In 2020, the Institute of Family Studies conducted research suggesting that of all American marriages, only 4% were between Democrats and Republicans. In the UK, the picture is not so stark, but moments of high political tension often bring struggling marriages to breaking point. Family lawyers in 2016 warned that it wasn’t just the UK and EU getting a divorce; the referendum was contributing to a rising divorce rate in British couples.
In light of the recent general election, the question emerges again, are opposing politics a dealbreaker?
I think the modern dating landscape gives us a warped perspective on this. Dating apps give the illusion that we can cherry-pick a perfect partner. Filtering by height, job, star sign or political beliefs… you get less choice when crafting a SIMS character. TikTok is filled with the language “red/beige/green flags” and “icks”. I am as guilty as anyone of spamming my friends with a million of these daily. But, truthfully, besides from the comedy gold they provide, I don’t think they will help you find the love of your life. I will always advocate for women having high standards, but there is a line. I’ve had to stop myself when I’ve been about to bin a man because I saw a TikTok saying “Imagine him on a bouncy castle” and now I’m irrevocably repulsed.
Women like Elizabeth Barrett Browning used to write poems about unconditional and forgiving love;
“I love thee with the breath, Smiles, tears, of all my life; and, if God choose, I shall but love thee better after death”.
In 2024 I’m sending messages to the girls group chat like “Yh first date was alright, but he misuses the crying emoji, probs a dealbreaker lol” and it’s met with “Totes. Hundo p. xoxo”. Liz is definitely rolling in her grave.
Of course, party politics are a bit more high-stakes than the politics of emojis, texting styles, and timed DM responses. However, still it’s indicative of the wider expectations we have for a perfectly formed partner, and our readiness to dismiss someone as soon as we encounter difference. Just like we would approach any platonic relationship we are invested in, we have to take people as evolving, flawed and messy humans. Most people’s views are shaped by a complex of mix of how they’ve been raised, their education and their lived experience. And, in our twenties and late teens, no one really knows who they are yet anyway.
So where does that leave us? In my experience, there’s four possible political dynamics when dating, some are more tolerable than others. But I think they exemplify how there is never a perfect match, all require a certain level of navigation and diplomacy to make it work.
My 4 Archetypes
1. The “I’ll have what she’s having”
I’ve met men who seem to think exactly like me. Ideal, right? Well, for a first date it’s great. That is until we run out things to talk about because every news story I bring up, or a comment I think is a unique political insight, is met with “Exactly. I know”.
This dynamic can work; my grandparents met at 16 in the same school society and have been happily married ever since. Every morning they share their breakfast together reading the same newspapers and in the 1960s you could find the at the same CND protests and Labour campaigns. However, I think the secret to their enduring relationship is not really that they vote the same, but the simple truth that they approach each other as intellectual equals.
I’ve met men who are my political match on paper, but it’s felt like they’re constantly trying to one-up up me intellectually and I leave feeling frustrated and bitter. There’s also a certain irony of being mansplained by a ‘feminist’ man about the economics of the gender pay gap…
2. The Devil’s Advocate
As a stubborn person also terrified of confrontation, meeting someone with clashing politics can cause issues. Some people love a heated debate. I definitely don’t. I find people whoalways present an opposing view, just for the sake of it, challenging to deal with.
Over the years, I’ve learnt that people with differing views, but who know how to communicate respectfully (and when to let it go) can be good for you. Some of my closest friends had upbringings which are completely alien to me, and I may never agree with some of their views, but I’m glad they share their politics with me because it challenges my own assumptions. And, most of the time, there’s usually more middle ground than you might think. It’s easier to internalise the discourse of Twitter culture wars and the vitriol politicians throw at each other, but I think, for most of us, there is always consensus to be found.
The same can be said to be true for relationships. This dynamic takes more work, and there are certain areas of conversation which may have to be taped off as a “no-go zone”. My parents’ views on how to raise kids, how to manage finances, their expectations for each other and what they want out of their life together are pretty perfectly aligned. But, come polling day, there’s an unspoken agreement that they keep who they voted for to themselves.
3. Mr Switzerland
The “middleman”, the “centrist”, the “fiscally-conservative-but-socially -liberal” type or the “are we talking about politics again?”. If there’s one thing more worrying than someone with strange views, it’s having no views.
Disinterested, disengaged or disillusioned; there are a lot of reasons why people take a neutral stance in politics. My advice is it’s not a dealbreaker, but proceed with caution. Sometimes you realise that this person just finds the world of party politics incomprehensible, exhausting and distant from their own life. I do have sympathy here; especially in an age of fake news, lies and politicians speaking in a language that is frankly deliberately obscure, I can understand what leads some people to switch off.
Growing up, we always talked politics at the dinner table. My Nan was ploughing me with feminist literature before I’d left primary school and some of my earliest memories are sat on my mum’s lap in a coffee shop whilst she was yapping to her girlfriends about politics and men (not much has changed!). I was raised by ambitious women who were always passionate about education and told me my voice was as valuable as anyone else’s. That’s a privilege not everyone gets.
That’s why I would suggest, before disregarding a potential partner, try to get to the root about why they are disengaged. And, with a bit of misinformation firefighting and Daily Mail damage control, I do think people can come around.
4. The Danger Zone
The sun was setting on beautiful Florence, I was several Aperol Sprits deep, feeling incredibly at peace in an Italian piazza. Feeling hopeful about life and, for once, hopeful about men. The waiter comes over and asks us whether we would like some water; and that’s when he told me, verbatim, “I only drink sparkling water because that’s what Andrew Tate drinks”.
Across the course of the dinner, he dropped some other bombshells including, “women can’t drive properly” and “women are the root of men’s problems”.
The problem is, sometimes people only reveal their true colours months into knowing them. So I would advise gauging their politics a few dates in. It’s at this point you should be dipping your toe in the political waters and not when you are thousands of miles away from home alone with an Andrew Tate enthusiast (and climate change denier). Lesson learnt.
You don’t have to launch straight out the gate, guns-a-blazing, with “Talk to me about third wave feminism” or “How do you view our fiscal relationship with the EU?”. Usually, I find the easiest way to do this is to gently bring up a news story, and ask for their opinion. People love talking about themselves, and if you give them space to express their views, you’ll probably get the answer you’re looking for.
In case it’s not obvious, never, ever, ever date a racist, homophobe, misogynist or general bigot. It’s not a valid political viewpoint; it’s called being unkind and ignorant. That is not someone you want to waste precious time and energy on. Besides, if you’re on the pull, there’s absolutely nothing sexy about being an arsehole.
The Takeaway…
Apart from my thick-red-tape-absolute-no-go-zone, the message that underpins the archetypes is this: approach and character always supersede simple party politics. If voting differently is an intransigent boundary for you, that’s completely valid. But these days the questions I find most helpful to judge relationship potential on a first date are not “Are they giving Brexiteer?”, but “Do our core values align?”, “Are they open to different views?” and “How do they communicate with others?”. Or, put simply, “Are they an all-round good egg?”
Dating apps are essentially a game. Swiping and liking give you the same dopamine hit you get from doing a TikTok doom scroll. They can be brilliant and I know many married couples who met online. But, without wanting to sound cliché, people are not algorithms. Despite the illusion, you can’t manufacture a perfect partner, so be prepared for compromise and potentially clashing politics.
I’ll put it another way; I don’t love my closest friends because of their politics. It’s the mixture of their kindness, consistent effort, and ability to have a laugh. Sometimes I love them despite their politics. Relationships are much the same.
