Scott Alexander examines which US political party has become more extreme faster, concluding Democrats have moved further left on policy since 1994, while results vary for other aspects of extremism. Longer summary

Scott Alexander analyzes the question of which political party in the US has become more extreme faster, breaking it down into four sub-questions. He concludes that Democrats have moved further left on policy positions since 1994 than Republicans have moved right, based on survey data and first principles. On divergence from ordinary Americans, he calls it a tie. Regarding ideological purity, Republicans show more polarization in Congress, but it's unclear for average voters. Scott avoids declaring a winner on which party has become crazier in worldview and messaging. He argues the policy position change is most important, supporting the meme that Democrats have moved more extreme, while noting other interpretations could point to Republicans. Shorter summary

Scott examines claims that political parties should focus on base turnout rather than appealing to moderates, finding evidence that extreme candidates decrease turnout and swing voters matter. Longer summary

This post analyzes the claim that political parties should focus on turning out their base rather than appealing to moderates. Scott examines research and data on voter behavior, finding that extreme candidates tend to decrease turnout for their own party and that swing voters can be decisive in close elections. He concludes that the evidence does not support the 'win-by-extremism-turning-out-the-base' argument. While acknowledging that non-centrist candidates like Trump can win, Scott argues this is by appealing to new coalitions rather than just moving to ideological extremes. The post evaluates academic studies, exit polls, and analysis by political commentators to reach these conclusions. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander examines how Republicans' failure to achieve smaller government despite holding power contributes to increased polarization and the election of more extreme candidates. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses a factor contributing to increased polarization among Republicans. He argues that despite Republican control of various levels of government, they have failed to achieve their stated goals of smaller government, fewer regulations, and a reduced welfare state. Scott presents graphs showing growth in government spending, regulations, and welfare spending over time. He suggests this failure is due to secular trends that make everything more expensive, requiring more government spending and regulation. However, Republican voters, unaware of these underlying factors, perceive this as betrayal by their elected officials. This leads to a cycle of electing increasingly extreme candidates who promise to be 'real' Republicans, resulting in hyperpartisanship and refusal to compromise. Scott notes that this is a general issue when people have unrealistic expectations, leading to rejection of existing governments in favor of extremism. Shorter summary