Skip to main content
×
Home
    • Aa
    • Aa

More than a Dime's Worth: Using State Party Platforms to Assess the Degree of American Party Polarization

  • Daniel J. Coffey (a1)
Abstract
Abstract

How polarized are American political parties? Recently, Kidd used an automated content analysis program to demonstrate that American party platforms reveal only minor policy differences. In contrast to his conclusions, this analysis produces three main findings. First, at the state level, state party platforms reveal considerable ideological differences between the parties. Second, differences in state public opinion do not account for these differences; rather, they are more closely correlated with activist opinions and increases in state party competition. Finally, the conflict is not simply ideological but applies to specific issues in the platforms. As such, American state parties are highly polarized on different measures. Automated content analysis programs clearly represent an important methodological advance in coding political texts, but the results here call attention to the importance of policy and agenda content in party platforms. Moreover, studies of American politics, particularly research focusing on parties and ideological polarization, need to take into account the diversity of agendas that is inherent in a federal party system.

Copyright
References
Hide All
Abramowitz Alan I., and Saunders Kyle L.. 2008. “Is Polarization a Myth?Journal of Politics 70: 542–55.
Aldrich John H., and Battista James S. Coleman. 2002. “Conditional Party Government in the States.” American Journal of Political Science 46: 164–72.
American Political Science Association. 1950. “Toward a More Responsible Two-Party System.” American Political Science Review 44 (3).
Benoit Kenneth, and Laver Michael. 2008. “Compared to What? A Comment on ‘A Robust Transformation Procedure for Interpreting Political Text’ by Martin and Vanberg.” Political Analysis 16: 101–11.
Berry Jeffrey M., and Schildkraut Deborah. 1998. “Citizen Groups, Political Parties, and Electoral Coalitions.” In Social Movements and American Political Institutions, ed. Costain Anne N. and McFarland Andrew S., 136–56. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.
Bibby John F., and Holbrook Thomas M.. 2004. “Parties and Elections.” In Politics in the American States: A Comparative Analysis, 8th ed., ed. Gray Virginia and Hanson Russell L.. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
Black Duncan. 1948. “On the Rationale of Group Decision Making.” Journal of Political Economy 56: 2334.
Budge Ian, Robertson David, and Hearl Derek, eds. 1990. Ideology, Strategy, and PartyChange: Spatial Analyses of Post-War Election Programmes in 19 Democracies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Carmines Edward G., and Stimson James A.. 1989. Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Coffey Daniel. 2005. “Measuring Gubernatorial Ideology: A Content Analysis of State of the State Speeches.” State Politics and Policy Quarterly 5: 88103.
Conger Kimberly H. 2010. “Party Platforms and Party Coalitions: The Christian Right and State-Level Republicans.” Party Politics 16: 651–68.
Downs Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper and Row.
Epstein Leon. 1986. Political Parties in the American Mold. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Erikson Robert S., Wright Gerald C., and McIver John. 1993. Statehouse Democracy: Public Opinion and Policy in the American States. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Erikson Robert S., Wright Gerald C., and McIver John. 2007. “Measuring the Public' Ideological Preferences in the 50 States: Survey Responses versus Roll Call Data.” State Politics and Policy Quarterly 7 (2): 141–51.
Fiorina Morris P., Abrams Samuel J., and Pope Jeremy C.. 2005. Culture War? The Myth of a Polarized America. New York: Pearson Longman.
Gerring John. 1998. Party Ideologies in America, 1828–1996. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gulati Girish J. 2004. “Revisiting the Link between Electoral Competition and Policy Extremism in the U.S. Congress.” American Politics Research 32: 495520.
Hacker Jacob S., and Pierson Paul. 2005. “Abandoning the Middle: The Bush Tax Cuts and the Limits of Democratic Control.” Perspectives on Politics 3: 3353.
Hetherington M. J. 2001. “Resurgent Mass Partisanship: The Role of Elite Polarization.” American Political Science Review 95: 619–32.
Jewell Malcolm. 1984. Parties and Primaries: Nominating State Governors. New York: Praeger.
Kidd Quentin. 2008. “The Real (Lack of) Difference between Republicans and Democrats: A Computer Word Score Analysis of Party Platforms, 1996–2004.” PS: Political Science and Politics 41: 519–25.
Klingemann Hans-Dieter, Hofferbert Richard I., and Budge Ian. 1994. Parties, Policies, and Democracy. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Laver Michael, Benoit Kenneth, and Garry John. 2003. “Extracting Policy Positions from Political Texts Using Words as Data.” American Political Science Review 97: 311–31.
Laver Michael, and Garry John. 2000. “Estimating Policy Positions from Political Texts.” American Journal of Political Science 44: 619–34.
Layman Geoffrey C. 2001. The Great Divide: Religious and Cultural Conflict in American Party Politics. New York: Columbia University Press.
Layman Geoffrey, and Carsey Thomas. 2002. “Party Polarization and ‘Conflict Extension’ in the American Electorate.” American Journal of Political Science 46: 786802.
Lublin David, and Voss D. Stephen. 2003. “The Missing Middle: Why Median-Voter Theory Can't Save Democrats from Singing the Boll-Weevil Blues.” Journal of Politics 65: 227–37.
Martin Lanny W., and Vanberg George. 2008. “A Robust Transformation Procedure for Interpreting Political Text.” Political Analysis 16: 93100.
Mayhew David R. 1986. Placing Parties in American Politics: Organization, Electoral Settings, and Government Activity in the Twentieth Century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
McCarty Nolan, Poole Keith T., and Rosenthal Howard. 2006. Polarized America: The Dance of Ideology and Unequal Riches. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Petrocik John R. 1996. “Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study.” American Journal of Political Science 40: 825–50.
Pomper Gerald. 2003. “Parliamentary Government in the United States: A New Regime for a New Century?” In The State of the Parties: The Changing Role of Contemporary Parties, 4th ed., ed. Green John Clifford and Farmer Rick. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.
Usher Douglas, 2000. “Strategy, Rules, and Participation: Issue Activists in Republican National Convention Delegations, 1976–1996.” Political Research Quarterly 53: 887903.
Weinberg Micah. 2010. “Measuring Governors' Political Orientations Using Words as Data.” State Politics and Policy Quarterly 10: 96109.
Recommend this journal

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

PS: Political Science & Politics
  • ISSN: 1049-0965
  • EISSN: 1537-5935
  • URL: /core/journals/ps-political-science-and-politics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 4
Total number of PDF views: 39 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 179 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 23rd October 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.