'Partyism' Now Trumps Racism

[GBCW 397]

SEPT 22, 2014 8:03 AM EDT
By Cass R. Sunstein

If you are a Democrat, would you marry a Republican? Would you be upset if your sister did?

Researchers have long asked such questions about race, and have found that along important dimensions, racial prejudice is decreasing. At the same time, party prejudice in the U.S. has jumped, infecting not only politics but also decisions about dating, marriage and hiring. By some measures, "partyism" now exceeds racial prejudice -- which helps explain the intensity of some midterm election campaigns.

In 1960, 5 percent of Republicans and 4 percent of Democrats said that they would feel “displeased” if their son or daughter married outside their political party. By 2010, those numbers had reached 49 percent and 33 percent.

Republicans have been found to like Democrats less than they like people on welfare or gays and lesbians. Democrats dislike Republicans more than they dislike big business.

...

To test for political prejudice, Shanto Iyengar and Sean Westwood, political scientists at Stanford University, conducted a large-scale implicit association test with 2,000 adults. They found people’s political bias to be much larger than their racial bias.

...

To find out whether such attitudes predict behavior, Iyengar and Westwood undertook a follow-up study. They asked more than 1,000 people to look at the resumes of several high-school seniors and say which ones should be awarded a scholarship. Some of these resumes contained racial cues (“president of the African American Student Association”) while others had political ones (“president of the Young Republicans”).

Race mattered ... But partisanship made a much bigger difference. Both Democrats and Republicans selected their in-party candidate about 80 percent of the time.

Even when a candidate from the opposing party had better credentials, most people chose the candidate from their own party. With respect to race, in contrast, merit prevailed.

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-09-22/partyism-now-trumps-racism

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What cracks me up are the number of so called 'independents' who are blatantly Republican but don't want to be called that because it isn't a fashionable label.

Libertarians are much the same, except they are also insane.

[Teddy B 17,252]

What cracks me up are the number of so called 'independents' who are blatantly Republican but don't want to be called that because it isn't a fashionable label.

You can thank the whackos in Tea Party for that. I wouldn't want to be associated with them either.

Edited September 29, 2014 by Teddy B

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You can thank the whackos in Tea Party for that. I wouldn't want to be associated with them either.

True enough.

[unsmiley 111]

You can thank the whackos in Tea Party for that. I wouldn't want to be associated with them either.

As opposed to the "whackos" on the socialist left, like the supposedly "independent" Bernie Saunders. Give me an effin' break.

[Teddy B 17,252]

As opposed to the "whackos" on the socialist left, like the supposedly "independent" Bernie Saunders. Give me an effin' break.

Extremists on any side are never a good thing. You shouldn't get so worked up over something so trivial, unless of course, you are one of the extremists.

Edited September 29, 2014 by Teddy B

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

The second Mr Maven was a socially liberal, fiscally conservative British citizen who aligned most closely with the UK Liberal Democrats when we emigrated to the US. After 7 years of exposure to American politics, I think he's become slightly to the right of Ted Cruz. Thanks Obama!

[Pooky 3,904]

What gets me is the number of people who are unable to recognise a political Independent, because they are so far out on the one or other of the political extremes that they have lost sight of what being Independent means.

Americans love their labels, especially when it comes to politics. Giving someone a label other than Independent, such as Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Liberal, Conservative, etc. when arguing an issue, gives people a comfort zone, setting up the other person as being an opponent.

Arguing from a partisan viewpoint with someone you acknowledge as being an Independent is more uncomfortable, as, by the mere fact of acknowledging them, you also acknowledge that you are the one with the restricted view. And arguing issues with someone who is at least prepared to consider the viewpoint from the other side always runs the risk of discovering that the other viewpoint has merit. And that just won't do, will it.

[eieio 1,594]

What cracks me up are the number of so called 'independents' who are blatantly Republican but don't want to be called that because it isn't a fashionable label.

Well...laugh away. I don't consider myself a Republican. Mainly because I am pro-choice and non-religious. However, when it comes time to vote,the enemy of my enemy is my friend

[unsmiley 111]

Extremists on any side are never a good thing. You shouldn't get so worked up over something so trivial, unless of course, you are one of the extremists.

Of course extremists are never a good thing -- who could disagree with that?

Where in my comment does it imply I am "worked up"? I could care less about this issue; I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the left and the one sided comment you agreed with. There are faux "independents" on both sides. There also are "whackos" on both sides.

[Teddy B 17,252]

Of course extremists are never a good thing -- who could disagree with that?

Where in my comment does it imply I am "worked up"? I could care less about this issue; I am merely pointing out the hypocrisy of the left and the one sided comment you agreed with. There are faux "independents" on both sides. There also are "whackos" on both sides.

Who would disagree that extremists are never a good thing? Have you read many posts here? This board has it's share of extremists, mostly on the right side.

When someone exclaims "give me an effin break", as you did, it usually means they are perturbed for whatever reason. Yes there are faux independents on both sides, but the comment made addressed the ones on the Republican side, which is why my reply did as well.

I have been around long enough to notice certain trends by both parties. One of the most consistent trends of Republicans is to automatically label anyone who differs from their hardline a liberal. Usually those people are true independents and not liberals, like myself.

[unsmiley 111]

Who would disagree that extremists are never a good thing? Have you read many posts here? This board has it's share of extremists, mostly on the right side.

When someone exclaims "give me an effin break", as you did, it usually means they are perturbed for whatever reason. Yes there are faux independents on both sides, but the comment made addressed the ones on the Republican side, which is why my reply did as well.

I have been around long enough to notice certain trends by both parties. One of the most consistent trends of Republicans is to automatically label anyone who differs from their hardline a liberal. Usually those people are true independents and not liberals, like myself.

I beg to differ that this site has mostly right wing extremists. Virtually every left leaning comment here gets +1'd to the max. It is almost automatic, and it is indicative of bias -- I do not see that reflexive back patting on the other side.

I would also like to say it is my opinion that there are very, very few true independents.

[Teddy B 17,252]

I beg to differ that this site has mostly right wing extremists. Virtually every left leaning comment here gets +1'd to the max. It is almost automatic, and it is indicative of bias -- I do not see that reflexive back patting on the other side.

I would also like to say it is my opinion that there are very, very few true independents.

Your viewpoint is understandable and fits right in to the trend I mentioned. Most Republicans have no idea what an Independent viewpoint is. They simply see an opposing view as a threat and immediately label that person a liberal, it's a defense mechanism.

[unsmiley 111]

Again don't agree. You do have a bias - you never acknowledge that some on the left are guilty of the same things as some on the other side of the aisle. For examples, one could never disagree with homosexual marriage without being painted a Neanderthal. One could never be against illegal immigration without being attacked as heartless. Although I don't like polarization either, it works both ways. Be realistic -- both sides see the other side as a threat. And there is nothing new about that.

[decocker 7,198]

Virtually every left leaning comment here gets +1'd to the max. It is almost automatic, and it is indicative of bias -- I do not see that reflexive back patting on the other side.

really, i've only seen the more conservative side complain about how the plus ones get tossed around here. lol ..that's because the rw extremists who frequent this board are mostly very grumpy and rarely supportive of anything, not even their fellow rw extremists! i plus one folks i disagree with on many topics in this forum, but that's probably because i'm generally an easy going, agreeable person and if someone makes a comment i relate to on some level, or makes me laugh, i'll + the comment. so maybe not so much bias, but just general outlook and laid back/lack of bad attititude.