this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2026
73 points (94.0% liked)

politics

28250 readers
3151 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Polarization in the U.S. didn’t rise gradually. A new machine-learning study shows it surged after 2008- but why?

all 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ToastedRavioli@midwest.social 26 points 1 day ago

but why??

Conservatives went feral after a black dude became president. Its not rocket science…

[–] moonshadow@slrpnk.net 20 points 1 day ago (2 children)

You people blame Obama

I blame the soon to be revealed Cambridge Analytica-esque data-driven societal engineering techniques

We are not the same

[–] ZoteTheMighty@lemmy.zip 1 points 19 hours ago

Cambridge Analytics became a household name in 2016 for getting Trump elected. It was a company whose business model didn't really exist in 2008 when Facebook was still young. Even in 2012, people were still connecting with friends on Facebook, not following influencers, there wasn't enough content on the internet to manipulate.

[–] I_Jedi@lemmy.today 37 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Lots of reasons 2008 would do this.

  • First black president
  • People losing their houses and jobs due to financial crash
  • Proliferation of smartphones and the Internet (remember dial-up?)
[–] 1dalm@lemmings.world 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I think you should also include the Iraq War. Evangelicals set a lot of their identity in their belief that the War on Terror would be the final Holy War that would bring about the Kingdom of Christ (with them at the top, of course). But instead their holy war turned into an undeniable catastrophe in front of their eyes.

And also Jesus didn't come back like he was supposed to.

[–] fodor@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 day ago

And it's really hard to overstate the significance of that war. The vast majority of Washington politicians and the vast majority of mainstream media outlets explicitly endorsed it as being just, they were all proven as liars before it even started and certainly after the fact, and very few of them apologized for the massive amounts of deaths that they caused. They never will apologize, they can't deal with that, their pride won't let them.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I'm thinking so much of it was the first one.

And when we say "polarization", I'm sure that's a bothsiderist way to say: "Republicans/conservatives getting even more crazy".

[–] I_Jedi@lemmy.today 11 points 1 day ago (1 children)

The effect of economic turmoil should not be underestimated. "That guy over there took my house" would boost polarization for sure.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 19 hours ago

I'm just saying that I seem to remember the cons claiming that Obama was so "divisive" all through both of his terms. If you'd ask them what that actually meant, they really could offer nothing cogent as to what they meant.

Meanwhile characters like Newt and Rush had laid the groundwork in the 90s to really create a lot of polarization.

[–] Xanthobilly@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Social media.

[–] 1dalm@lemmings.world 52 points 1 day ago (5 children)

A black man was elected president.

[–] human@slrpnk.net 33 points 1 day ago (2 children)

A black man who was also the first Democratic president after the rise of Fox News. They were obnoxious enough with W in the white house, but then Obama was elected and the circus really started.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 24 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Faux (started in 1996) and hate radio spent a good deal of the 90s trying to take down Clinton. He totally consumed the right wing. Hillary was not wrong when she talked about a vast right wing conspiracy.

Oh, and it surely didn't help them get any less crazy when people were referring to Clinton as the first black President.

I think years of this hateful nonsense and conspiracy theories really came to a head when they watched W flame out to the point that they constructed a fake movement, originally called teabaggers, to pretend they weren't Republicans. The economy cratered at the end of W's reign, the Iraq War was shown to be the quagmire all the liberals told them it was going to be, and now a black man who they were told was a Kenyan usurper was here to clean up the mess.

The fact that most normal Americans really rather liked him drove them all the crazier.

[–] human@slrpnk.net 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

True, the radio shows were definitely filling that role. The idea that the TV networks were left leaning was a big talking point for them.

I know Fox started in '96 and they were definitely already nuts with the "fair and balanced" stuff, but at least to me it felt like it picked up a lot of viewership during the Bush administration.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago

I seem to recall they were in the red for the first N years (5?) of their operation, so you very well may be right that they started getting more traction later on.

IIRC, Cheney mandated them in certain venues, which probably didn't hurt.

[–] Xanthobilly@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

I think people are underestimating social media. Fox News has been around for years by 2008.

[–] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

And that was literally the apocalypse for 50% of this country

[–] artifex@piefed.social 9 points 1 day ago

I feel like it’s a toss up between this (old-school racism) and occupy wall street looking too scary to the bigwigs (who had to amplify racism and invent “woke” as a new wedge)

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Bingo.

The Republicans/conservatives have always had a dark undercurrent and plenty of crazy in their midst and heaps of racism. They started to really rip that mask off when Obama was elected.

Then Pedonald started up with being King of the Birthers and we were really on our way...

[–] CaliforniaSober@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 day ago

Fox News was crafted…

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

US citizens elected a change candidate who then proceeded to bail out the banks while people were going homeless, and the followed it up by handing over healthcare to insurance companies.

Obama jaded a generation out of the concept that progress could be made through politics. They became ample fodder for the nativist/ auth right movements which would follow.

[–] yonderbarn@lazysoci.al -2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The man made bank post presidency earning lucrative Netflix and Spotify deals and hanging out on Richard Branson's yacht.

Just goes to show you which side he was on when banks went under

[–] GutterRat42@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago

"But why?"

Easy, a black guy became president and conservatives lost their fucking minds.

[–] Novis 3 points 1 day ago

First black president- United States loses it's mind Find out covid is killing poor black people more than white people- America loses it's mind and calls mask mandates fascist Find out social programs benefit black and brown people- America calls them welfare queens and demands investigations and budget cuts. Sounds about ~~racist~~ America to me.