tl;dr: If content angered any "prevailing partisans" of whatever political direction, it's likely not "high quality content". Nevertheless, individual cases might be worth examining.
It's hard to argue against the points raised in this question when it does not point to any any specific questions which you think deserve better.
But I believe that when a question receives downvotes because people disagree with it for partisan reasons, then the question might not actually be a very good question. Good questions should be written from a neutral point of view and avoid pushing any political agendas. So when people find something in the question they object to for political reasons, then the question author didn't do a very good job at that.
But again, I can only guess which questions this meta-question talks about. Maybe the downvotes on them aren't actually justified? Maybe they are justified, but for a completely different reason than I think or you think?
If you would open a new meta-question about one specific question which you think got unjustified down/close/delete votes from the community, then we could take a closer look and analyze how good that specific question really is and how it could be improved.