Daniel M. Shea

Forget the Good of the Game Political Incivility and Lack of Compromise as a Second Layer of Party Polarization

The growing literature on American party polarization has focused on growing differences in partisan vote outcomes, political values, and policy position. We argue that a second layer of party polarization has developed that goes far beyond simply issue and ideological differences. A growing unwillingness to want politicians to compromise with the other side and a determination to blame growing political incivility solely on the other party characterizes this additional division. This second layer is important to gauge because an electorate with a significant portion of voters deeply separated on policy questions but open to compromise is appreciably different from an electorate deeply divided on policy and unwilling to budge based on policy and emotion. Our findings show that a solid percentage of the electorate holds strong partisan preferences and wants their party leaders to stand firm on principle rather than compromise with the other side. Furthermore, this strong partisan mood is not simply driven by the particular conditions of the 2010 midterm election, such as the Tea Party or in particular regions. Rather, this stark divisive partisan atmosphere existed generally and was not concentrated in electorally competitive areas.

The Rise and Fall of Nasty Politics in America

It is fair to say that a great swath of forest was sacrificed for the study of negative campaigning. As we might hope and expect, a great deal has been learned since our initial assumptions that negative ads would be the downfall of our republic. (For an excellent review of this literature, see Geer 2006). This PS symposium and a spate of recent work (for example, see Herbst 2010; Shea and Fiorina 2012; Sobieraj and Berry 2011), suggest growing interest in a somewhat different form of negativity: the tone of political discourse, or what we might call levels of civility in politics. Much of this work has centered on the impact of nasty politics on individuals (Forgette and Morris 2006; Mutz 2007; Mutz and Reeves 2005; Fridkin and Kenney 2008). Might vitriol turn off citizens and lead to increased levels of distrust and cynicism?