Polarization, Gridlock, and Presidential Campaign Politics in 2016
Abstract
The American electorate has grown increasingly divided along party lines in recent decades, by political attitudes, social values, basic demography, and even beliefs about reality. Deepening partisan divisions have inspired high levels of party-line voting and low levels of ticket splitting, resulting in thoroughly nationalized, president- and party-centered federal elections. Because of the way the electoral system aggregates votes, however, historically high levels of electoral coherence have delivered incoherent, divided government and policy stalemate. The 2016 nomination campaigns have exposed deep fissures within as well as between the parties, and their results threaten to shake up electoral patterns that have prevailed so far during this century, with uncertain and perhaps unpredictable consequences for national politics. The 2016 election is certain to polarize the electorate, but the axis of polarization may not fall so neatly along party lines as it has in recent years.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Polarization along party lines in the United States is on the rise, and the 2016 elections deepened the divide.
“Polarization along party lines in the United States is on the rise2, and 2016 elections have deepen the divide3.”
From No echo in the chambers of political interactions on Reddit (2021) · cites this paper as [3]
Cites
Authoritarianism and Polarization in American Politics, Still?
Hetherington, M. J., & Weiler, J. D. (2015) · American Gridlock · doi:10.1017/cbo9781316287002.006 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
No echo in the chambers of political interactions on Reddit
De Francisci Morales, G., Monti, C., & Starnini, M. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-81531-x · Cited by 98 · see citing works
- Authors
- Jacobson, G. C.
- Corresponding author
- Jacobson, Gary C.
- ORCID
- Jacobson, Gary C.
- Venue
- The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2016-08-17
- Volume
- 667
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 226-246
- ISSN
- 0002-7162 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-3349
- OpenAlex
- W2509571293
- Cited by
- 66
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 37.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Electoral Systems and Political Participation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › American Political and Social Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › American Constitutional Law and Politics
- Keywords
- 2016 US presidential election, political polarization, party-line voting, ticket splitting, divided government, political stalemate, presidential nomination campaigns, party nominations, electoral systems
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review