Hostname: page-component-7d684dbfc8-tqxhq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-09-22T17:18:43.569Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "corePageComponentGetUserInfoFromSharedSession": true, "coreDisableEcommerce": false, "coreDisableSocialShare": false, "coreDisableEcommerceForArticlePurchase": false, "coreDisableEcommerceForBookPurchase": false, "coreDisableEcommerceForElementPurchase": false, "coreUseNewShare": true, "useRatesEcommerce": true } hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Activists and Partisan Realignment in the United States

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 August 2003

GARY MILLER  and
NORMAN SCHOFIELD
GARY MILLER
Affiliation:
Professor, Department of Political Science, Washington University, Campus Box 1063, St. Louis, MO 63130-4899 (gjmiller@artsci.wustl.edu).
NORMAN SCHOFIELD
Affiliation:
William Taussig Professor of Political Economy, Department of Economics, Washington University, Campus Box 1208, St. Louis, MO 63130-4899 (schofld@wueconc.wustl.edu).
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper, we contend that party realignments occur due to the interaction of candidates and activists. We examine independent party candidates who are motivated primarily to win elections but who use activist contributions to increase vote shares. In a two-dimensional policy space, such candidates will on occasion engage in “flanking” moves so as to enlist coalitions of disaffected voters, at the risk of alienating some of their traditional activist supporters. We argue that a result of such “flanking” moves, in the early part of the century, has been a shift in emphasis from an underlying social dimension to the economic dimension. In recent decades, electoral salience has shifted back to the social dimension. The net result is that the party cleavage line is much as it was a century ago—but the parties have switched sides.

Type
ARTICLES
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 97 , Issue 2 , May 2003 , pp. 245 - 260
Copyright
© 2003 by the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This paper is based on research supported by NSF Grants SBR 98 18582 and SES 02 41732. The authors would also like to thank James Adams and members of the Washington University Department of Political Science for their suggestions and encouragement, especially Randy Calvert, John Carey, Andrew Martin, Scott McClurg, Jeff Smith, and Steve Smith. Larry Handlin and Alexandra Shankster helped with data analysis and technical support.

References

Adams James Merrill Samuel 1999 Modeling Party Strategies and Policy Representation in Multiparty Elections: Why Are Strategies So Extreme? American Journal of Political Science 43 4 765-91Google Scholar
Aldrich John 1983 A Downsian Spatial Model with Party Activists American Political Science Review 77 4 974-90Google Scholar
Aldrich John 1983 A Spatial Model with Party Activists: Implications for Electoral Dynamics Public Choice 41 1 63 100Google Scholar
Aldrich John 1995 Why Parties? Chicago University of Chicago
Aldrich John McGinnis Michael 1989 A Model of Party Constraints on Optimal Candidate Positions Mathematical and Computer Modelling 12 4–5 437-50Google Scholar
Ansolabahere Steve Snyder James 2000 Valence Politics and Equilibrium in Spatial Election Models Public Choice 103 327–36
Banks Jeffrey Duggan John 1999 The Theory of Probabilistic Voting in the Spatial Model of Elections Typescript University of Rochester
Banks Jeffrey Duggan John Michel Le Breton 2002 Bounds for Mixed Strategy Equilibria and the Spatial Model of Elections Journal of Economic Theory 103 1 88 105Google Scholar
Brady David 1988 Critical Elections and Congressional Policy Making Palo Alto, CA Stanford University Press
Branch Taylor 1998 Pillar of Fire New York Simon & Schuster
Burnham Walter 1968 American Voting Behavior and the 1964 Election Midwest Journal of Political Science 12 1 1 40Google Scholar
Califano Joseph Jr 1991 The Triumph and Tragedy of Lyndon Johnson New York Simon & Schuster
Carmines Edward Stimson James 1989 Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics Princeton Princeton University Press
Carter Don 1995 The Politics of Rage New York Simon and Schuster
Connelly Marjorie 2000 Who Voted: A Portrait of American Politics, 1976–2000 New York Times November 12 4
Coughlin Peter 1992 Probabilistic Voting Theory New York Cambridge University Press
Downs Anthony 1957 An Economic Theory of Democracy New York Harper & Row
Duverger Maurice 1954 Political Parties New York Wiley
Enelow James Hinich Melvin 1985 The Spatial Theory of Voting Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Fine Sidney 1976 Laissez-Faire and the General-Welfare State Ann Arbor University of Michigan
Gallup George 1972 The Gallup Poll: Public Opinion 1935–71 New York Random House
Goldman Eric 1956 Rendezvous with Destiny Rev. ed. New York Vintage Books
Groseclose Tim 2001 A Model of Candidate Location When One Candidate Has a Valence Advantage American Journal of Political Science 45 4 862-86Google Scholar
Huckfeldt Robert Kohfeld Carol 1989 Race and the Decline of Class in American Politics Urbana–Champaign University of Illinois Press
Karol David 1999 Realignment without Replacement: Issue Evolution and Ideological Change Among Members of Congress Typescript UCLA
Kirkland Richard 1995 Today's GOP: The Party's Over for Big Business Fortune February 6 50–95
Koford Kenneth 1989 Dimensions in Congressional Voting American Political Science Review 83 949–62
Laver M. Schofield Norman 1990 Multiparty Government: The Politics of Coalition in Europe Oxford Oxford University Press. Reprinted 1998. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press
Lin Tse-Min Enelow James Dorussen Han 1999 Equilibrium in Multi-candidate Probabilistic Spatial Voting Public Choice 98 1 59 62Google Scholar
Mann Robert 1996 The Walls of Jericho New York Harcourt Brace
McKelvey Richard 1979 General Conditions for Global Intransitivities in Formal Voting Models Econometrica 47 1085–111
McKelvey Richard 1986 Covering, Dominance, and Institution-Free Properties of Social Choice American Journal of Political Science 30 2 283 314Google Scholar
McKelvey Richard Schofield Norman 1986 Structural Instability of the Core Journal of Mathematical Economics 15 4 179-98Google Scholar
Merrill Samuel Grofman Bernard 1999 A Unified Theory of Voting Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Petrocik John 1981 Party Coalitions: Realignment and the Decline of the New Deal Party System Chicago University of Chicago Press
Poole Keith Rosenthal Howard 1984 U.S. Presidential Elections 1968–1980: A Spatial Analysis American Journal of Political Science 28 2 283 312Google Scholar
Schlesinger Joseph A. 1994 Political Parties and the Winning of Office Chicago University of Chicago Press
Schofield Norman 1978 Instability of Simple Dynamic Games Review of Economic Studies 45 3 575-94Google Scholar
Schofield Norman 1983 Generic Instability of Majority Rule Review of Economic Studies 50 3 695 705Google Scholar
Schofield Norman 2002 Electoral Rules and Endogenous Parties: A Stochastic Model of Multi-Candidate Competition with Valence Typescript St. Louis, MO Washington University
Schofield Norman 2003 Valence Competition in the Spatial Stochastic Model Journal of Theoretical Politics Forthcoming
Schofield Norman Martin Andrew Quinn Kevin Whitford Andrew 1998 Multiparty Government in the Netherlands and Germany: A Model Based on Multinomial Probit Public Choice 97 3 257-93Google Scholar
Schofield Norman Miller Gary Martin Andrew 2003 Critical Elections and Political Realignment in the United States. 1860–2000 Political Studies 51 217–40
Smith Jeff 2002 Trading Places? The Two Parties in the Electorate from 1970–2000 Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago
Sundquist James 1983 Dynamics of the Party System Brookings Institution