party candidate even more, which has led to an increase of negative partisanship in recent years.

The Racial Divide

The racial divide in the United States has been the most significant factor that has influenced the rise of negative partisanship. Negative political campaigns, partisan media, and diverse cultural issues have heightened tensions. The most significant factor to negative partisanship is racial alignment which occurred in the beginning of the 1970s. [1] During this time, Republican candidates would send out racially tinged messages in order to gain support from racially conservative White voters. [1] This transformed the Republican Party into predominately white, while the Democratic Party was growing more diverse. This realignment was influenced by demographic changes and large-scale immigration. These things caused an increase in racial resentment among the White Republican voters which created the racial divide between the two parties. Peoples racial attitudes have been significant on how voters view parties and candidates. We can see in recent years that White voters with high levels of racial resentment align with the Republican Party, while racially liberal White and non-white voters usually vote democratic. [10] This division have increased negative feelings towards the parties in modern day politics.

The Impact of the Media

The advancement of technology and the media has strongly influenced negative partisanship. The rise of tv, radio, and internet news outlets has created a fragmented and polarized media landscape. This has enabled individuals to choose to watch ideologically aligned news sources that often depict the opposing party in a negative manner. For example, Republicans are often to watch Fox News, while Democrats can be seen watching CNN. Studies have shown that exposure to partisan media has a huge impact on voting behaviors. [1] As these partisan media outlets continue to grow, they continue to create a divide between Democrats and Republicans which will increase negative partisanship.

The Influence of Personalities

Even personality traits have an influence on negative partisanship. Utilizing the Big Five personality framework (Openness to New Experiences, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Emotional Stability), scholars have made a connection between certain traits and the impact that they have on partisanship. [1] The American National Election Studies revealed that higher levels of extraversion, agreeableness, and emotional stability are less likely to be negative partisans. [1] People who are naturally friendly are less likely to have negativity towards the opposing party. Extraverts that are socially active have been shown to also be less likely to show negativity towards the other party due to the fact that they understand others. On the other hand, those who have lower levels of agreeableness, extraversion, and emotional stability are more likely to be negative partisans. Our personality traits can play in a role in our feelings towards the opposing party.

In other countries

In a comparative study of elections in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States, researchers from the Université de Montréal examined the relationship between group identity, political ideology, positive party identification, negative party identification, and vote choice. [5] Under the traditional left–right political spectrum, negative partisanship is not an independent factor distinct from positive partisan identity, with psychologists John T. Cacioppo and Gary Berntson placing positive and negative attitudes on a single bipolar continuum. [11] However, more recent scholarship has found that positive and negative identity are not merely opposites. According to Henri Tajfel, members of a group must first gain a positive sense of identity before they can associate negative feelings with an outgroup. [12] But once negative feelings are established, they may produce a stronger reaction in the brain due to negativity bias. [13]

The Montréal researchers concluded that group identities are acquired early in life, and combine with ideology to determine positive party identification, but not negative party identification except in New Zealand. Under a logistic regression model with party identification and education as independent variables and vote choice as the dependent variable, both forms of party identification have a statistically significant impact on vote choice, while education is a significant determinant of vote choice for both parties only in the United States. [5]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Politics of the United States</span>

In the United States, politics functions within a framework of a constitutional federal republic. The three distinct branches share powers: the U.S. Congress which forms the legislative branch, a bicameral legislative body comprising the House of Representatives and the Senate; the executive branch, which is headed by the president of the United States, who serves as the country's head of state and government; and the judicial branch, composed of the Supreme Court and lower federal courts, and which exercises judicial power.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Republican Party (United States)</span> American political party

The Republican Party, also known as the GOP, is one of the two major contemporary political parties in the United States. It emerged as the main political rival of the then-dominant Democratic Party in the 1850s, and the two parties have dominated American politics since then.

Philip Ernest Converse was an American political scientist. He was a professor in political science and sociology at the University of Michigan who conducted research on public opinion, survey research, and quantitative social science.

Political polarization is the divergence of political attitudes away from the center, towards ideological extremes. Scholars distinguish between ideological polarization and affective polarization.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Negative campaigning</span> Campaign strategy focused on attacking other alternatives

Negative campaigning is the process of deliberately spreading negative information about someone or something to worsen the public image of the described. A colloquial, and somewhat more derogatory, term for the practice is mudslinging.

Bipartisanship, sometimes referred to as nonpartisanship, is a political situation, usually in the context of a two-party system, in which opposing political parties find common ground through compromise. In multi-partisan electoral systems or in situations where multiple parties work together, it is called multipartisanship. Partisanship is the antonym, where an individual or political party adheres only to its interests without compromise.

Dealignment, in political science, is a trend or process whereby a large portion of the electorate abandons its previous partisan affiliation, without developing a new one to replace it. It is contrasted with political realignment.

An independent voter, often also called an unaffiliated voter or non-affiliated voter in the United States, is a voter who does not align themselves with a political party. An independent is variously defined as a voter who votes for candidates on issues rather than on the basis of a political ideology or partisanship; a voter who does not have long-standing loyalty to, or identification with, a political party; a voter who does not usually vote for the same political party from election to election; or a voter who self-describes as an independent.

A partisan is a committed member of a political party. In multi-party systems, the term is used for persons who strongly support their party's policies and are reluctant to compromise with political opponents.

Party identification refers to the political party with which an individual is affiliated with. Party identification is typically determined by the political party that an individual most commonly supports.

Latino Americans have received a growing share of the national vote in the United States due to their increasing population. As of the 2020 U.S. Census, 62.1 million Latinos live in the United States, representing 18.9% of the total U.S. population, a 23% increase since 2010. This racial/ethnic group is the second largest after non-Hispanic whites in the U.S. In 2020, the states with the highest Hispanic or Latino populations were; Arizona, California, Florida, Illinois, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, and Texas. According to the Brookings Institution, Latinos will become the nation's largest minority by 2045 and the deciding population in future elections.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Political ideologies in the United States</span> Ideologies and ideological demographics in the United States

American political ideologies conventionally align with the left–right political spectrum, with most Americans identifying as conservative, liberal, or moderate. Contemporary American conservatism includes social conservatism and fiscal conservatism. The former ideology developed as a response to communism and the civil rights movement, while the latter developed as a response to the New Deal. Contemporary American liberalism includes social liberalism and progressivism, developing during the Progressive Era and the Great Depression. Besides conservatism and liberalism, the United States has a notable libertarian movement, developing during the mid-20th century as a revival of classical liberalism. Historical political movements in the United States have been shaped by ideologies as varied as republicanism, populism, separatism, fascism, socialism, monarchism, and nationalism.

Alan Ira Abramowitz is an American political scientist and author, known for his research and writings on American politics, elections in the United States, and political parties in the United States.

The Latino vote or refers to the voting trends during elections in the United States by eligible voters of Latino background. This phrase is usually mentioned by the media as a way to label voters of this ethnicity, and to opine that this demographic group could potentially tilt the outcome of an election, and how candidates have developed messaging strategies to this ethnic group.

Voting behavior refers to how people decide how to vote. This decision is shaped by a complex interplay between an individual voter's attitudes as well as social factors. Voter attitudes include characteristics such as ideological predisposition, party identity, degree of satisfaction with the existing government, public policy leanings, and feelings about a candidate's personality traits. Social factors include race, religion and degree of religiosity, social and economic class, educational level, regional characteristics, and gender. The degree to which a person identifies with a political party influences voting behavior, as does social identity. Voter decision-making is not a purely rational endeavor but rather is profoundly influenced by personal and social biases and deeply held beliefs as well as characteristics such as personality, memory, emotions, and other psychological factors. Voting advice applications and avoidance of wasted votes through strategic voting can impact voting behavior.

Partisan sorting is an effect in politics in which voters sort themselves into parties that match their ideology. Partisan sorting is distinct from political polarization, which is where partisans subscribe to increasingly extreme positions. As political scientist Nolan McCarty explains, "party sorting can account for the increased differences across partisans even if the distribution of...attitudes in the population remains unchanged or moves uniformly in one direction or the other." As an example given by McCarty, the gap between the Democratic Party and Republican Party on views towards immigrants strengthening the country with hard work and talents has widened from a 2-point gap in 1994 to a 42-point gap in 2017. A reasonable explanation is that of partisan sorting: those who are pro-immigrant shifted into the Democratic party and immigration-restrictions have shifted towards the Republican party. According to McCarty, this explains the widening gap between the two parties, considering how pro-immigration viewpoints between the two surveys have increased by 35% since 1994.

A feeling thermometer, also known as a thermometer scale, is a type of visual analog scale that allows respondents to rank their views of a given subject on a scale from "cold" to "hot", analogous to the temperature scale of a real thermometer. It is often used in survey and political science research to measure how positively individuals feel about a given group, individual, issue, or organisation, as well as in quality of life research to measure individuals' subjective health status. It typically uses a rating scale with options ranging from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 100. Questions using the feeling thermometer have been included in every year of the American National Election Studies since 1968.

Political cognition refers to the study of how individuals come to understand the political world, and how this understanding leads to political behavior. Some of the processes studied under the umbrella of political cognition include attention, interpretation, judgment, and memory. Most of the advancements in the area have been made by scholars in the fields of social psychology, political science, and communication studies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Political polarization in the United States</span>

Political polarization is a prominent component of politics in the United States. Scholars distinguish between ideological polarization and affective polarization, both of which are apparent in the United States. In the last few decades, the U.S. has experienced a greater surge in ideological polarization and affective polarization than comparable democracies.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Michael K. Fauntroy</span> American political scientist

Michael K. Fauntroy is an American political scientist. He was formerly a professor in the political science department at Howard University, where he has also been the associate chair. In 2018 he became the acting director of the Ronald W. Walters Leadership and Public Policy Center at Howard University. He studies African American politics, interest groups, and American political parties and partisanship. In 2021, he takes on a new role at George Mason University where he previously spent 11 years at prior to Howard. He has published books on the struggle for self-governance in Washington, D.C., and the relationship between African American voters and the Republican Party.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Abramowitz, Alan I.; Webster, Steven W. (2018). "Negative Partisanship: Why Americans Dislike Parties But Behave Like Rabid Partisans: Negative Partisanship and Rabid Partisans". Political Psychology. 39: 119–135. doi: 10.1111/pops.12479 .
  2. Lelkes, Yphtach (2021). "What Do We Mean by Negative Partisanship?". The Forum. 19 (3): 481–497. doi:10.1515/for-2021-2027. ISSN   1540-8884. S2CID   244801529.
  3. 1 2 3 Abramowitz, Alan; Webster, Steven (September–October 2017). "'Negative Partisanship' Explains Everything". POLITICO Magazine. Retrieved 2020-01-13.
  4. McGregor, R. Michael; Caruana, Nicholas J.; Stephenson, Laura B. (2015-07-03). "Negative Partisanship in a Multi-party System: The Case of Canada". Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties. 25 (3): 300–316. doi:10.1080/17457289.2014.997239. ISSN   1745-7289. S2CID   143516960.
  5. 1 2 3 Medeiros, Mike; Noël, Alain (June 2014). "The Forgotten Side of Partisanship: Negative Party Identification in Four Anglo-American Democracies". Comparative Political Studies. 47 (7): 1022–1046. doi:10.1177/0010414013488560. hdl: 1866/12238 . ISSN   0010-4140. S2CID   154511200.
  6. 1 2 Ridge, Hannah M. (2020-11-12). "Enemy Mine: Negative Partisanship and Satisfaction with Democracy". Political Behavior. 44 (3): 1271–1295. doi:10.1007/s11109-020-09658-7. ISSN   1573-6687. S2CID   228872010.
  7. Aldrich, John H.; Bussing, Austin; Krishnamurthy, Arvind; Madan, Nicolas; Ice, Katelyn Mehling; Renberg, Kristen M.; Ridge, Hannah M. (2020), "Does a partisan public increase democratic stability?", Research Handbook on Political Partisanship, Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 256–265, doi:10.4337/9781788111997.00027, ISBN   978-1-78811-199-7, S2CID   219771883 , retrieved 2021-02-12
  8. "Partisanship and Animosity in 2016" (PDF). Pew Research Center. June 2016. Retrieved 13 June 2020.
  9. 1 2 Freedlander, David (6 February 2020). "An Unsettling New Theory: There Is No Swing Voter". Politico. Retrieved 12 June 2020.
  10. Abramowitz, Alan I. (2018). The great alignment: race, party transformation, and the rise of Donald Trump. New Haven London: Yale University Press. ISBN   978-0-300-23512-8.
  11. Cacioppo, J. T.; Berntson, G. G. (1994). "Relationship between attitudes and evaluative space: A critical review, with emphasis on the separability of positive and negative substrates". Psychological Bulletin. 115 (3): 401–423. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.115.3.401.
  12. Tajfel, H. (1974). "Social identity and intergroup behaviour". Social Science Information. 13 (2): 65–93. doi:10.1177/053901847401300204. S2CID   143666442.
  13. Ito, T. A.; Larsen, J. T.; Smith, N. K.; Cacioppo, J. T. (1998). "Negative information weighs more heavily on the brain: The negativity bias in evaluative categorizations". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 75 (4): 887–900. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.4.887. PMID   9825526.