More answers like this
GPT-5Nov 8, 2026openai/gpt-5-2025-08-07
Is political polarization worse than it's been in the past?
Short answer: mostly yes—at least in the United States—depending on what kind of polarization you mean.
How it’s “worse” today (U.S.):
•Elite (Congress): By roll‑call–based measures, Democrats and Republicans in Congress are more separated ideologically than at any time since the late 19th century. The parties overlap far less than they did in the mid‑20th century.
•Affective (feelings): Voters are much more negative toward the other party than a few decades ago. Dislike and distrust have grown faster than disagreement on specific policies.
•Social sorting: Partisanship now lines up more tightly with race, religion, education, and where people live (urban vs. rural), which makes politics feel like “us vs. them” across many parts of identity and daily life.
•Electoral behavior: There’s less split‑ticket voting and fewer cross‑party coalitions, making competition more zero‑sum and nationalized.
Where it’s more mixed:
•Issue positions among the public: On many policy details, voters aren’t as ideologically extreme as elites. The gap is real but smaller than the rhetoric suggests, and many Americans still hold a mix of “left” and “right” views.
•History caveat: The U.S. has experienced periods of extreme conflict before (e.g., the 1850s–1870s around the Civil War). What’s distinctive today is sustained, nationwide partisan sorting and negative partisanship in a long‑standing, stable democracy.
Outside the U.S.:
•Many democracies have seen rising affective and ideological polarization since the 2000s, but the levels and patterns vary widely by country and electoral system.
If you tell me which country (and whether you care about elites, voters, media, or geography), I can pull specific charts and recent studies to quantify it.