Alternate theory: virtue signaling over policy preference. Voters mostly don’t care about the details, only about showing their family and peers that they’re part of the tribe, and have the “correct” passion about politics.
This leads to one-upsmanship of extreme ideas, and acceptance that supporting this is the way to belong. This is how voters get polarized. And this style of polarization means they hate moderates (because they weaken the tribe), so politicians don’t succeed unless they are at least as polar as their base.
Interesting. And how do you think they enforce this dislike of moderates? By not voting at all? By voting for the other party if it’s more extreme? If they prefer extreme politicians but still vote for the politician closest to their views, the puzzle isn’t solved.
Alternate theory: virtue signaling over policy preference. Voters mostly don’t care about the details, only about showing their family and peers that they’re part of the tribe, and have the “correct” passion about politics.
This leads to one-upsmanship of extreme ideas, and acceptance that supporting this is the way to belong. This is how voters get polarized. And this style of polarization means they hate moderates (because they weaken the tribe), so politicians don’t succeed unless they are at least as polar as their base.
Interesting. And how do you think they enforce this dislike of moderates? By not voting at all? By voting for the other party if it’s more extreme? If they prefer extreme politicians but still vote for the politician closest to their views, the puzzle isn’t solved.
They vote for the politician that represents their signals, and that irks the other tribe.