Toxic presidential race will make governing even tougher

Politics is about managing social conflict and, as a result, it is bound to prompt strong emotional reactions. But the 2016 presidential election campaign, and the candidates it has produced, are eliciting a level of public frustration and anger that is notable for its intensity. The mood of many Americans as they anticipate the outcome of this year’s presidential election ranges somewhere between gloomy resignation and outright horror.

Part of the explanation for this predicament is that neither Democrats nor Republicans are particularly pleased with their party’s nominees. Many party identifiers are inspired less by devotion to the nominee their party convention has delivered and more by alarm at what the opposing side is offering. For example, polls show that among declared Hillary Clinton voters, 44 percent report that their choice reflected more of a vote against Trump than a vote for Clinton. Likewise, among declared Donald Trump voters, 51 percent report that their choice reflected more a vote against Clinton than a vote for Trump.

Among independent voters, those without a strong party allegiance that would predispose them to overlook their candidate’s shortcomings, the candidate assessments are notably harsh. According to results reported by veteran pollster Frank Luntz, a sample of independent voters described Trump as “arrogant,” “vindictive,” “unbalanced” and “bigoted.” Clinton fared no better. Independent voters assessed her as “deceitful,” “unpleasant,” “untrustworthy” and “entitled.”

While it is reasonable to attribute some of this election year’s public frustration to the shortcomings of the candidates themselves, public restlessness and dissatisfaction with politics have in fact been building for years. Though opinion polls that measure the level of trust citizens have in our political leadership tend to fluctuate somewhat from year to year, overall trust has declined over the past several decades.

The loss of confidence and trust in our politicians has been accompanied by an increase in public anger. As a candidate for the presidency in 2008, Barack Obama highlighted the harsh rhetoric that had for some time characterized politics and promised to address it. By 2016, Obama conceded “the tone of our politics hasn’t gotten better, but worse.”

Citizen frustrations, and the angry rhetoric that results, can be attributed to several sources, years in the making. Our two political parties have grown more distinct ideologically. As a result, the gap between liberal and conservative perspectives has grown. Bridging that gap is harder. New media technologies have expanded the range of easily accessed information sources and many of these sources offer a steady stream of ideologically-driven news and commentary. Citizens who limit their exposure to these sources may develop a distorted picture of reality. Contentious issues certainly contribute to the anger: American involvement in divisive wars in the Middle East, the threat of terrorism, sluggish economic growth and illegal immigration to name a few.

Yet politics by nature is often divisive. Presidential election campaigns by necessity highlight policy disagreements. The value of a spirited debate over national priorities should not be underestimated.

But this presidential election campaign feels particularly ugly, even when measured against the hostile tone of our contemporary political climate. As a result, the troubled waters it leaves in its wake may further complicate the job of governance that follows, regardless of who is in charge. At that juncture, a measure of civility and genuine communication across the partisan divide will be necessary. Without it, policy fails and problems fester.

To the relief of many Americans, this contentious election will soon be decided. But with Trump charging that the presidential election process is “rigged” and Clinton describing at least one-half of Trump supporters as “irredeemable” bigots, it is difficult to see how partisans on either side can accept election defeat graciously. As the dust settles, the difficult task of governance in a politically polarized environment will endure.

This story was originally published October 26, 2016 at 7:01 PM with the headline "Toxic presidential race will make governing even tougher."