Podcasts about group interest democrats

Once a year Matt and Sam take questions from listeners—and they always prove to be incredibly smart and interesting. This time around was no different, with questions that include such topics as: the crisis in Israel and Palestine, the influence of postliberal thinkers on the right, polarization and our political future, the state of the GOP, Willie Nelson, conservative art (and artists), and more!Sources:Joshua Leifer, "Toward a Humane Left," Dissent, Oct 12, 2023; read Gabriel Winant's reply, "On Mourning and Statehood," and Leifer's response to Winant herePatrick Deneen, Regime Change: Toward a Postliberal Future (2023)Kurt Vonnegut, Player Piano (1952)Kurt Vonnegut, "Harrison Bergeron" (1961)Lilliana Mason, Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity (2018)Samuel L. Popkin, Crackup: The Republican Implosion and the Future of Presidential Politics (2021)Matt Grossmann and David A. Hopkins, Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats (2016)John Spong, "Daniel Lanois on Recording Willie Nelson's Landmark Album 'Teatro,'" Texas Monthly, June 2023Walker Percy, Love in the Ruins (1971)Suzanne Schneider, "Light Among the Nations," Jewish Currents, Sept 23, 2023Ellis Sandoz, Political Apocalypse: A Study of Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor (1971)Mark C. Henrie, ed., Doomed Bourgeois in Love: Essays on the Films of Whit Stillman (2001) ...and don't forget to subscribe to Know Your Enemy on Patreon for access to all of our bonus episodes!

Julia argues that we need to pay greater attention to the informal norms surrounding the filibuster and cites a 2012 article she authored with Jennifer K. Smith (“Unwritten Rules: Informal Institutions in Established Democracies”). She also references a 2016 book by Matt Grossman and Dave Hopkins, Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats.James references work by Gregory J. Wawro and Eric Schickler (Filibuster: Obstruction and Lawmaking in the U.S. Senate) to highlight the fact that the Senate was able to legislate before its members adopted the current cloture rule to end debate in 1917. He also cites Frances Lee’s book, Insecure Majorities: Congress and the Perpetual Campaign, to support his claim that the observed behavior of senators at present does not align with the conventional wisdom on how we think they are behaving. Finally, James contends that there are numerous ways that Senate majorities can get around the filibuster and cites Molly Reynolds ' book, Exceptions to the Rule: The Politics of Filibuster Limitations in the U.S. Senate.Lee mentions Jonathan Bernstein’s proposal to give the majority party one “Superbill” in each Congress that cannot be filibustered.The open letter written by 70 former senators is available here. James’ response is available here.

More on my journey to understand varying political points of view. If you like the show, please give it a 5 star rating on whatever app or site you use to listen to it. And tell your friends and family about it! Thanks! In this episode I mention: Justin Robert Young's "Raise the Dead" podcast: https://www.raisethedeadpodcast.com/ "Why People Like Trump" https://www.linkedin.com/content-guest/article/mayor-livermore-california-explains-trumps-popularity-julian-mccall?fbclid=IwAR3wL5OWrQcJtJM48zW8jJ69W57FQ8X0zBmvKTSgLpah6Ot5-5ykiNFlm68 Jury's "Politics, Politics, Politics" podcast: http://www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/ NPR's "Up First" podcast: https://www.npr.org/podcasts/510318/up-first NPR's "Politics" podcast: https://www.npr.org/podcasts/510310/npr-politics-podcast Andrew Heaton's "Political Orphanage" podcast: https://player.fm/series/the-political-orphanage And the book "Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats” by Matt Grossman and David A. Hopkins: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/30008279-asymmetric-politics Here's a couple of links to the journal Dad used to record his life: https://www.amazon.com/Book-Myself-Yourself-Autobiography-Questions/dp/1401303099 https://www.amazon.com/Book-Myself-Do-Yourself-Autobiography/dp/0316534498 (Newer edition) You can follow me on social media: https://twitter.com/seniorgeek49 https://www.instagram.com/seniorgeek49/ https://www.facebook.com/garyf37 If this podcast doesn't show up in your favorite app you can add it! Find the "Add podcast as URL" or equivalent then copy and paste this RSS link: https://anchor.fm/s/afe7720/podcast/rss Please leave comments here: https://anchor.fm/gary-fisher/message --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/gary-fisher/message

Talking about my struggles to understand how political Conservatives (or those that are calling themselves Conservatives these days) think. Here are some links to resources I mentioned in this week's episode: You can find Andrew Heaton's "The Political Orphanage" podcast here: https://podcasts.google.com/?feed=aHR0cHM6Ly9wb2xpdGljYWxvcnBoYW5hZ2UubGlic3luLmNvbS9yc3M%3D&episode=NGMzYWEzNzVlZjI5NDRjN2E3MTUwYWNlZjViYzkxYTc%3D&hl=en The book "Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats" by Dr. Matt Grossmann is available wherever fine books are sold, including Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Asymmetric-Politics-Ideological-Republicans-Democrats/dp/0190626607 This week's quote is from "The 100 Most Famous Quotes of All Time" web page: https://blog.hubspot.com/sales/famous-quotes If you like the show, please give it a 5 star rating on whatever app or site you use to listen to it. And tell your friends and family about it! Thanks! Here's a couple of links to the journal Dad used to record his life: https://www.amazon.com/Book-Myself-Yourself-Autobiography-Questions/dp/1401303099 https://www.amazon.com/Book-Myself-Do-Yourself-Autobiography/dp/0316534498 (Newer edition) You can follow me on social media: https://twitter.com/seniorgeek49 https://www.instagram.com/seniorgeek49/ https://www.facebook.com/garyf37 If this podcast doesn't show up in your favorite app you can add it! Find the "Add podcast as URL" or equivalent then copy and paste this RSS link: https://anchor.fm/s/afe7720/podcast/rss Please leave comments here: https://anchor.fm/gary-fisher/message --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/gary-fisher/message

Republicans and Democrats don't just have different goals and platforms, they literally think and organize differently. Dr. Matt Grossmann joins Heaton to discuss his book, "Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats."

The Republican and Democratic parties are not the same. I’ll say it again: The Republican and Democratic parties are not the same. I don’t just mean they believe different things. I mean they’re composed in different ways, they argue from different premises, they’re structured in different ways. We treat them as mirror images of each other — the left and right hands of American politics — but they’re not. And the ways in which they’re different make it hard for them to understand each other, and hard for American politics to function. Political scientists Matt Grossmann and Dan Hopkins literally wrote the book on how the parties are different. In Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats, they argue that the differences between the parties stem from a central and longstanding split in the country’s political personality: We are a country of philosophical conservatives, and policy liberals. We want a small government that does more of everything. I asked Grossmann on the show to walk me through the ways the parties are different, and how those differences explain everything from the GOP’s repeated shutdowns to asymmetric polarization to the rise of Fox News. This is a conversation about the fundamental structure of America’s parties, public opinion, and media institutions. It’s worth the time. Book Recommendations: Racial Realignment: The Transformation of American Liberalism, 1932-1965by Eric Schickler Before the Storm: Barry Goldwater and the Unmaking of the American Consensusby Rick Perlstein Law and Order: Street Crime, Civil Unrest, and the Crisis of Liberalism in the 1960's by Michael W. Flamm Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

A conversation with Professor Matt Grossmann about his research on how the two major parties are changing and resulting in a wide polarization and dysfunctional governing. The Republican Party he says, is the vehicle of an ideological movement while the Democratic Party is a coalition of social groups. Republican leaders prize conservatism and attract support by pledging loyalty to broad values. Democratic leaders instead seek concrete gove rnment action, appealing to voters' group identities and interests by endorsing specific policies. Guest: Matt Grossmann is the Director of the Institute for Public Policy and Social Research and Associate Professor of Political Science at Michigan State University. He is co-author with Professor David Hopkins of the new book Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats. Then, the new wave of candidates running for office with Sayu Bhojwani. Guest: Sayu Bhojwani is the founder and president of New American Leaders, the only national organization focused on preparing immigrant leaders to run for public office. She served as New York City's first commissioner of immigrant affairs. She is author of People Like Us: The New Wave of Candidates Knocking at Democracy's Door.   The post The Changing Nature of the Two Major Political Parties. Then, Immigrants Running for Office appeared first on KPFA.

Jennifer Victor, Richard Skinner, and Seth Masket talk with Vox editor-at-large Ezra Klein about dissatisfaction with American democracy, the evolutions of and differences between the Democratic and Republican parties, and what political science gets right and wrong. The articles and books mentioned here include, but aren't limited to, the following: -Julia Azari, “Weak parties and strong partisanship are a bad combination” -Will Blythe, "To Hate Like This Is to Be Happy Forever: A Thoroughly Obsessive, Intermittently Uplifting, and Occasionally Unbiased Account of the Duke-North Carolina Basketball Rivalry" -Michael Finkel, "The Stranger in the Woods" -Matt Grossmann and David Hopkins, "Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats" -Ezra Klein, “White Threat in a Browning America” -Lilliana Mason, "Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity" -Joanne M. Miller, Kyle L. Saunders, and Christina E. Farhart, “Conspiracy Endorsement as Motivated Reasoning: The Moderating Roles of Political Knowledge and Trust” -Diana Mutz, "Hearing the Other Side: Deliberative versus Participatory Democracy" -Neil Postman, "Amusing Ourselves to Death" Recorded in Washington DC on July 26, 2018 at the Vox studios.

Chris Martin talks to Matt Grossmann, associate professor of political science at Michigan State University and director of the Institute for Public Policy and Social Research. He specializes in the study of interest groups and parties. His latest book is Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats, co-authored with David A. Hopkins. 0:00 What do undergraduates know about the parties? 04:00 Should we trace change to the Gingrich era? 07:35 Matt’s new book on asymmetric politics 15:00 People project their mirror image on the opposite party 17:10 Does Donald Trump represent the core of Republican party? 20:00 Comparing American parties to parties elsewhere 24:11 New research #1: Do the rich buy off politicians? 28:53 How this relates to Heterodox Academy’s mission 31:58 Think tanks and ideology Selected Quotes: "I think we may be overlearning a little bit on the public level. I wouldn’t want students to come away thinking the public is divided into two clear factions, that they disagree with each other on everything, and they’re sort of driving the parties. I think it’s worth separating what elites are doing in Congress and the ways that the public is changing." "Each party tends to understand itself but they sort of misunderstand the other political party, so the Democrats commonly portray the Republican party as just a vehicle for the rich, for big business, and they’re just about distributing benefits to their constituencies, and that’s just basically the Democrats seeing the Republicans as the mirror image of themselves. And in similar terms, the Republicans tend to see the Democrats as a more ideological party than they are, that is, they see the Democrats as favoring big government for its own sake, favoring centralization for its own sake and rather than just pursuing lots of benefits for their constituencies and trying to solve their constituencies’ problems." "Our only difference with [social psychological research] is that those studies tend to compare liberals with conservatives, which is a pretty reasonable thing to do, except that when it comes to the American public, if you’re comparing conservatives, you have the fact that almost all Republicans are conservatives, whereas only about the half the Democratic party is liberals, so you get these comparisons that are really your modal Republican with your—kind of—half of the Democratic Party. There’s a whole other section of the Democratic Party that really doesn’t identify as liberal, and might have a tie to the Democratic party that’s just based on one issue or based on the sense that the party represents their minority group and so they’re not necessarily going to follow those same practices that you would get if you’re comparing liberals and conservatives."

n this episode, Chris Martin (@Chrismartin76) talks to Matt Grossmann (@MattGrossmann), associate professor of political science at Michigan State University and director of the Institute for Public Policy and Social Research. He specializes in the study of interest groups and parties. His latest book is Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats, co-authored with David A. Hopkins.

Matt Grossmann and David A. Hopkins are the authors of Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats (Oxford University Press, 2016). Grossmann is director of the Institute for Public Policy and Social research and associate professor of political science at Michigan State University; Hopkins is assistant professor of political science at Boston College. With heated confirmation hearings occurring on Capitol Hill and the inauguration days away, Republicans and Democrats are debating what makes a good Cabinet official and what makes good federal policy. Why is it that the two parties have such different visions for what makes good policy and the importance of ideology? Asymmetric Politics offers an answer: the GOP has been, at its core, an ideological movement while the Democrats are a coalition of social groups. Hopkins and Grossmann support this argument with a huge amount of information about the electorate, party organizing, and elected officials. They show that the polarization observed by so many has to be understood in the context of these pronounced asymmetries between the two parties. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Matt Grossmann and David A. Hopkins are the authors of Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats (Oxford University Press, 2016). Grossmann is director of the Institute for Public Policy and Social research and associate professor of political science at Michigan State University; Hopkins is assistant professor of political science at Boston College. With heated confirmation hearings occurring on Capitol Hill and the inauguration days away, Republicans and Democrats are debating what makes a good Cabinet official and what makes good federal policy. Why is it that the two parties have such different visions for what makes good policy and the importance of ideology? Asymmetric Politics offers an answer: the GOP has been, at its core, an ideological movement while the Democrats are a coalition of social groups. Hopkins and Grossmann support this argument with a huge amount of information about the electorate, party organizing, and elected officials. They show that the polarization observed by so many has to be understood in the context of these pronounced asymmetries between the two parties. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Matt Grossmann and David A. Hopkins are the authors of Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats (Oxford University Press, 2016). Grossmann is director of the Institute for Public Policy and Social research and associate professor of political science at Michigan State University; Hopkins is assistant professor of political... Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Matt Grossmann and David A. Hopkins are the authors of Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats (Oxford University Press, 2016). Grossmann is director of the Institute for Public Policy and Social research and associate professor of political science at Michigan State University; Hopkins is assistant professor of political science at Boston College. With heated confirmation hearings occurring on Capitol Hill and the inauguration days away, Republicans and Democrats are debating what makes a good Cabinet official and what makes good federal policy. Why is it that the two parties have such different visions for what makes good policy and the importance of ideology? Asymmetric Politics offers an answer: the GOP has been, at its core, an ideological movement while the Democrats are a coalition of social groups. Hopkins and Grossmann support this argument with a huge amount of information about the electorate, party organizing, and elected officials. They show that the polarization observed by so many has to be understood in the context of these pronounced asymmetries between the two parties. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Matt Grossmann and David A. Hopkins are the authors of Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats (Oxford University Press, 2016). Grossmann is director of the Institute for Public Policy and Social research and associate professor of political science at Michigan State University; Hopkins is assistant professor of political science at Boston College. With heated confirmation hearings occurring on Capitol Hill and the inauguration days away, Republicans and Democrats are debating what makes a good Cabinet official and what makes good federal policy. Why is it that the two parties have such different visions for what makes good policy and the importance of ideology? Asymmetric Politics offers an answer: the GOP has been, at its core, an ideological movement while the Democrats are a coalition of social groups. Hopkins and Grossmann support this argument with a huge amount of information about the electorate, party organizing, and elected officials. They show that the polarization observed by so many has to be understood in the context of these pronounced asymmetries between the two parties.

Political polarization is the worst it’s been since the Civil War, some experts argue. How did we get here? How have America’s ideologies shifted so much in the past four decades? What forces underlie the growing divide between Republicans and Democrats? And how has social media and varying sources of information widened the gap? In episode 21, professors Julian Zelizer and Sam Wang discuss party polarization with Matt Grossmann and David Hopkins, co-authors of the new book, “Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats.” Published by Oxford University Press, the book provides a new understanding of contemporary polarization. Grossmann and Hopkins show how Republicans are more ideological, gaining public support by pledging their loyalty to broad values, while Democrats are more interested in special interest groups, appealing to voters’ group identities and interests through the endorsement of certain policies. The result: two parties that think differently, argue past one another, rely on completely different sources of information and pursue divergent governmental goals.