搜索结果：Republicans

Many climate change mitigation policies enjoy large majority support from the U.S. public. Yet, both Republicans and Democrats underestimate public support for climate policies, on average, with Republicans underestimating by more. Explaining this is a major puzzle in climate change politics. Homophily is one possible explanation: if citizens are selectively exposed to views reinforcing their own, then policy opponents might underestimate support more than supporters. Here, we explore how homophily could interact with social network structure to produce misperceptions of policy support, using a stochastic block model and preferential attachment model. Homophily alone can explain opponents underestimating support by more than supporters, but supporters only underestimate support when their homophily is so low that they disproportionately associate with opponents. We then expand our model to combine homophily with Bayesian rescaling, inaccurate priors, or asymmetric prominence of opposing opinions (simulating media bias). With Bayesian rescaling and inaccurate priors, homophily would still need to be highly asymmetric to produce realistic misperception patterns. Media bias combined w

Americans' warmth toward members of the opposing political party has fallen sharply over the past three decades -- yet meaningful cross-partisan contact remains scarce, in part because people actively avoid it. Across five preregistered studies (total N = 3,960 U.S. partisans), we test whether brief conversations with AI chatbots representing the political outgroup can substitute for the contact people shun. Synthetic contact first lowers the barrier to entry: partisans would endure almost twice as long contemplating their own mortality to avoid a human outgroup partner as an AI one. These conversations then correct the misperceptions that fuel division. At baseline, Democrats placed Republicans more than a standard deviation past their actual position on environmental consumption attitudes -- enough to flip the average Republican from supportive to opposed -- and a single ten-minute conversation with an outgroup chatbot corrected those beliefs and warmed affect in a within-person study of both parties. A three-arm experiment ruled out pure engagement and sociality as drivers. Synthetic contact also moved behavior, in a sample of both parties and on a more affectively charged issue

Florida has experienced significant population increase in recent years, driven in part by domestic migration from other states. This study analyzes the migration patterns of voters in Florida between 2017 and 2022 using voter registration data. By examining demographic characteristics such as race/ethnicity, gender, age, and party affiliation, I identify trends in voter migration and their implications for Florida's political landscape. The findings reveal that minorities, younger individuals, Republicans, and those possibly with non-conforming gender are more likely to migrate into Florida. These insights contribute to understanding the dynamics of Florida's migration patterns and the effect of migration on recent elections.

Current cross-platform social media analyses primarily focus on the textual features of posts, often lacking multimodal analysis due to past technical limitations. This study addresses this gap by examining how U.S. legislators in the 118th Congress strategically use social media platforms to adapt their public personas by emphasizing different topics and stances. Leveraging the Large Multimodal Models (LMMs) for fine-grained text and image analysis, we examine 540 legislators personal website and social media, including Facebook, X (Twitter), TikTok. We find that legislators tailor their topics and stances to project distinct public personas on different platforms. Democrats tend to prioritize TikTok, which has a younger user base, while Republicans are more likely to express stronger stances on established platforms such as Facebook and X (Twitter), which offer broader audience reach. Topic analysis reveals alignment with constituents' key concerns, while stances and polarization vary by platform and topic. Large-scale image analysis shows Republicans employing more formal visuals to project authority, whereas Democrats favor campaign-oriented imagery. These findings highlight th

Political discourse on social media has grown increasingly toxic, with electoral periods amplifying partisan hostility and cross-group attacks. Yet it remains unclear whether toxicity in online political speech reflects how partisans communicate within their own circles, or how aggressively they engage with the opposition. Disentangling these dynamics is critical for understanding online political hostility and for designing effective content moderation. We examine this question at scale using a large collection of original posts and replies from X (formerly Twitter), collected during the 2024 U.S. presidential election. Using a human-validated large language model to classify the political alignment of posts and users, and the Perspective API for toxicity scoring, we uncover a striking asymmetry: Republican-leaning posts are significantly more toxic than Democratic-leaning posts, yet Democratic-leaning posts attract significantly more toxic replies. To interpret this finding, we compare the toxicity of same-party and cross-partisan replies. While cross-partisan replies are slightly but significantly more toxic than same-party replies, this is true for both Democratic and Republica

The advent of the COVID-19 pandemic has undoubtedly affected the political scene worldwide and the introduction of new terminology and public opinions regarding the virus has further polarized partisan stances. Using a collection of tweets gathered from leading American political figures online (Republican and Democratic), we explored the partisan differences in approach, response, and attitude towards handling the international crisis. Implementation of the bag-of-words, bigram, and TF-IDF models was used to identify and analyze keywords, topics, and overall sentiments from each party. Results suggest that Democrats are more concerned with the casualties of the pandemic, and give more medical precautions and recommendations to the public whereas Republicans are more invested in political responsibilities such as keeping the public updated through media and carefully watching the progress of the virus. We propose a systematic approach to predict and distinguish a tweet's political stance (left or right leaning) based on its COVID-19 related terms using different classification algorithms on different language models.

Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used to simulate social behaviour, yet their political biases and interaction dynamics in debates remain underexplored. We investigate how LLM type and agent gender attributes influence political bias using a structured multi-agent debate framework, by engaging Neutral, Republican, and Democrat American LLM agents in debates on politically sensitive topics. We systematically vary the underlying LLMs, agent genders, and debate formats to examine how model provenance and agent personas influence political bias and attitudes throughout debates. We find that Neutral agents consistently align with Democrats, while Republicans shift closer to the Neutral; gender influences agent attitudes, with agents adapting their opinions when aware of other agents' genders; and contrary to prior research, agents with shared political affiliations can form echo chambers, exhibiting the expected intensification of attitudes as debates progress.

Using nationally representative data from the 2020 and 2024 American National Election Studies (ANES), this paper traces how the U.S. social media landscape has shifted across platforms, demographics, and politics. Overall platform use has declined, with the youngest and oldest Americans increasingly abstaining from social media altogether. Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter/X have lost ground, while TikTok and Reddit have grown modestly, reflecting a more fragmented digital public sphere. Platform audiences have aged and become slightly more educated and diverse. Politically, most platforms have moved toward Republican users while remaining, on balance, Democratic-leaning. Twitter/X has experienced the sharpest shift: posting has flipped nearly 50 percentage points from Democrats to Republicans. Across platforms, political posting remains tightly linked to affective polarization, as the most partisan users are also the most active. As casual users disengage and polarized partisans remain vocal, the online public sphere grows smaller, sharper, and more ideologically extreme.

This paper provides a novel summary measure of ideological polarization in the American public based on the joint distribution of survey responses. Intuitively, polarization is maximized when views are concentrated at opposing extremes with little mass in between and when opinions are highly correlated across many issues. Using this measure, I show that public polarization has been increasing for the past three decades and that these changes are mostly due to increases in general disagreement, not dimensional collapse. Furthermore, these increases are not explained by the diverging opinions of Democrats and Republicans, nor divergence of opinions across gender, geography, education, or any other demographic divide.

The colloquial phrase "partisan bias" encompasses multiple distinct conceptions of bias, including partisan advantage, packing & cracking, and partisan symmetry. All are useful and have their place, and there are several proposed measures of each. While different measures frequently signal the direction of bias consistently for redistricting plans, sometimes the signals are contradictory: for example, one metric says a map is biased towards Democrats while another metric say the same map is biased towards Republicans. This happens most frequently with metrics that measure different kinds of bias, but it also occurs between measures in the same category. These inconsistencies are most pronounced in states where one party is dominant, but they also occur across the full range of partisan balance. The political geography of states also influences the frequency with which various measures are inconsistent in their assessment of bias. No subset of metrics is always internally consistent in their signal of bias.

Social media is often blamed for the creation of echo chambers. However, these claims fail to consider the prevalence of offline echo chambers resulting from high levels of partisan segregation in the United States. Our article empirically assesses these online versus offline dynamics by linking a novel dataset of voters' offline partisan segregation extracted from publicly available voter files for 180 million US voters with their online network segregation on Twitter. We investigate offline and online partisan segregation using measures of geographical and network isolation of every matched voter-twitter user to their co-partisans online and offline. Our results show that while social media users tend to form politically homogeneous online networks, these levels of partisan sorting are significantly lower than those found in offline settings. Notably, Democrats are more isolated than Republicans in both settings, and only older Republicans exhibit higher online than offline segregation. Our results contribute to the emerging literature on political communication and the homophily of online networks, providing novel evidence on partisan sorting both online and offline.

Changes in political geography and electoral district boundaries shape representation in the United States Congress. To disentangle the effects of geography and gerrymandering, we generate a large ensemble of alternative redistricting plans that follow each state's legal criteria. Comparing enacted plans to these simulations reveals partisan bias, while changes in the simulated plans over time identify shifts in political geography. Our analysis shows that geographic polarization has intensified between 2010 and 2020: Republicans improved their standing in rural and rural-suburban areas, while Democrats further gained in urban districts. These shifts offset nationally, reducing the Republican geographic advantage from 14 to 10 seats. Additionally, pro-Democratic gerrymandering in 2020 counteracted earlier Republican efforts, reducing the GOP redistricting advantage by two seats. In total, the pro-Republican bias declined from 16 to 10 seats. Crucially, shifts in political geography and gerrymandering reduced the number of highly competitive districts by over 25%, with geographic polarization driving most of the decline.

This study demonstrates the persistent dominance of identity based voting across democratic systems, using the United States as a primary case and comparative analyses of 19 other democracies as counterfactuals. Drawing solely on election data from the Roper Center (1976 through recent cycles), we employ OLS regression, ANOVA, and correlation tests to show that race remains the strongest predictor of party affiliation in the US (p < 0.001), with White voters favoring Republicans and Black voters consistently supporting Democrats (85% since 1988). Income, education, and gender exemplified by gaps like 10 points in 2020 further shape voting patterns, yet racial identity predominates. Comparative evidence from majoritarian (e.g., India), proportional (e.g., Germany through 2025), and hybrid (e.g., South Korea with a 25 point gender gap) systems reveals no democracy where issue based voting fully supplants identity based voting. Digital mobilization amplifies this trend globally. These findings underscore identity enduring role in electoral behavior, challenging assumptions of policy driven democratic choice.

While voters from opposing parties have traditionally exhibited symmetric levels of hostility toward out-party candidates, our analysis of the 2016 and 2020 Nationscape data reveals a notable departure from this pattern. In 2016, negative voting was relatively balanced, with similar levels of hostility directed at Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. However, by 2020, asymmetric negative voting had emerged. As an incumbent seeking re-election amid a rapidly declining economy, the COVID-19 pandemic, and widespread uncertainty, Trump faced heightened negative perceptions fueled by dissatisfaction with his handling of the economy, race relations, the pandemic, and his leadership style. These factors galvanized younger, educated Democrats and Independents to vote against him in unprecedented numbers. In contrast, Republicans expressed less animosity toward Biden in 2020 than they had toward Clinton in 2016. This shift disrupted the balance in the typical pattern of symmetric negative voting.

TikTok is a major force among social media platforms with over a billion monthly active users worldwide and 170 million in the United States. The platform's status as a key news source, particularly among younger demographics, raises concerns about its potential influence on politics in the U.S. and globally. Despite these concerns, there is scant research investigating TikTok's recommendation algorithm for political biases. We fill this gap by conducting 323 independent algorithmic audit experiments testing partisan content recommendations in the lead-up to the 2024 U.S. presidential elections. Specifically, we create hundreds of "sock puppet" TikTok accounts in Texas, New York, and Georgia, seeding them with varying partisan content and collecting algorithmic content recommendations for each of them. Collectively, these accounts viewed ~394,000 videos from April 30th to November 11th, 2024, which we label for political and partisan content. Our analysis reveals significant asymmetries in content distribution: Republican-seeded accounts received ~11.8% more party-aligned recommendations compared to their Democratic-seeded counterparts, and Democratic-seeded accounts were exposed t

Social media networks have amplified the reach of social and political movements, but most research focuses on mainstream platforms such as X, Reddit, and Facebook, overlooking Discord. As a rapidly growing, community-driven platform with optional decentralized moderation, Discord offers unique opportunities to study political discourse. This study analyzes over 30 million messages from political servers on Discord discussing the 2024 U.S. elections. Servers were classified as Republican-aligned, Democratic-aligned, or unaligned based on their descriptions. We tracked changes in political conversation during key campaign events and identified distinct political valence and implicit biases in semantic association through embedding analysis. We observed that Republican servers emphasized economic policies, while Democratic servers focused on equality-related and progressive causes. Furthermore, we detected an increase in toxic language, such as sexism, in Republican-aligned servers after Kamala Harris's nomination. These findings provide a first look at political behavior on Discord, highlighting its growing role in shaping and understanding online political engagement.

We study monotone ecological inference, a partial identification approach to ecological inference. The approach exploits information about one or both of the following conditional associations: (1) outcome differences between groups within the same neighborhood, and (2) outcomes differences within the same group across neighborhoods with different group compositions. We show how assumptions about the sign of these conditional associations, whether individually or in relation to one another, can yield informative sharp bounds in ecological inference settings. We illustrate our proposed approach using county-level data to study differences in Covid-19 vaccination rates among Republicans and Democrats in the United States.

Artificial intelligence is set to revolutionize social and political life in unpredictable ways, raising questions about the principles that ought to guide its development and regulation. By examining digital advertising and social media algorithms, this article highlights how artificial intelligence already poses a significant threat to the republican conception of liberty -- or freedom from unaccountable power -- and thereby highlights the necessity of protecting republican liberty when integrating artificial intelligence into society. At an individual level, these algorithms can subconsciously influence behavior and thought, and those subject to this influence have limited power over the algorithms they engage. At the political level, these algorithms give technology company executives and other foreign parties the power to influence domestic political processes, such as elections; the multinational nature of algorithm-based platforms and the speed with which technology companies innovate make incumbent state institutions ineffective at holding these actors accountable. At both levels, artificial intelligence has thus created a new form of unfreedom: digital domination. By drawi