I am a loud and proud liberal: pro choice, pro love of varying sexualities and gender identities, pro women, pro minorities, pro immigration. I am fond of social security nets and government assistance, I am entirely against implementation of capital punishment within the United States, and I believe gun control and reformations regarding requirements to own one (or more) should be revisited.

I am proud of my political identity and enjoy surrounding myself with people who identify similarly. Am I wrong for this?

According to national correspondent Philip Bump, I am far from an exception. On October 5th, 2017 Bump published an article through The Washington Post titled, “Only about 1 in 10 Americans have a lot of friends of the opposing political party.” He states, accrediting a Pew Research publication, that “more than 80 percent of Republicans and Democrats hold unfavorable views of members of the other party, with 44 percent of Democrats and 45 percent of Republicans holding very unfavorable views of their political opponents.” 21 percent of Democrats polled reported having no Republican friends, while 14 percent of Republicans reported having no Democratic friends. Slightly less than half of each party’s members polled reported having “a few” friends crossing party lines.

Although party polarization is not a newly acquired facet within American politics, various media outlets, universities, and independent researchers and experts have concluded that the rift between parties has widened tremendously, especially since the beginning of the decade. Median Republicans and median Democrats are drifting further from middle ideologies in exchange for core conservatism and solid liberalism.

Consider the two terms that President Obama served, and a few of the legislative actions he took during that time:

Passed the Affordable Care Act in order to provide healthcare to millions of Americans.
Began withdrawing American troops from Afghanistan.
Implemented DACA, allowing illegal immigrants a chance to stay and work within the United States.
Repealed the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, and signed the Hate Crimes Prevention Act.

Now, consider some of the preferences Trump has enacted, or attempted to enact, since taking office:

Hopeful for repealment and replacement of Obamacare.
Threat of barring openly transgender individuals from serving in the U.S. Military.
Announcement of formal end of DACA.
Continuously adamant in constructing a Mexican border wall, because Mexicans are "drug dealers, criminals, rapists."

Barack Obama and Donald Trump are polar opposites - Obama, a strong liberal, and Trump, a fierce, albeit untraditional, conservative. Those who opposed Obama’s lenient policies on social issues and outspoken support for public welfare programs are steadfast to support a Republican candidate in hopes of change, while those detesting Trump’s election are quick to reminisce about Obama and the success of the Democratic party.

This is not an isolated incident. Retrospective and prospective techniques of voting consistently take into account the performance of the political party previously in power, and how the “issues” were handled. As candidates continue to appeal to the far left or right throughout the course of their campaigns, it becomes more difficult for the American voter to remain within the median of a party. Democratic-leaning voters who don’t support DACA and diplomacy, and Republican-leaning voters who are pro choice and desire stricter gun regulations no longer have a candidate that appeals to their core values, forcing them to reevaluate which issues they really care about. Voters are pushed to a radical end of liberalism or conservatism because candidates no longer appeal to the middle ground, causing party dealignment and an emphasis on prospective and retrospective voting.

So, again I ask, am I wrong for enjoying the company of fellow liberals? Am I wrong for supporting the radical positions now being implemented because of political polarization?

I am a political science and women’s studies major with aspirations of becoming a civil rights attorney. I absolutely adore discussions about LGBT+ injustices, the appropriation of rape culture in the United States, Black Lives Matter and police brutality - essentially, if it’s a faux pas to discuss, I love it. These are my “issues,” my passions, my “I would die for these” stances, and I do not feel bad for wanting to discuss them with people who are like minded. I do not want to feel as though I am eternally damned to needing to defend myself in discussions of my core values.

I am guilty of assuming the worst upon knowing that somebody is politically conservative, especially in Trump’s America. I assume they’re intolerant of minorities, homophobic and transphobic, and love guns more than their own life. Rationally, I know that these assumptions are not always accurate, and that stereotypes are continuously enforcing American political discourse. That being said, I have great friends whose political ideologies do not coincide perfectly with my own, and that has not detrimentally affected our relationship - but, I know that there are certain topics we dare not breach.

I love these friends with all of my heart, but sometimes, I want to express my discontentment with the outcome of Philando Castille’s case without being retorted with: “Well, if he wasn’t breaking the law…”

I would like to express the fear I harbour for my black siblings, and the empathy I feel for my LGBT+ friends, and the uncertainty about my own professional future because of my gender without being met with, “I don’t agree with that, but…”

I love intellectual, stimulating arguments, but I appreciate understanding and compassion just as much, and find security and a guarantee of this through members of my own political party.