Applying Moral Politics Theory to the 2018 Midterms
Date
2019
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Producer
Director
Performer
Choreographer
Costume Designer
Music
Videographer
Lighting Designer
Set Designer
Crew Member
Funder
Rehearsal Director
Concert Coordinator
Advisor
Moderator
Panelist
Alternative Title
Department
Swarthmore College. Dept. of Linguistics
Type
Original Format
Running Time
File Format
Place of Publication
Date Span
Copyright Date
Award
Language
en
Note
Table of Contents
Terms of Use
Full copyright to this work is retained by the student author. It may only be used for non-commercial, research, and educational purposes. All other uses are restricted.
Rights Holder
Access Restrictions
No restrictions
Terms of Use
Tripod URL
Identifier
Abstract
This paper will begin with an abbreviated overview of the history of political polarization
in the 1900s. First, it will suggest that polarization is in fact a real phenomenon by citing the
D-NOMINATE method of measuring polarization among political elites. It will then go forward
and suggest that the American public are living in a time of increased partisanship, that more or
less corresponds with an ongoing "culture war" in some segments of American society, and an
ongoing depopulation and political deemphasizing of the importance of the political center. The
paper then suggests Lakoff's conceptual metaphor theory, and more particularly Lakoff's
extension Moral Politics Theory as a way to look at modern political polarization. Lakoff's
"strict father" and "nurturant parent" moralities arise, and both moralities construct a model
citizen and different demons to represent the ideal and nonideal type of people. This paper then
uses the campaign speeches of Bernie Sanders, Ted Cruz, and Mike Huckabee to exemplify how
these politicians' used morality and identity-building to create ingroups and outgroups consistent
with Moral Politics Theory. Next, the paper than focuses in on discourse regarding immigration,
and notes how the "commonsensical" arguments of partisans on both the right and the left are
moral, and that those morals are also consistent with Lakoff's "nurturant parent" and "strict
father" models. Lastly, the paper suggests further research to compensate based on some
anomalous findings that Lakoff's theory does not account for.