Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Why Democrats hate Texas and Republicans detest California

Blue donkey and red elephant facing off
kbeis/Getty Images

Klug served in the House of Representatives from 1991 to 1999. He hosts the political podcast “Lost in the Middle: America’s Political Orphans.”

A few years ago, a class of senior honors students at the University of Louisville learned firsthand the harsh reality of political stereotypes. They developed an ad for a hypothetical candidate running for Congress to get the reaction of 1,500 randomly selected people across the country. Two versions were created from the same script, using two different actors. One with a Southern accent, the other with the flat Midwestern delivery.

The students asked a couple of questions: Do you think this person is trustworthy, intelligent? Would you vote for this person? What political viewpoint would you ascribe to this person?

The students were taken aback when the Southern speaker got trashed.


“The feedback was harsh,” said Gracie Kelly, who helped run the project. “I have a Southern accent. The people we polled immediately assumed the candidate was conservative, didn’t support climate change and wanted very strict immigration policies. It was insulting. It did make me angry.”

We all use stereotypes, but in politics it amplifies our divisiveness, says DePaul University professor Christine Reyna.

“One of the most sophisticated things our brains do is categorize things. If I tell you something's a chair, you instantly know lots of things about it, right? And we categorize human groups, too. We categorize people by age, by gender, by race and by politics,” she said.

Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter

Consider a few snapshots from across the partisan divide from a Florida State University study. On economic issues, Democrats said nearly 50 percent of Republicans belonged to the 1 percent, when it is actually closer to 3 percent. When asked what percentage of Democrats were gay, Republicans responded more than 40 percent. It's actually less than 5 percent.

I will never forget a contribution I received from a classmate at St. Rita’s grade school in Milwaukee. Scott Robideaux had penned a quick note that he attached to his check. “Hey best of luck. I can’t figure out who will be more offended my gay friends that I am supporting a Republican, or my Republican friends that I am gay.” Hard to believe decades later the same tension remains.

“When we talk about the other side, we talk with very negative traits,” says Brigham Young University assistant professor Ethan Busby. “We sort of say, ‘If I'm a Democrat, Republicans are bigoted and ignorant and selfish.’ And if I am a Republican talking about Democrats, I would say, ‘They're elitists who don’t understand people who go to church.’”

In our podcast episode on political stereotypes, the gang at Lost in the Middle thought it would be fun to frame the issue by examining why Democrats hate Texas and Republicans detest California.

Can a Washington bowling league get Congress to work together? by Scott Klug

We'll throw in the pizza and beer.

Read on Substack

Read More

Drain—More Than Fight—Authoritarianism and Censorship
Getty Images, Mykyta Ivanov

Drain—More Than Fight—Authoritarianism and Censorship

The current approaches to proactively counteracting authoritarianism and censorship fall into two main categories, which we call “fighting” and “Constitution-defending.” While Constitution-defending in particular has some value, this article advocates for a third major method: draining interest in authoritarianism and censorship.

“Draining” refers to sapping interest in these extreme possibilities of authoritarianism and censorship. In practical terms, it comes from reducing an overblown sense of threat of fellow Americans across the political spectrum. When there is less to fear about each other, there is less desire for authoritarianism or censorship.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Eagles Soar
bald eagle above brown frield
Photo by Richard Lee on Unsplash

The Eagles Soar

Nearly every American can identify the bald eagle as our country’s national symbol, purveyor of our proud heritage. Formerly declared endangered and facing extinction, in just the last fifteen years, the eagle population has quadrupled. Eagles are now spotted in areas it was feared they would never soar again: the Mississippi river bluffs, the plains of the Midwest, the east coast, the west, literally from sea to shining sea.

The Great Seal of the United States of America, adopted in 1782, features a bald eagle with a banner in its beak reading “E pluribus unum”—"out of many, one.” The seal represents strength, freedom, and independence and is a symbol of our nation's sovereignty. It is used to authenticate official documents.

Keep ReadingShow less
Defining the Democracy Movement: Richard Young
- YouTube

Defining the Democracy Movement: Richard Young

The Fulcrum presents The Path Forward: Defining the Democracy Reform Movement. Scott Warren's weekly interviews engage diverse thought leaders to elevate the conversation about building a thriving and healthy democratic republic that fulfills its potential as a national social and political game-changer. This series is the start of focused collaborations and dialogue led by The Bridge Alliance and The Fulcrum teams to help the movement find a path forward.

The most recent interview of this series took place with Richard Young, the Executive Director of CivicLex, a nonprofit organization strengthening civic health in Lexington, Kentucky. In addition to leading important work in Lexington, Richard has become an evangelist for the importance of place-based democracy work, which has indisputably gained interest and attention following the 2024 general election.

Keep ReadingShow less
The Evolving Social Contract: From Common Good to Contemporary Practice

An illustration of hands putting together a puzzle.

Getty Images, cienpies

The Evolving Social Contract: From Common Good to Contemporary Practice

The concept of the common good in American society has undergone a remarkable transformation since the nation's founding. What began as a clear, if contested, vision of collective welfare has splintered into something far more complex and individualistic. This shift reflects changing times and a fundamental reimagining of what we owe each other as citizens and human beings.

The nation’s progenitors wrestled with this very question. They drew heavily from Enlightenment thinkers like John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who saw the social contract as a sacred covenant between citizens and their government. But they also pulled from deeper wells—the Puritan concept of the covenant community, the classical Republican tradition of civic virtue, and the Christian ideal of serving one's neighbor. These threads wove into something uniquely American: a vision of the common good that balances individual liberty with collective responsibility.

Keep ReadingShow less