How do emotions shape policy views? Analyzing over 11 million tweets and political speeches from 2013 to 2025, we document a sharp rise in anger in U.S. political discourse on both the supply side (policymakers) and the demand side (citizens). Among voters, the share of policy-related sentences expressing anger has increased by 50\% since 2013, with a pronounced acceleration after the 2016 election. Anger-laden tweets receive 60\% more retweets than non-emotional ones, providing a strategic incentive for emotional messaging. A key asymmetry emerges: while politicians’ anger follows political cycles, citizens’ anger has been durably shifted upward since 2016 and does not revert. Two nationwide experiments then establish causal effects. Inducing negative emotions increases support for protectionism, restrictive immigration policies, and redistribution, but does not reinforce populist attitudes. Positive emotions have little effect on policy preferences but reduce populist inclinations. Distinguishing between fear and anger, we find that anger substantially shifts climate policy attitudes while fear has no detectable effect. The emotional register of political discourse may thus shape not only engagement but the substance of citizens’ policy views.