Political Polarization of Urban and Rural Areas

The research in this paper focuses on the differences in the way that urban and rural areas have behaved politically in past, through looking at the 2016 election, specifically in Kentucky. While research for this paper is primarily gathered through nation-wide or region-specific data, these topics are just as pervasive in the state of Kentucky as they are nationally. The research gathered about the nation and from the 2016 election relates as equally to Kentucky as it does to the United States as whole.

Differences in rural and urban areas consist of the way they act politically, from party identification to voting. These differences are mostly seen as rural areas supporting republican decisions, and urban areas supporting democratic decisions.

The divide demonstrated can be credited to candidates being unable to connect to the middle-class (or failing to include them in campaign ideas entirely), history of who settled where in the Unites States and the effect mass media has on constituents. While there is no one circumstance to blame, and no simple solution to depolarize these areas, these three reasons can begin to start a conversation sufficient to fixing the divide All three of these instances can be credited for aggregating the polarization we see arising in the political sphere nation-wide and Kentucky-wide in recent years and coming to fruition in the 2016 election.

Get quality help now

Bella Hamilton

Verified writer

Proficient in: Rural And Urban Life

5 (234)

“ Very organized ,I enjoyed and Loved every bit of our professional interaction ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

Introduction Does the difference in political activity of urban and rural area’s demographics bear any weight on national elections, and how does the difference effect the way that Kentuckians vote? This question is worth answering because it is a pervasive issue in the United States.

In recent years, political party polarization has divided the nation into a system much like a two-party system. While other parties do exist and function, it’s republicans and democrats that stake claim on governmental institutions. Reasonably so, those that identify as a member of the republican party will typically vote republican while those that identify with the democratic party will typically vote democratic. While there is no issue in voting for politicians that share your same political ideals, the average of the American people fit into a moderate category (Walsh), so voting only one side does not represent the totality of the American people. Therefore, this divide of the American people is not an accurate representation of the ideals of the nation. This question can be answered with empirical evidence, making it worthy to answer. Voting results can be analyzed to determine the statistics of people who voted for which candidates.

Using the state of Kentucky as an example for the nation in the 2016 presidential election, the democratic candidate received more support in urban counties such as Fayette and Jefferson (where the largest cities in the state are located) county. Oppositely, the republican candidate won in every other county in the state. The rationale behind their big win is because these other counties consist of rural land. Given these statistics, it is reasonable to come to the conclusion that party affiliation and attitude towards these parties is what influences the outcome of the election. As a whole, counties in which there are larger cities versus counties where there are no metropolitan areas show a trend in demographics and the way citizens vote and act politically. Literature Review This research inherently requires proof that there is a difference in the way urban and rural areas vote and participate politically. A journal by Jen Nelles concludes that the differences seen in rural and urban areas, are legitimate.