Read on Twitter
Excited to share: In a new article now online @AJPS_Editor, I show that concerns about affective polarization, in terms of what it means for perceptions of elite behavior, may be overblown. People *do not want* politicians to denigrate the other party. 1/ https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ajps.12571
Pioneering work has shown that polarization is driven by affect, not ideology. And some have thought that increasing loathing bw partisans leads voters to desire reps who inflame partisan animus. On it's face, this narrative is tempting. But...
..Across 3 conjoint experiments, I find this isn't the case. Repeatedly, out-party affect is penalized, especially compared to policy congruence. This is true even for voters evaluating co-partisan politicians attacking the other party...
...and even just for primary voters...
...AND even when compared to policy issues that aren't even the most important to respondents.
In-party cheerleading is also evaluated more favorably than out-party animus, which was not expected given decreasing trends in in-party loyalty.
So, politicians who stoke partisan negativity may be out of step with what their constituents want. But that constituents *don't* want that from their leaders is a good thing for representative democracy. /end.
