Polarization has become increasingly common in the world today, as it has an immense effect on public opinion. The gap between partisan groups has been growing further apart through contracting sets of opinions and beliefs. This causes the parties to diverge in decisions about important policies and politicians. Polarization is even more apparent under the current political leader Donald Trump through his contrary policies; as this is only creating a bigger gap between the parties. Partisan motivated reasoning has surfaced as an effect of polarization and has contributed to even stronger beliefs. As a result, we cannot overcome the political divisions in our country due to the increasing polarization in our nation. Although there has always …show more content…
It has caused Republicans and Democrats to have conflicting opinions to where there is hatred and it is difficult to have cooperation. There are two different origins of where polarization began to occur within parties. The top-down argument discusses how politicians have become more polarized, which has resulted in the public becoming increasingly polarized (Polarization PowerPoint). For example, as Congress becomes more polarized, it becomes easier for the public to distinguish certain policy positions within different partisan groups. Hence, it is more likely that the public will be persuaded with polarized policies through these elite figures. The bottom-up argument explains that the public is more polarized, thus the officials become more polarized (Polarization PowerPoint). As the nation becomes more geographically homogeneous, people select groups that reinforce their views. Thus when they vote in their districts, they vote on one end of the spectrum creating the politicians to become polarized. It allows for people to sort themselves into …show more content…
Affective polarization has caused participation to be motivated by emotions instead of what the actual issue is (Polarization PowerPoint). Nowadays partisan identity is reinforced through racial and cultural identities, so people will vote for a candidate based on their identity and their beliefs rather than the issues they stand for. This is seen with Trump, as people of strong levels of white identities support him because their shared thoughts on racial identities. Hence, they will agree or vote on any policies that support Trump, rather than what understanding what issues he actually stands for. These feelings can end up causing individuals to have stronger viewpoints that can have detrimental effects. Consequently, affective polarization then creates the nature of engagement to be contentious and uncivil by bringing in more anger into the conversations. If people from one party have a lot of anger when discussing an issue, it is less likely they will cooperate and listen to what the other side has to say. This allows for a larger political divide and opposition from the public when creating policies. People are then more likely to believe anything that confirms these emotions in order to prove the other side wrong, as that allows for individuals to become misinformed. As more anger grows for the opposing party it makes bipartisan compromise difficult for elected officials;