"Substantial evidence suggests that Obama operates in a much more hostile and divided environment than Clinton did, even after the 1994 elections. Congressional polarization has increased. The presidential approval gap has expanded. Right-wing media has proliferated. Some new research that Amber Wichowsky, Jordyn Cziep, and I presented at APSA also suggests that the language used by the Speaker of the House (in floor speeches and other contexts) has become more sharply polarized over time - more negative toward the president and the other party, more negative about the idea of compromise. So if we are going to measure polarization spatially, or in terms of a continuum, Obama’s presidency is pretty clearly more polarized."
Julia Azari at Washington Monthly compares presidential opposition in the 1990s and the 2010s.
Tuesday, October 28, 2014
Clinton or Obama?
Labels:
1990s,
2000s,
2010s,
Clinton,
Obama,
political history,
politics,
twentieth century,
twenty-first century
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment