An unflinching examination of the effects and boundaries of partisan animosity. For generations, experts argued that American politics needed cohesive parties to function effectively. Now many fear that strong partisan views, particularly hostility to the opposing party, are damaging democracy. Is partisanship as dangerous as we fear it is? To provide an answer, this book offers a nuanced evaluation of when and how partisan animosity matters in today’s highly charged, dynamic political environment, drawing on panel data from some of the most tumultuous years in recent American history, 2019 through 2021. The authors show that partisanship powerfully shapes political behaviors, but its effects are conditional, not constant. Instead, it is most powerful when politicians send clear signals and when an issue is unlikely to bring direct personal consequences. In the absence of these conditions, other factors often dominate decision-making. The authors argue that while partisan hostility has degraded US politics—for example, politicizing previously non-political issues and undermining compromise—it is not in itself an existential threat. As their research shows, the future of American democracy depends on how politicians, more than ordinary voters, behave.

A pioneering exploration of the unexamined roots and effect of racial sympathy within American politics. There is racial inequality in America, and some people are distressed over it while others are not. This is a book about white people who feel that distress. For decades, political scientists have studied the effects of white racial prejudice, but Jennifer Chudy shows that white racial sympathy for Black Americans’ suffering is also a potent force in modern American politics. Grounded in the history of Black-white relations in America, racial sympathy is unique. It is not equivalent to a low level of racial prejudice or sympathy for other marginalized groups. Some White Folks reveals how racial sympathy shapes a significant number of white Americans’ opinions on policy areas ranging from the social welfare state to the criminal justice system. Under certain circumstances, it can also spur action—although effects on political behavior are weaker and less consistent, for reasons Chudy examines. Drawing on diverse quantitative and qualitative evidence and integrating insights from multiple disciplines, Chudy explores the origins, importance, and complexity of racial sympathy, as well as the practical implications for political and movement leaders. A companion to the rich literature on prejudice, Some White Folks demonstrates the multifaceted role of race in American politics and public opinion.

A deeply researched account of how battles over civil rights in the 1960s shaped today’s partisan culture wars. In the late twentieth century, gay rights, immigration, gun control, and abortion debates all burst onto the political scene, scrambling the parties and polarizing the electorate. Neil A. O’Brian traces the origins of today’s political divide on these issues to the 1960s when Democrats and Republicans split over civil rights. It was this partisan polarization over race, he argues, that subsequently shaped partisan fault lines on other culture war issues that persist to this day. Using public opinion data dating to the 1930s, O’Brian shows that attitudes about civil rights were already linked with a range of other culture war beliefs decades before the parties split on these issues—and much earlier than previous scholarship realized. Challenging a common understanding of partisan polarization as an elite-led phenomenon, The Roots of Polarization argues politicians and interest groups, jockeying for power in the changing party system, seized on these preexisting connections in the mass public to build the parties’ contemporary coalitions.

Lurking in the back of the minds of many students of American government is the question, “How well does the American political system work?” This book examines this in a way that is broad in approach and accessible to readers. Such an ambitious examination of the effectiveness of the American policymaking system leads to one inescapable question: how can you measure “effectiveness?” The answer taken in this book is to employ a number of different criteria. These criteria include: •the public’s attitudes towards the institutions of government •the degree in which all participate equally in political activities •the level of which public policy is responsive to public opinion •the ability of the actors in the process to create effective public policy •the extent the political system imposes costs and benefits on us equally, regardless of our economic condition race, gender, or age In doing so, this book ties together and expands upon numerous scholarly studies conducted on American public policymaking and uses David Truman’s Systems Model as a conceptual guide. Because of the large amount of data presented, the book will also serve as a reference source for others conducting research on American public policy.

Indicting the 45th President is a sequel to Criminology on Trump in real time, continuing the criminological investigation into the former US president. Developing and expanding on the themes of family dynamics, deviance, deception, dishonesty, and the weaponization of the law, this book offers the next chapter on the world’s most successful outlaw. In this new book, Gregg Barak considers the campaigns and policies, the corruption, the state- organized abuses of power and obstructions of justice, the pardons, the failed insurrection, the prosecutions, the indictment of Trump and the politics of punishment as these revolve around the Trumpian character and social structures that encourage such crimes of the powerful. Barak also thoroughly addresses the threat to American Democracy, critiques the current state of the U.S. constitutional system, and proposes reforms to enhance justice for all in the United States. Another accessible and compelling read, this is essential reading for all those engaged with state and white- collar crime in the context of power and privilege, and those seeking a criminological understanding of Trump’s evasion of law and justice.

Radical partisanship among ordinary Americans is rising, and it poses grave risks for the prospects of American democracy. Political violence is rising in the United States, with Republicans and Democrats divided along racial and ethnic lines that spurred massive bloodshed and democratic collapse earlier in the nation’s history. The January 6, 2021 insurrection and the partisan responses that ensued are a vivid illustration of how deep these currents run. How did American politics become so divided that we cannot agree on how to categorize an attack on our own Capitol? For over four years, through a series of surveys and experiments, Nathan P. Kalmoe and Lilliana Mason have been studying radicalism among ordinary American partisans. In this groundbreaking book, they draw on new evidence—as well as insights from history, psychology, and political science—to put our present partisan fractiousness in context and to explain broad patterns of political and social change. Early chapters reveal the scope of the problem, who radical partisans are, and trends over time, while later chapters identify the conditions that partisans say justify violence and test how elections, political violence, and messages from leaders enflame or pacify radical views. Kalmoe and Mason find that ordinary partisanship is far more dangerous than pundits and scholars have recognized. However, these findings are not a forecast of inevitable doom; the current climate also brings opportunities to confront democratic threats head-on and to create a more inclusive politics. Timely and thought-provoking, Radical American Partisanship is vital reading for understanding our current political landscape.

Since the nation’s founding, the strategic manipulation of congressional districts has influenced American politics and public policy

"Respect is in trouble in American politics. Many Americans think that respecting other citizens is a virtue of a democratic society, yet many struggle to respect opposing partisans. It is especially liberal citizens, who hold respect as central to their robust view of democratic equality, who struggle the most granting respect to others. In Respect and Loathing in American Democracy, political theorist Jeff Spinner-Halev and political psychologist Elizabeth Theiss-Morse team up to explain why respect is important to democracy and yet so lacking in contemporary US politics. Drawing on evidence from extensive focus groups, national surveys, survey experiments, and the views of political theorists, Spinner-Halev and Theiss-Morse develop a theoretical framework that places respect squarely in the context of a polarized United States. They elucidate how clashing, moralized worldviews undergird partisan conflict and shape its character and intensity. The authors argue that liberals and conservatives are less divided on issues than many believe, but they are divided on which issues they moralize. That liberals moralize their social justice worldview and conservatives their national solidarity worldview makes it hard for them to grant respect to each other, despite so many people believing in the importance of respect. The authors differentiate between two types of respect and distinguish respect from tolerance. Respect is both far reaching and difficult to give in ways that many citizens and theorists fail to recognize. Deep-seated tension exists between respect and justice, and political theorists and citizens alike need to acknowledge that tension. Spinner-Halev and Theiss-Morse argue that respect is connected to pluralism, and propose a possible path forward that is challenging but far from impossible for scholars and citizens to traverse"--

Russian interference in the 2016 US presidential election was illegal because it violated the American people's right of self-determination.

How did the United States descend into crisis, with institutions frayed, political violence mounting, and democracy itself in peril? This timely book identifies how the Tea Party and its extremist narratives laid the groundwork for the rise of Donald Trump, his MAGA movement, and the January 6, 2021, assault on the Capitol. Brigitte L. Nacos, Yaeli Bloch-Elkon, and Robert Y. Shapiro trace the escalation of a strain of extremist rhetoric in right-wing political discourse after the inauguration of Barack Obama. Drawing on extensive and in-depth analysis of political communication in both traditional media and online spaces, they demonstrate how the dominant rhetorical styles of the Trump era were pioneered by the Tea Party. A backlash to the election of the first Black president, this reactionary social movement deployed violent language and spread anti-Obama paranoia, with the assistance of media insiders, GOP leaders, and conservative advocacy groups. Donald Trump rose to political prominence by hitching himself to the “birther” racist conspiracy theory, espoused by many Tea Partiers, and drew from their aggressive and hyperpartisan repertoire. Ultimately, this book shows, the increasingly violent rhetoric of right-wing extremists spilled over into real-world political violence. Revealing the path the Tea Party blazed to Trump and the insurrectionists, Hate Speech and Political Violence provides timely new insights into the threats facing American democracy.