Timeline for How do more polarized states affect politics on the federal level?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 10 at 18:00 | answer | added | William Walker III | timeline score: 1 | |
| Aug 3, 2022 at 22:26 | comment | added | Barmar | @Fizz I think many consider the current state of American politics to be unprecedented, so there isn't really much to extrapolate from. Much of political science is based on assumptions and educated guessing, since we can't really do controlled experiments. | |
| Jul 13, 2022 at 6:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPolitics/status/1547098505063419905 | ||
| Jul 11, 2022 at 14:08 | history | edited | TCooper | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
updated to attempt and remove confusion / predicting the future
|
| Jul 8, 2022 at 22:04 | comment | added | 264 champagne bottles on ice | I suggest changing the question a wee bit to be about how polarization has affected it in the past. Hawley seems to be essentially extrapolating from that. I.e. to make the Q a bit less speculative, make it about whether polarization was good for R insofar. As with cause-effect relationships in hindsight that may also not be answerable "beyond a reasonable doubt", but it is a fair question insofar as whether that association can be plausibly inferred because its existence is seemingly used to shape political strategy, so whether it's plausible or just nuts is an ok question in this case. | |
| Jul 8, 2022 at 20:55 | comment | added | Italian Philosopher | Well, 2 things: has never existed, is kind of a red herring. Nation states are not massive data sets allowing us to say with certainty when X happens Y is the outcome 70% of the time. There just aren't that many federal states and even if there were, outcomes are not necessarily the same as if you found a good match, 70 years back. Second, you can start out with an assumption of an effect (migration between blues and reds) and not know the outcome of that migration at the federal level. So, no, extremely interesting question, no doubt, but too early to tell. | |
| Jul 8, 2022 at 19:42 | comment | added | TCooper | @ItalianPhilosophers4Monica I did base this on an assumption, but the assumption is that at some point in history there has existed either another democratic republic meeting these conditions, or the US itself has in the past met these conditions of higher polarization than 30-50 years ago. It is an assumption, however if I knew with certainty of either cases existence I would be able to easily research myself. Since I don't know, I instead pose a question. If a democratic republic with highly polarized but homogenous-within-themselves-regions has never existed, great frame challenge. | |
| Jul 8, 2022 at 17:42 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jul 8, 2022 at 21:15 | |||||
| Jul 8, 2022 at 17:25 | comment | added | Italian Philosopher | Like your immediately preceding question, this is asking us to predict the future. Hawley starts out from one assumption and spins it into a narrative that suits him. Another possibility is that some of the +/-40% pro-choice minorities leave the reds, making them redder, but without much influx, losing electoral college votes by next census: we don't know and we won't until it happens. We also don't know how people will react to losing their abortion rights as opposed to taking them away from others. VTC | |
| Jul 8, 2022 at 16:58 | history | asked | TCooper | CC BY-SA 4.0 |