Why did polarization hit a minimum in the 90s? The 2000 election was the least polarizing election ever because it felt like both the candidates had the same platform. But every election afterwards has felt more consequential than the last and fearmongering over the impact of the other side winning have increased every 4 years. But it seems between 1932-2000 differences shrank to become almost negligible by 2000. Have any political scientists studied this phenomenon
>>18527897polarization was caused by the media, which at the time hadn't yet completed it's transformation into what it became. 24-hour news was just becoming a thing and the repeal of the fairness doctrine was only recent.
>>18527897>>18527919Believe it or not there are these things called "issues" that fluctuate in importance and relevance over time. Try a quick brainstorming activit: think of as many issues as you can in five seconds. Here's what I came up with:TradeIndustryWarImmigrationCultureOne or more of the above words may provide a clue as to why people polarized.
>>18527897Polarization grew from the 60s onward. Though perhaps things were less polarized in the 90s/2000s because both Bushes were fairly moderate compared to Reagan
>>18527897Clinton hijacked the Republican platform by being pro-business, while nobody could tell the difference between Bush Jr and Gore.People were still plenty polarized before that. Conservatives often consider Carter the worst president in history, leftists run hit pieces on Reagan to this day. So maybe bouncing back to really liking or hating Bush Jr was a return to form. The War on Terror was extremely polarizing, but I suspect it revealed more than it caused.Then Obama was supposed to be a breath of fresh air, but turned out to be a fart. Trump was the actual maverick, so they frauded Biden into office. He probably would have gotten away with being the normal boring candidate nobody had strong opinions on, except that he was deployed as deliberate interference to Trump draining the swamp and was obviously a shambling husk at the time.Trump then won against the hyena by a landslide, so apparently the public was willing to depolarize long enough to get him back into office.In other words, we've had escalating polarization whenever it mattered, and relative calm when the choice was easy or too hard to bother with.
>>18527967Clinton's pro business pivot was one of the most cold blooded, Machiavellian political maneuvers ever pulled.quintupled (!) naturalizations, federally-enforced bilingual signage and schooling, relaxed the English requirement, offered good behavior naturalizations, food stamps, health care, disability, you name it. Get them in here, make them feel welcome, and make that line go up! 13 million arrived in eight years.And his voters sat there and took it. The same people who fumed at Milton Friedman over the inhumanity of capitalism now held hands with these New Americans and sang kumbaya. Fire sales at the Chairman Mao cap store. Clinton gave a commencement address announcing for the first time whites would soon be a minority and the crowd cheered.Their middle class parents looked the other way as their communities were transformed and mumbled something about well at least he's tough on illegal. Elian Gonzalez, didn't you hear?It stunlocked the Republicans for two decades. Bob Dole and Dubya were crying and genuflecting on the banks of the Rio Grande.
>>18528015Incredibly funny to see rightoids seethe at neoliberals. Usually they're not this fucking stupid though, clinton gutted welfare in 1996 and stopped federal programs from giving benefits to migrants, you should love him
>>18528020There was nothing seething or even right wing about my post, I was just describing how Clinton cucked the Republicans.>stopped federal programs from giving benefits to migrantsWRONG! He created the programs lol
>>18528024>nothing seething or even right wingDon't pretend I'm stupid.>picrelYes, he partially rolled back the restrictions he signed and tried to make it sound like a major victory. Politicians do that>He created the programsThat's literally my point retard, he gutted welfare by swapping AFDC with TANF. Again, you should love him
>>18528037This is hilarious lol, you really can't read. In 1996, Republicans tried a universal welfare ban. Clinton only let them ban migrants. That doesn't make him anti-migrant! Just think about it for two seconds. They're just the least defensible recipient, so he has no choice. Then in 1997, Clinton gives the migrants welfare anyway! It was literally in the picture you were replying to, in 1997 legal migrants got SSI and Medicaid back!You know all this, idk why you are even engaging in trying to retcon this irrelevant Arizonan saxophonist
Like in the quest to find "rightoids" to smugly fact check, you could pounce on the mail in ballot schizos, or the vaccine schizos, or the ones who thought Trump was anti-war (lol) or that he was going to deflate housing prices (LOL).You have this feast laid out before you, and instead you try to retcon the guy who quintupled naturalizations, gave migrants food stamps, Medicaid, SSI, bilingual schooling, banned immigration enforcement at schools, as somehow anti-migrant. Lol
>>18527897Leftist haven't gone bat shit insane yet. That's something that would only happen during the Obama years.
>>18528066>Leftist haven't gone bat shit insane yet. That's something that would only happen during the Obama years.that never actually happened. take your psych meds.
It goes in cycles. The 80s had pretty low polarization, so did the 50s-early 60s.
By the 90s both parties had embraced the same neoliberal consensus, and so it seemed that the only difference was between minor fiscal or welfare policies
>>18527897Because of kurt cobain unirinically
>>18528133Yeah bro keep denying that things that never happens are, in fact, happening in front of our eyes everyday. That'll work our well for all of us.
