Blogosphere Polarization and Congress

August 9th, 2008 By: Michael Merritt | Tags:

I cannot agree more with Jason and Michael on their entries regarding blogosphere partisanship.  I too have noticed the general partisan line on blogs from the left and right.  On these blogs, views other than the line defined by that blog’s writers are generally not expressed, although every blog seems to have a few outsiders thrown into the mix.  Additionally, those having moderate/centrist views or views outside the mainstream liberal/conservative dichotomy are sidelined and sometimes ridiculed.  Yet, I believe that the current polarization in the blogosphere can find its root in the polarization and partisanship we see in the current Congress.

I believe that we’re seeing a pretty polarized Congress right now, in that compromise is seen as the utmost of evils, and anybody who tries to forge a compromise or see the merit in the other party’s position is demonized as a traitor (DINO/RINO) to the party.  Holding a centrist position is also seen as an evil by the partisans because apparently centrists/moderates are wishy washy individuals who don’t hold a strong ideology (any reader of this blog knows that’s simply not true).  These politicians find themselves stuck between a rock and a hard place because unless you’re a household name, joining a third party or becoming an Independent is probably politically unviable.  Anyway, you at least already have to be elected to try and even think of doing that, since name recognition has always been a strong element in getting re-election, even for a member of the two major parties.

Since the leadership of Congress is highly partisanized, it makes some sense that those in the blogosphere would feel empowered to express their views, which could explain the Mandatory Scripts that Jason outlined are so prevalent.  The bloggers know the leadership of Congress is on their side, and thus feel empowered to express these views.

In this atmosphere, as Jason pointed out, the centrist bloggers and the ones who can see the merit in some arguments that may not match their own worldview are basically sidelined.  Even if the majority of your views are liberal or conservative, the partisan atmosphere that we currently see makes having a view that falls on the side of the opposite ideology the deadliest of sins.  I’ve seen it before, even here, though mostly among the comments, which isn’t unexpected.

I’m not saying that partisanship itself is an evil.  There are definitely times on Capitol Hill where there is legislation that is definitely bad and rightfully should be opposed with all the force the party can throw at it.  Yet, partisanship is used too often as a tool to outright oppose the policy to try and gain political points.  It’s almost like a contest to see who can be more hardline in their opposition to the other party, and anyone who doesn’t do this enough be damned, even if that person agrees with the party the majority of the time.  You then get the Joe Liebermans, John McCains and Chuck Hagels of the legislature, who get the heat put on them whenever they oppose the party line.  It is this excessive partisanship and demonization of those who don’t always push the party line that made me dissolusioned with the two party system and made me register as an Independent.

Likewise, partisanship on blogs is not always bad since there are policies that should be opposed.  However, like Jason says, too often we see the same Mandatory Scripts, and those who do not also express them are sidelined, demonized, called wishy washy, or said to hold no strong views.

I would even speculate the partisan atmosphere has even become a part of the lives of even some who don’t follow blogs or don’t represent a constituency in Congress.  Thus, I’ll end on an anecdote of my own.  Like Jason, I like both Barack Obama and John McCain, although I’m not as opposed to Ron Paul (not going to feed the Paulbots again, at least not right now).  On my Facebook account, I have declared myself a fan of both Obama and McCain.  My roommate saw this and asked me, “Why do you have John McCain on your Facebook?” as if this was a very strange thing to do.  I simply told him I liked them both.

I’m pretty sure he still thinks this is strange.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  1. Jonathan Wilson
    August 9th, 2008 at 05:09
    Reply | Quote | #1

    Well, the thing is, it’s election time, and election times means higher urgency of being a partisan.

    In other words, during non-election times people are solving problems, in election times people are trying to get their way.

    It’s a democracy. A democracy is basically a dictatorship that is in constant struggle within internal powers, which makes it something much better than a dictatorship can ever be.

    So you’re right, it’s a partisan time, but it’s not surprising.

  2. Michael Merritt
    August 9th, 2008 at 05:23
    Reply | Quote | #2

    Yea, but people like Chuck Hagel have been speaking out on Iraq for a while now, not just to try and gain political points with a possible Obama administration.  Joe Lieberman’s supported it since day 1.  And McCain has been getting flack from the base for his campaign reform and environmental and immigration reform views for years.

    Perhaps there is a higher urgency in the parties to keep its members in line during the elections, but they still exhibit this kind of behavior in the off season.  At least, that’s they way I’ve seen it since I started really following politics hardcore (2004).

  3. MichaelS
    August 9th, 2008 at 07:20
    Reply | Quote | #3

    This Shields and Brooks discussion made me see red. It is excessively frustrating that we are losing more good people to partisan rancor. Shields and Brooks put too much emphasis on partisan redistricting (which in my opinion violates equal protection and should be struck down altogether). The real culprit is that many in America have gotten with the gang mentality about everything. The baby boomers did it first with their counterculture and the New Left. Then some of the boomers went home, backlashed against counterculture, and formed the basis of conservatism. Then along came Talk Radio. Then the Internet and blogs. Each of these things only led us further down the path to what I would cerebral/relational divide, where politics are defined more by what you think than who you are and what your place in the world is. Conservatives and Liberals have become united in head, but not in heart. They have no true empathy for even each other.

    A perfect example of this is John McCain. I hate to break this to people, but hes a conservative, lock, stock and barrel. He’s just not one of those disingenuous conservatives that offers post hoc ergo prompter hoc arguments about cutting taxes increasing revenue. He just sees lobbyists as a huge threat to free markets, because they "cheat" the free market on behalf of the rich (e.g., Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) leading quite justly to poor and middle class people crying foul. He just realizes that smaller government and a balanced budget go hand and hand, and that occasionally taxes will have to go up, or at least not be cut, so that people can truly see the cost of their government. And he and Bush both are just reading the demographic tea leaves of there home states and realizing that without the Republicans spearheading immigration reform and education, the otherwise socially conservative Hispanic community will gravitate to the Democrats carrying with it perhaps the only big state Republicans can claim as their own. Try telling all this to any conservative out there.

    I can take comfort in a number of things. One, the two people out of all the candidates I wanted to be president are the two candidates we have now. Two, they both seem to be willing to reach out to the other side (although Obama may not have to) to get things done.

  4. C Stanley
    August 9th, 2008 at 14:26
    Reply | Quote | #4

    Michael, I have to disagree with your premise that partisanship in Congress is the root of uberpartisanship in the electorate as seen in the blogosphere. Congressional delegates mirror their constituents, so the partisanship in Congress happens because the people in various districts hold views that are polarized with respect to people in other districts and regions of the country.

    Now, I do think that elected officials play on this and ramp it up; by issuing the right talking points, they strike a chord with their base and their rhetoric tends to demonize their opponents, so that the voters then have a negative opinion of the opposing party’s ideas (instead of just viewing each perspective as a different means to an end.)

    And the sad thing is that the voters allow themselves to be played in this manner. It’s just like our excessive consumerism where we’re so easily convinced by advertising that we must have the latest model of Iphone or HDTV, but in political terms people become convinced that life will not be worth living unless their party is in power.

    If people could truly understand the issues on which they support one party or one candidate or another, and articulate it, there’d be no problem because honest debate would then take place and the best ideas and policies would be hammered out. That’s as it should be in a representative democracy; people should have strong opinions and be willing to defend their own views. The problem is when they do so without real understanding and simply follow one party blindly and parrot the talking points on issues.

  5. Jonathan Wilson
    August 9th, 2008 at 15:57
    Reply | Quote | #5

    Wrong, the partisanship is neither caused by Congress nor by constituents. The partisanship is caused and affected by both, they are not related, they are all the same.

    You water the plants they will grow, even if they are different types of plants.

  6. Michael Merritt
    August 10th, 2008 at 01:35
    Reply | Quote | #6

    Perhaps the atmosphere in Congress isn’t the whole answer.  When I wrote the post, that’s all that was on my mind.  But, even if it’s not the root of the partisanship in the blogosphere, it certainly doesn’t help.

  7. rrrocks
    August 10th, 2008 at 02:06
    Reply | Quote | #7

    Well, the thing is, it’s election time, and election times means higher urgency of being a partisan.

    I hate to tell you but in America its election time 24×7, 365 every year.  That is the problem.  The minute they get elected they begin their next campaign bid because their are no term limits.

  8. Michael Merritt
    August 10th, 2008 at 04:00
    Reply | Quote | #8

    I know all about the constant election cycle, franking privileges, etc.  Yet, like I said above, even during the off years, partisanship has been high.  At least, that’s how I’ve seen it since 2004.

    And yes, it sucks.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.


Warning: is_writable() [function.is-writable]: open_basedir restriction in effect. File(error_log) is not within the allowed path(s): (/home/p6525pol:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php:/tmp) in /home/p6525pol/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 500