Suchergebnisse

Introduction to political hostility -- A primer on political disagreement -- Where opinions come from -- Motivated reasoning : how we think and reason about politics -- Consider the source: news media and political hostility -- Can we talk? : how to engage in civil discussions about politics -- Taxing and spending -- Should Medicare be expanded to cover all Americans? -- Should college tuition be free for all Americans? -- Should Congress increase funding for the military? -- Social policy; chapter 9: should the federal government legalize marijuana? -- Should universities encourage affirmative action policies? -- Should illegal immigrants be granted work visas? -- Should students be allowed to carry guns on college campuses? -- Government reforms -- Should Congress have term limits? -- Should U.S. Supreme Court justices be elected? -- Should voting be mandatory in national elections? -- Should a national popular vote replace the electoral college?

Introduction to political hostility -- A primer on political disagreement -- Where opinions come from -- Motivated reasoning : how we think and reason about politics -- Consider the source: news media and political hostility -- Can we talk? : how to engage in civil discussions about politics -- Taxing and spending -- Should Medicare be expanded to cover all Americans? -- Should college tuition be free for all Americans? -- Should Congress increase funding for the military? -- Social policy; chapter 9: should the federal government legalize marijuana? -- Should universities encourage affirmative action policies? -- Should illegal immigrants be granted work visas? -- Should students be allowed to carry guns on college campuses? -- Government reforms -- Should Congress have term limits? -- Should U.S. Supreme Court justices be elected? -- Should voting be mandatory in national elections? -- Should a national popular vote replace the electoral college?

This book facilitates civil discussion of controversial political issues. Unique to this book is a section that explains how to discuss politics without feeling angry or hostile toward people who hold different beliefs. In addition, the book provides concise and accessible debates of contemporary policy issues including gun control, immigration, the Electoral College,voting, and affirmative action. For each topic, readers are shown that opposing arguments are based on values and concerns that are widely shared by most people regardless of their political leanings. Perfect for students, professors, and citizens alike, this book promotes civility without shying away from controversy.

Political hostility is a pervasive problem in American politics, producing dangerous consequences for individuals and society. Recent research in social psychology suggests that intellectual humility may be able to reduce political hostility, but the underlying causal relationship remains unclear. The purpose of this article is to examine how intellectual humility lowers hostility toward people who disagree (dissenters) about specific political topics. Results from a national survey indicate that those holding political beliefs with humility feel less negativity toward dissenters. Fixed‐effects regression models also show that intrapersonal variation in intellectual humility predicts issue‐specific hostility across political topics. Furthermore, a survey experiment priming intellectual humility caused a corresponding decrease in hostility toward dissenters without impacting underlying opinions. Altogether, these results suggest that fostering intellectual humility may be a fruitful avenue for alleviating the hostility and anger that often accompany political disagreement.

This study examines whether broadcast news reduces negativity toward political leaders by exposing partisans to opposing viewpoints. For analysis, both exposure to broadcast news and variation in media content are used to predict changes in feelings toward the candidates during the 2008 presidential election. The results suggest that increased exposure to broadcast news increased partisans' favorability toward the out-party candidate. In addition, increased coverage of the candidates was followed by increased favorability among members of the opposing party. These results demonstrate the benefits of exposure to two-sided communications flows for the reduction of animosity between the political parties. Moreover, these results suggest that public negativity toward political leaders might be even worse if not for the large amount of overlap between the audiences for partisan and mainstream news outlets.

This article examines when partisan media effects occur during presidential campaigns. I argue that partisan media are most likely to influence candidate impressions early in the election cycle, when voters have less crystallized impressions of the candidates and are less motivated to defend their party's nominee. Using multiple methods and two large-scale surveys spanning 2008, I show that Fox News affected favorability toward Barack Obama during the first five months of the election year, but those effects largely disappeared over the last five months. The results varied by political knowledge, however, as Fox News affected low-knowledge viewers throughout the entire year, but only affected high-knowledge viewers early in the election cycle. These results provide important new evidence on how partisan media affect viewers and when those effects occur during a presidential election.

Glen A. Smith describes the Prior Mountain range and the unique situation that stockmen faced raising herds in a land with little water. He reports on the early years of his marriage to Chrissy C. Rowe, and the birth of their three children. Smith describes the first completed road between Libby and Troy that ran along the banks of the Kootenai River, noting that such developments reflected the transition to "living in a civilized country." He recalls his job working for the Kootenai National Forest which he notes was more challenging professionally than his jobs at either Beartooth or Custer National Forest due to the Forest Homestead Act of June 11, 1906, which initiated efforts to identify agricultural land within the national forest bounds and clear it for use. Smith recalls tensions between the community and the federal government in regards to timber rights policy decisions along the banks of Kootenai River. ; https://scholarworks.umt.edu/glensmith_reminiscences/1005/thumbnail.jpg