Skip to main content
×
×
Home

The Ideological Asymmetry of the American Party System

  • Yphtach Lelkes and Paul M. Sniderman
Abstract

Most Americans support liberal policies on the social welfare agenda, the dominant policy cleavage in American politics. Yet a striking feature of the US party system is its tendency to equilibrium. How, then, does the Republican Party minimize defection on the social welfare agenda? The results of this study illustrate a deep ideological asymmetry between the parties. Republican identifiers are ideologically aware and oriented to a degree that far exceeds their Democratic counterparts. Our investigation, which utilizes cross-sectional, longitudinal and experimental data, demonstrates the role of ideological awareness and involvement in the Republicans’ ability to maintain the backing of their supporters even on issues on which the position of the Democratic Party is widely popular. It also exposes two mechanisms, party branding and the use of the status quo as a focal point, that Democrats use to retain or rally support for issues on the social welfare agenda on which the Republican Party’s position is widely popular.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      The Ideological Asymmetry of the American Party System
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      The Ideological Asymmetry of the American Party System
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      The Ideological Asymmetry of the American Party System
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Footnotes
Hide All
*

Amsterdam School of Communication Research, University of Amsterdam (email: y.lelkes@uva.nl); Department of Political Science, Stanford University (email: paulms@stanford.edu). We thank Kevin Arceneaux, Justin Grimmer, John Sides, Gaurav Sood and Christopher Wlezien for helpful advice and encouragement. Data replication sets and online appendices are available at http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1017/S0007123414000404.

Footnotes
References
Hide All
Abramowitz, A.I., and Saunders, K.L.. 1998. Ideological Realignment in the U.S. Electorate. The Journal of Politics 60 (3):634652.
Ansolabehere, S., Snyder, J.M. Jr, and Stewart III, C.. 2001. Candidate Positioning in US House Elections. American Journal of Political Science 45 (1):136159.
Bartels, L.M. 1996. Uninformed Votes: Information Effects in Presidential Elections. American Journal of Political Science 40 (1):194230.
Bartels, L.M.. 2000. Partisanship and Voting Behavior, 1952–1996. American Journal of Political Science 44 (1):3550.
Brown, R.D. 1995. Party Cleavages and Welfare Effort in the American States. American Political Science Review 89:2333.
Bullock, J.G. 2011. Elite Influence on Public Opinion in an Informed Electorate. American Political Science Review 105 (3):496515.
Carmines, E.G., and Stimson, J.A.. 1990. Issue Evolution: The Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Conover, P.J., and Feldman, S.. 1981. The Origins and Meaning of Liberal/Conservative Self-Identifications. American Journal of Political Science 25 (4):617645.
Converse, P.E. 1964. The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics. In Ideology and Discontent, edited by D.E. Apter. 206–61. New York: Free Press.
Dalton, R.J., Beck, P.A., and Huckfeldt, R.. 1998. Partisan Cues and the Media: Information Flows in the 1992 Presidential Election. American Political Science Review 92 (1):111126.
Ellis, C., and Stimson, J.A.. 2009. Symbolic Ideology in the American Electorate. Electoral Studies 28 (3):388402.
Ellis, C., and Stimson, J.A.. 2011. Pathways to Conservative Identification. In Facing the Challenge of Democracy: Explorations in the Analysis of Public Opinion and Political Participation, edited by P.M. Sniderman and B. Highton, 120152. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Ellis, C., and Stimson, J.A.. 2012. Ideology in America. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Feldman, S., and Zaller, J.. 1992. The Political Culture of Ambivalence: Ideological Responses to the Welfare State. American Journal of Political Science 36 (1):268307.
Freeman, J. 1986. The Political Culture of the Democratic and Republican Parties. Political Science Quarterly 101 (3):327356.
Gelman, A. 2009. Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State: Why Americans Vote the Way They Do. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Gerber, A.S., Huber, G.A., Doherty, D., Dowling, C.M., and Ha, S.E.. 2010. Personality and Political Attitudes: Relationships across Issue Domains and Political Contexts. American Political Science Review 104 (1):111133.
Goren, P., Federico, C.M., and Kittilson, M.C.. 2009. Source Cues, Partisan Identities, and Political Value Expression. American Journal of Political Science 53 (4):805820.
Green, D.P., Palmquist, B., and Schickler, E.. 2002. Partisan Hearts and Minds: Political Parties and the Social Identities of Voters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Heaney, M.T., Masket, S.E., Miller, J.M., and Strolovitch, D.Z.. 2012. Polarized Networks: The Organizational Affiliations of National Party Convention Delegates. American Behavioral Scientist 56 (12):16541676.
Iacus, S.M., King, G., and Porro, G.. 2012. Causal Inference Without Balance Checking: Coarsened Exact Matching. Political Analysis 20 (1):124.
Jost, J.T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A.W., and Sulloway, F.J.. 2003. Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition. Psychological Bulletin 129 (3):339.
Kahneman, D. 2011. Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Kam, C.D. 2005. Who Toes the Party Line? Cues, Values, and Individual Differences. Political Behavior 27 (2):163182.
Kinder, D.R. 1983. Diversity and Complexity in American Public Opinion. In Political Science. The State of the Discipline, edited by A. Finifter, 391401. Washington: APSA.
Kinder, D.R.. 2003. Belief Systems after Converse. In Electoral Democracy, edited by M. MacKuen and G. Rabinowitz, 1347. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Levendusky, M. 2009. The Partisan Sort: How Liberals Became Democrats and Conservatives Became Republicans. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Malka, A., and Lelkes, Y.. 2010. More Than Ideology: Conservative–Liberal Identity and Receptivity to Political Cues. Social Justice Research 23 (2–3):156188.
Mondak, J.J. 1993. Source Cues and Policy Approval: The Cognitive Dynamics of Public Support for the Reagan Agenda. American Journal of Political Science 37 (1):186212.
Mondak, J.J.. 2010. Personality and the Foundations of Political Behavior. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mondak, J.J., Hibbing, M.V., Canache, D., Seligson, M.A., and Anderson, M.R.. 2010. Personality and Civic Engagement: An Integrative Framework for the Study of Trait Effects on Political Behavior. American Political Science Review 104 (1):85110.
Petersen, M.B. 2012. Social Welfare as Small-Scale Help: Evolutionary Psychology and the Deservingness Heuristic. American Journal of Political Science 56 (1):116.
Petersen, M.B., Slothuus, R., Stubager, R., and Togeby, L.. 2011. Deservingness Versus Values in Public Opinion on Welfare: The Automaticity of the Deservingness Heuristic. European Journal of Political Research 50 (1):2452.
Rahn, W.M. 1993. The Role of Partisan Stereotypes in Information Processing About Political Candidates. American Journal of Political Science 37 (2):472496.
Schattschneider, E.E. 1960. The Semi-Sovereign People: A Realist’s View of Democracy in America. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Skocpol, Theda. 1991. Targeting Within Universalism: Politically Viable Policies to Combat Poverty in the United States. In The Urban Underclass, edited by C. Jencks and P.E. Peterson, 411436. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.
Squire, P., and Smith, E.R.A.N.. 1988. The Effect of Partisan Information on Voters in Nonpartisan Elections. Journal of Politics 50 (1):169179.
Stimson, J.A. 1991. Public Opinion in America: Moods, Cycles, and Swings . Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Stimson, J.A.. 2004. Tides of Consent: How Public Opinion Shapes American Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Stokes, D.E., and Iversen, G.R.. 1962. On the Existence of Forces Restoring Party Competition. Public Opinion Quarterly 26 (2):159171.
Wilson, W.J. 2012. The Declining Significance of Race: Blacks and Changing American Institutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Zaller, J. 1986. Analysis of Information Items in the 1985 NES Pilot Study, Ann Arbor, MI: National Election Pilot Study Report.
Zaller, J.. 1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

British Journal of Political Science
  • ISSN: 0007-1234
  • EISSN: 1469-2112
  • URL: /core/journals/british-journal-of-political-science
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
Type Description Title
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Lelkes and Sniderman Supplementary Material
Supplementary Material 4

 Unknown (30 KB)
30 KB
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Lelkes and Sniderman Supplementary Material
Supplementary Material 5

 Unknown (46 KB)
46 KB
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Lelkes and Sniderman Supplementary Material
Supplementary Material 6

 Unknown (114 KB)
114 KB
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Lelkes and Sniderman Supplementary Material
Supplementary Material 2

 Unknown (404 bytes)
404 bytes
WORD
Supplementary materials

Lelkes and Sniderman Supplementary Material
Supplementary Material 1

 Word (67 KB)
67 KB
UNKNOWN
Supplementary materials

Lelkes and Sniderman Supplementary Material
Supplementary Material 3

 Unknown (404 bytes)
404 bytes

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed