The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Divided We Fall? Polarization in the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election

Divided We Fall? Polarization in the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election
Divided We Fall? Polarization in the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election
The chapter emphasizes the “supply side polarization” of politics by comparing party policy positions. To develop their analysis, the authors use data from the Comparative Manifesto Project (CMP/MARPOR). While in public perception there are huge differences between both parties (and even more, between the candidates), reviewed data do not separate Democrats and Republicans sharply. While the Republicans stayed relatively stable in their conservative ideological supply, Democrats moved back onto the liberal side for the first time after 2000. Hence, this election was indeed more polarized than the elections before. But, in a more long-term perspective, the 2012 election does not stand out as particularly polarized because the polarization of 2012 is smaller than the peak elections of 1964 and the 1980s. In general, cultural (morality, abortion) and social issues (welfare, healthcare) played a strong role in the 2012 election, revealing areas of distinction between the two parties. Additionally, the chapter discusses the influence of the Tea Party and the Occupy movement on the positions of Democrats and Republicans.
85-108
Springer
Lacewell, Onawa
1bd52dcb-22ef-40f9-85d8-c0ae5b0abab3
Werner, Annika
dcafc9c0-9649-427b-b550-04d03e3c0b24
Bieber, Christoph
Kamps, Klaus
Lacewell, Onawa
1bd52dcb-22ef-40f9-85d8-c0ae5b0abab3
Werner, Annika
dcafc9c0-9649-427b-b550-04d03e3c0b24
Bieber, Christoph
Kamps, Klaus

Lacewell, Onawa and Werner, Annika (2015) Divided We Fall? Polarization in the 2012 U.S. Presidential Election. In, Bieber, Christoph and Kamps, Klaus (eds.) Die US-Präsidentschaftswahl 2012. Springer, pp. 85-108. (doi:10.1007/978-3-531-19767-8_4).

Record type: Book Section

Abstract

The chapter emphasizes the “supply side polarization” of politics by comparing party policy positions. To develop their analysis, the authors use data from the Comparative Manifesto Project (CMP/MARPOR). While in public perception there are huge differences between both parties (and even more, between the candidates), reviewed data do not separate Democrats and Republicans sharply. While the Republicans stayed relatively stable in their conservative ideological supply, Democrats moved back onto the liberal side for the first time after 2000. Hence, this election was indeed more polarized than the elections before. But, in a more long-term perspective, the 2012 election does not stand out as particularly polarized because the polarization of 2012 is smaller than the peak elections of 1964 and the 1980s. In general, cultural (morality, abortion) and social issues (welfare, healthcare) played a strong role in the 2012 election, revealing areas of distinction between the two parties. Additionally, the chapter discusses the influence of the Tea Party and the Occupy movement on the positions of Democrats and Republicans.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 8 September 2015

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 498236
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/498236
PURE UUID: 5f7e732b-0932-4815-b8d4-da4fff46e168
ORCID for Annika Werner: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-7341-0551

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 12 Feb 2025 17:50
Last modified: 13 Feb 2025 03:16

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Onawa Lacewell
Author: Annika Werner ORCID iD
Editor: Christoph Bieber
Editor: Klaus Kamps

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×