Angry politicians create angry voters who are more likely to help them by electing angry politicians, giving them donations, and parroting their angry messages.
The feedback loop of resentment that provides short-term gains to powerful politicians and long-term harm to American politics is the thesis a new paper By two researchers – Carrie Stapleton at the University of Colorado Boulder and Ryan Dawkins at the Air Force Academy. They studied the responses of 1,500 people who listened to the congressional debate on immigration.
Violent messages from like-minded candidates angered voters and became more disgusting with politics, especially if voters were not committed to one political party. The angry messages made them more likely to donate their time and money to the campaign of the angry candidate.
Stapleton and Dawkins wrote, “If the political elite were to alter sentimentality in their speeches, this could have a direct effect on reducing the general level of anger in politics.” “Tactically, however, it seems impossible. Politicians benefit from having angry supporters.”
Stapleton told The Post that he has long been dogged by politics, even writing a doctoral dissertation on the subject. He lays the blame on the political elite, but also on opinion leaders in the media and on social media sites, whose algorithms promote the loudest, most angry posts.
“There are short-term benefits to voters being angry but the long-term effects are not great: mistrust, lack of compromise and, when taken to extremes, violence and rioting and what we saw on January 6. It turns into something that Uncontrollable,” he said.
Stapleton sees no easy solution to lowering the political blood pressure, as politicians, commentators and social media companies must police themselves. But as the paper published in the Political Research Quarterly makes clear, that’s not likely to happen anytime soon.
To support the critical journalism we do, you can subscribe to The Denver Post Here.
Do you have questions about Colorado politics? Submit it here and it will go straight to the Denver Post’s politics team.
“Unions usually don’t take such a concrete step,” but the Colorado AFL-CIO did this week. No donations to Democrats until May 2022.
Capital Diary, Part I • By Saja Hindi
The 2022 Statehouse race is taking shape
Colorado House Representative Dylan Roberts of Avono announced this week That he is seeking Kerry Donovan’s limited-term seat in the state Senate in 2022.
The initial redistribution will be in maps Roberts was moved out of the House District 26, a role he has held representing Eagle and Root counties three times in a row. Instead, the draft maps pit him against Democratic incumbent Rep. Julie McCluskey in House District 61.
So far, five Republicans and seven Democrats have announced their candidacy for state Senate seats in the 2022 elections, according to records from the Colorado Secretary of State’s office. In the House, it has 16 Democrats, six Republicans and one from the Unity Party.
Roberts, along with Donovan and Aurora representative Iman Jodeh, sponsored this year’s push to lower insurance rates through a new law that would create a public-private insurance option, expected to begin in 2023. Is.
Roberts said he plans to continue to focus on issues related to cost of living, health care, housing and child care if elected to Senate District 5 as announced, including new ideas on the environment, water, climate change. Ideas for the bills are also listed. And the need for economic and workforce.
Donovan has backed Roberts as she campaigns in her quest to oust US Rep. Lauren Boebert in the Third Congressional District.
Colorado law only allows one candidate to run for one seat at a time for state office unless it is for a particular district board. A person may opt out of the race for one seat and run for another, but they must all adhere to the same time-limit for election.
The Capital Diary, Part II • By Alex Burnes
ice cream is hot
The news that Ben & Jerry’s will end sales of its frozen treats in the occupied West Bank represents the first test of a 2016 Colorado law that declared loyalty to Israel.
That law directed the State Public Employees Retirement Association to refuse any company to do business with Israel. It was a response to the boycott, partition and sanctions movement for Palestinian independence, and was one of the recent examples of a state legislature in foreign politics.
According to Pera spokeswoman Laura Morsch-Babu, the retirement fund has a portfolio of more than $50 billion, which includes a $49 million investment in Unilever — Ben & Jerry’s parent company.
Since Ben & Jerry’s is grouped, the state will have a harder time disinvesting the money than Ben & Jerry’s invested alone. The 2016 law begins an analysis of what disinvestment would look like in this case, and any action would have to be approved by Pera’s board. Morsh-Babu said that would not happen until at least September.
Colorado isn’t the only one facing this test: more than 30 other states There are also laws opposing the boycott, disinvestment and sanctions movement.
More Colorado Political News
Mile High Politics • By Conrad Swanson
Council, in the flesh
No more plastic partitions, no more tape to keep strangers from sitting next to each other, no more masks (unless you want to wear one). The Denver city council is back to the old ways of doing business in person.
First came Tuesday’s Finance and Governance Committee meeting, where the committee chair, Councilwoman Kendra Black, briefly but warmly welcomed her colleagues and others.
“We have real, living people sitting in poses,” Black said with a smile.
Of the 13 members of the council, five attended that meeting and 10 came on Wednesday for the Committee on Safety, Housing, Education and Homelessness. But the big test is Monday, when the council will hold its first plenary meeting in the chambers, said council administrator Stacey Simonet.
The council began meeting remotely in April 2020 for the first time in the early days of the pandemic. The technology proved so challenging That the group had to cut the call short and delay its agenda for a week.
After a few weeks, the council reverted to in-person meetings – plastic division and social distancing in effect – in June 2020 for the only one of them to be taken over by a group of demonstrators to discredit the city’s police department .
When protesters repeatedly promised to return to council rooms, the group once again returned to online meetings.
Now, the council members appear ready to do what they have been doing, except that they will now be next to each other and facing their constituents rather than their computers’ cameras.
More Denver and Suburban Political News
Forward this newsletter to your colleagues and encourage them to subscribe.