Party Sorting as the Underpinning of
Polarized Politics
In this essay I have argued that the fundamental cause of today’s climate of incivil
politics is the sorting of politically active Americans into parties that have grown
much more homogeneous than they were in the mid-20th Century. Particular
interests (other than Wall Street) appear to receive protection from only one of
the two parties. Particular values seem to be defended by only one of the two
parties. And particular kinds of people seem to receive a sympathetic hearing by
only one of the two parties. The consequence is that the actions considered by
government bodies are more likely to present stark choices today than in some
earlier, less polarized, more civil eras. In consequence, elections matter more. As
the stakes rise, civility falls.
Polarization
Democrats
Independents Republicans
Time I
60 libs
25 mods
15 conservs
50 moderates
15 libs
25 mods
60 conservs
Time 2
125 libs
--
125 conservs
Partisanship Not Polarized
100
90
80
70
Percent
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1952 1956 1960 1964 1968 1972 1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012
Strong and Weak Democrats
Source: ANES
Indepedents including Leaners
Strong and Weak Republicans
Ideology Not Polarized
100
90
80
Percent
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012
Liberal
Source: GSS
Moderate
Conservative
Specific Issues not Polarized: 2012
50
45
Percent
40
35
Services/Spending
30
Insurance
Aid to Minorities
25
Jobs/SOL
20
Military Spending
15
10
5
0
1
Source: ANES
* “Haven’t thought much about it” responses recoded as moderates
2
3
4
5
6
7
Party Sorting
Democrats
Independents Republicans
Time I
60 libs
25 mods
15 conservs
50 moderates
15 libs
25 mods
60 conservs
Time 2
75 libs
25 mods
50 moderates
75 conservs
25 mods
Should Abortion be Legal?
(GSS 1972- 2012)
Percentage Believing Abortion Should be Legal
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1972
Source: General Social Survey
1975
1978
1983
1987
1990
1994
2000
2006
Married- Wants No More Children
Strong Chance of Defect
Not Married
Pregnant as a Result of Rape
Low Income- Can’t Afford More Children
Woman’s Health Seriously Endangered
2012
Partisans in the General Public Are
Sorting on Abortion
Average Number of Circumstances Legal
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
Democrats
Source: General Social Survey. Note: Partisans include strong and weak identifiers.
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
Independents and Leaners
2001
2003
2005
2007
2009
Republicans
2011
2012 ANES: Should Abortion Be Legal?
Favor
Oppose
Woman’s Choice
37%
38
Threat to Mother’s Life
Pregnancy from rape
Serious birth defect
Pregnancy from incest
Threat to mother’s health
68
66
48
48
43
10
14
23
24
29
Financial hardship
Not the right sex you want
24
8
50
74
Party Sorting
D
I
R
I
D
R
Correlation between PID and Lib-Con
(Democrats and Republicans who Voted)
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
1972
1976
1980
1984
1988
Don't Knows Dropped
Source: ANES
1992
1996
2000
2004
2008
Don't Knows Coded As Moderates
2012
Difference in Means on the Lib-Con Scale
(Dems v. Reps who voted)
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1972
1976
1980
1984
Don't Knows Dropped
Source: ANES
1988
1992
1996
2000
2004
2008
Don't Knows Coded as Moderates
2012
Symmetric Separation on the Lib-Con Scale
7
Mean Placement
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
1972
1976
1980
1984
1988
Voting Democrats (1,2)
Source: ANES Note: DKs Dropped; 2012 data FTF Only
1992
1996
2000
2004
2008
Voting Republicans (6,7)
2012
Party Sorting and …
Adj. R2
Presidential Approval:
Correlation measure
Distance measure
Republican Candidate Rating
Correlation measure
Distance measure
Democratic Candidate Rating
Correlation measure
Distance measure
Split Ticket Voting
Correlation measure
Distance measure
.49
.34
.30
.36
.83
.74
.90
.91
Finish
Polarization of Choices/Evaluations
D
R
Centrist Strategy
JFK
D
Nixon
R
Base Strategy
Gore
Bush
Ideological Placement: Democratic Party
100
90
80
Percent
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1972
1976
1980
1984
1988
1992
1996
2000
Extremely Liberal and Liberal
Source: ANES. Face-to-Face respondents only
2004
2008
2012
Ideological Placement: Republican Party
100
90
80
Percent
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1972
1976
1980
1984
1988
1992
1996
2000
2004
Extremely Conservative and Conservative
Source: ANES. Face-to-Face respondents only
2008
2012