Other Topics Trump is Simply the End Product The Polarisation of U.S. Politics Is the Culmination of Long-Term Trends Céline-Agathe Caro 88 At the beginning of the U.S. primaries, the candidacies of political outsiders Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders invoked laughter among the political establishment in Washington. But the possibility of a candidate such as Trump actually ending up in the White House can no longer be ruled out. This article addresses a number of factors in the polarisation of U.S. politics and society and will illustrate that this is the result of long-term trends. In early summer 2015, the political establish- seen as a serious alternative to the traditional ment in Washington laughed about it; billionaire candidates of both parties by the start of the Pres- real-estate mogul Donald Trump had entered idential primaries in February 2016. Since early the race for the White House in mid-June. Most May, we have been witnessing an unprecedented political observers rated his chances of being situation in the United States. Trump is now the nominated as the Republican Party candidate as only Republican candidate in the race following extremely slim, and his poll ratings were still very his victory in the State of Indiana. His main rivals, low. At that point, Trump, the businessman with Senator Ted Cruz from Texas (an ultra-conserv- no political experience who “tells it like it is”, was ative Tea Party representative) and moderate the unlikely candidate of the 2016 presidential Governor of Ohio, John Kasich, have thrown in elections. The general feeling was that he would the towel. In addition to that, as of May, Trump at least provide some entertainment during the has reached the necessary number of delegates. summer slump, but that his campaign would As a result, it is highly likely that he will be nomi- fizzle out sooner or later. nated as his party’s Presidential candidate at the Republican National Convention in July. The situation seemed equally clear on the Dem- ocrat side: after losing to Barack Obama in 2008, What makes this situation all the more astounding former Secretary of State, Senator from New is that the billionaire is not in fact a “true” Repub- York and First Lady Hillary Clinton portrayed lican at all: several points on his platform are herself as her party’s only viable candidate. highly unorthodox for the GOP.1 His lifestyle also Bernie Sanders, at that time still an independ- fails to fit the traditional conservative mould (for ent Senator from Vermont and a long-serving instance, Trump is not very religious and has been Member of the House of Representatives, had divorced several times). His derogatory comments announced his candidacy in late April. However, about various sectors of the population (Mexicans, at that stage barely any mention had been made Muslims, migrants and women) and his simple of this self-professed “democratic socialist”. His solutions to all manner of political issues show positions were considered far too left of center that, whatever else he is, he is certainly a populist. to present any serious challenge to the favourite, His nationalistic and xenophobic remarks and his Clinton. Political commentators in the capital hostility towards Islam evoke clear parallels with considered Sanders to be an extremely unlikely right-wing extremists in the EU. candidate as well. This inevitably begs the question as to why Just a few weeks later, the situation had already extreme candidates such as Trump and Sanders changed radically. Trump and Sanders soon are faring so well in the current U.S. primaries. achieved good poll ratings as anti-establishment What is giving rise to the trends of radicalisation, candidates, which led to them being increasingly populism and anti-establishmentarianism that Other Topics 89 The improbable candidate: The unthinkable has now become a reality – Trump is the Republican Party’s nominee for President of the United States in the 2016 election. Source: © Brian Snyder, Reuters. are currently found in both political camps and politics and society and to explain the factors are dominating the 2016 election campaigns contributing to the success of Sanders and, more (elections for the House of Representatives are especially, Trump. To this end, it outlines five also due to be held in November)? factors, all of which were contentious before the current presidential elections. Indeed, the polar- The fierce debates and controversies that have isation of both political camps has not suddenly accompanied the rise of Trump and Sanders come about in recent months and years, rather it illustrate once more just how polarised U.S. pol- is the result of long-term trends in the political, itics and society have now become. This polar- economic, social and cultural life of the United isation is proving to be a decisive factor in the States. elections, as it is benefitting the outsiders most of all. It would appear that this phenomenon Factor One: Gerrymandering has long exceeded the critical threshold, as the possibility of a candidate such as Trump actually Gerrymandering has been identified as the first ending up in the White House can no longer be factor because it is an institutional element that fully ruled out. has been contributing to the polarisation of U.S. politics and society for decades now. It describes Against this backdrop, this article seeks to shed a political practice readily used by Republicans light on the polarisation taking place within U.S. and Democrats alike to improve their chances 90 International Reports 2 | 2016 of success in local and parliamentary elections. of Representatives are drawn based on this prin- While the practice is an effective one, it has the ciple. Due to a lack of geographical unity and/or side effect of increasing competition within the the amalgamation of strongholds of uniform voter parties during the primaries, thereby encourag- profiles, there is talk in some states of the balkani- ing the radicalisation of their respective positions. sation of constituency boundaries (see fig. 1). Against this backdrop, the result of the House of Gerrymandering involves Representatives elections is only open to a lim- modifying the boundaries of ited degree. According to the projections of the electoral constituencies in Cook Political Report, 86.6 per cent of seats are already secured for the Republicans or Demo- order to optimise the election crats. Due to weak competition from the other results of one party. party, it should be relatively easy for one side or the other to win in eight per cent of cases. A real election battle and an open race is only expected for 5.2 per cent of seats.6 The system creates The goal of gerrymandering is to modify the similar conditions at the state level. boundaries of electoral constituencies so as to optimise the election results of one party.2 This As a consequence of these trends, election cam- practice is permitted every ten years following paigns in the United States are often fought the national census and has been commonly within, rather than between parties, since in employed in U.S. politics since the 19th century. many cases, the nomination of one’s own party The strategy is used by both Democrats and guarantees subsequent electoral victory. At the Republicans when they are in power in a given national level, this situation leads to less compe- state to increase the number of their mandates tition of ideas between the two political camps in the House of Representatives of the United and instead to greater rivalry between party col- States Congress and in the lower houses of leagues. For politically moderate candidates, this each state.3 One of the key strategies, packing, means they are primarily competing with others involves cramming as many opposition voters from different wings of their own party. as possible into small, politically homogeneous districts in order to secure victory for one’s own Such internal competition is a factor in the rad- camp in the other more numerous constituen- icalisation of the political discourse, as candi- cies. Another strategy, cracking, involves spread- dates do not need to take account of swing vot- ing opposition voters across several constituen- ers in the moderate center ground if they wish cies in which they have no prospect of success. At to win. Rather than appealing to a broad elec- the same time, both parties may choose to agree torate and representing positions acceptable on the constituency boundaries, for instance, to the majority of voters, they attempt to outdo if they wish to facilitate the re-election of their one another in appealing to their own clientele. respective incumbents.4 The goal is frequently to portray oneself as the most authentic candidate for one’s own party. In 2004, the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed While this can encourage the loyal defence of that gerrymandering was not unconstitutional, the ideological positions and principles of one’s provided that there were no underlying racist political family, the need to compete with the motives.5 This ruling has consolidated a trend election pledges of more radical opponents also that began to emerge some 30 years ago. After the promotes the adoption of more hard-line, if not last census in 2010, Democrats and Republicans extreme positions. employed this instrument once more. One of the main results of this is that the boundaries of most For elected representatives, the highest priority electoral constituencies for elections to the House after elections are over is to ensure internal com- Other Topics 91 Fig. 1: Electoral Constituencies in North Carolina and Maryland The 12th electoral constituency in North Carolina (top, Republican boundary) and the 3rd electoral constituency in Maryland (bottom, Democratic boundary) for the House of Representatives elections represent extreme examples of gerrymandering.