this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2026
24 points (92.9% liked)

politics

28220 readers
2529 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?

top 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] I_Jedi@lemmy.today 4 points 1 hour ago (2 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 1 points 9 minutes ago

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.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 2 points 23 minutes 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 1 points 6 minutes ago

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

[–] 1dalm@lemmings.world 21 points 3 hours ago (5 children)

A black man was elected president.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 1 points 22 minutes 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 2 points 1 hour ago

Fox News was crafted…

[–] human@slrpnk.net 14 points 2 hours ago (1 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 1 points 16 minutes 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 1 points 5 minutes ago

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.

[–] PP_BOY_@lemmy.world 11 points 3 hours ago

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

[–] artifex@piefed.social 7 points 3 hours 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)

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 9 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

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.

[–] GutterRat42@lemmy.world 6 points 2 hours ago

"But why?"

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

[–] Novis@lemdro.id 0 points 2 hours 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.