Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-jkvpf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-15T14:08:21.523Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How catchall parties compete ideologically: Beyond party typologies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2026

Ben Mainwaring  and
Sean McGraw
Ben Mainwaring
Affiliation:
YouGov, London, UK
Sean McGraw*
Affiliation:
University of Notre Dame, USA
*
Address for correspondence: Sean McGraw, Department of Political Science, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556, USA. Email: mcgraw.4@nd.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The catchall party remains a useful concept despite the lack of a widely agreed definition or list of parties. This article suggests defining catchall parties based on how they act strategically. Although catchall parties act strategically on both the organisational and ideological dimensions, this article concentrates on three key ideological features: catchall parties are ideologically centrist, dispersed and flexible over time. Relying on original surveys in the Republic of Ireland, which interviewed two‐thirds of parliamentarians, it is confirmed that Ireland's ‘catchall’ and ‘programmatic’ parties clearly differ in terms of how they compete ideologically. Ireland's catchall parties employ all three identified strategies. Smaller, more programmatic parties are consistent over time, non‐centrist and extremely ideologically coherent on core programmatic issues. The competition between catchall parties and ideological populist parties is a pressing issue, and the Irish case provides new theoretical insights and empirical evidence to understand these party types.

Keywords

political partiesideologyIrelandcatchall

Information

Type
Original Articles
Information
European Journal of Political Research , Volume 58 , Issue 2 , May 2019 , pp. 676 - 696
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 European Consortium for Political Research

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Allen, C. (2009). ‘Empty nets’: Social democracy and the ‘catch‐all party thesis’ in Germany and Sweden. Party Politics 15(5): 635–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carty, R.K. (2017). Fianna Fáil in comparative perspective. Irish Political Studies 32(1): 30–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coakley, J. (2012). The rise and fall of minor parties in Ireland, 1922–2011. In Weeks, L. & Clark, A. (eds), Radical or redundant? Minor parties in Irish politics. Dublin: History Press Ireland.Google Scholar
Farrell, D.M. (2001). Electoral systems: A comparative introduction. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Fenno, R. (1978). Home style: House members in their districts. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
Gallagher, M. (1981). Societal change and party adaptation in the Republic of Ireland, 1960–1981. European Journal of Political Research 9(3): 269–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz, R. & Mair, P. (1993). The evolution of party organizations in Europe: The three faces of party organization. American Review of Politics 14: 593–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirchheimer, O. (1966). The transformation of the Western European party systems. In LaPalombara, J. & Weiner, M. (eds), Political parties and political development. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Krouwel, A. (2006). Party models. In Katz, R.S. & Crotty, W.J. (eds), The handbook of party politics. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Krouwel, A. (2012). Party transformations in European democracies. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Mair, P. (1987). The changing Irish party system: Organization, ideology and electoral competition. London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
Marsh, M., Sinnott, R., Garry, J. & Kennedy, F. (2008). The Irish voter: The nature of electoral competition in the Republic of Ireland. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Mayhew, D. (1974). Congress: The electoral connection. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
McGraw, S. (2015). How parties win: Shaping the Irish political arena. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGraw, S. (2016). Ideological flexibility and electoral success: An analysis of Irish party competition. Irish Political Studies 31(4): 461–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meguid, B. (2008). Party competition between unequals: Strategies and electoral fortunes in Western Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Panebianco, A. (1988). Political parties: Organization and power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shu, M. (2003). Cope with Two‐dimensional Cleavage Structure: Party Politics in Referendums on European Integration. Paper presented at Workshop 19, ‘Cleavage Development: Causes and Consequences’, ECPR Joint Sessions, Edinburgh, 28 March–2 April.Google Scholar
Sinnott, R. (1995). Irish voters decide: Voting behaviour in elections and referendums since 1918. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, J. (2009). Campaigning and the catch‐all party: The process of party transformation in Britain. Party Politics 15(5): 555–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weeks, L. & Clark, A. (eds) (2010). Minor parties in Irish political life. Irish Political Studies 25(4): special issue.Google Scholar
Williams, M. (2009). Catch‐all in the twenty‐first century? Revisiting Kirchheimer's thesis 40 years later. Party Politics 15(5): 539–541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolinetz, S. (2002). Beyond the catch‐all party: Approaches to the study of parties and party organization in contemporary democracies. In Linz, J., Montero, J.R. & Gunther, R. (eds), The future of political parties. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar