The Evolution of Mass Ideologies in Modern American Politics
-
William J.M. Claggett
William J.M. Claggett is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Florida State University and author ofThe American Public Mind andThe Two Majorities , both with Byron E. Shafer, along with numerous articles on American electoral behavior in theAmerican Political Science Review , theAmerican Journal of Political Science , and theJournal of Politics , among others.
,
Pär Jason Engle
Pär Jason Engle is a graduate student in Political Science at the University of Wisconsin and manager of data and statistics in the Office of Educational Accountability (OEA) in the Department of Public Instruction for the State of Wisconsin.Byron E. Shafer is Hawkins Chair of Political Science at the University of Wisconsin and author of, most recently,The American Political Landscape , with Richard H. Spady, andThe American Public Mind , with William J.M. Claggett.
Abstract
A newly created dataset makes it possible to go looking for the mass ideologies most common in American politics across the postwar years. For this purpose, it is necessary to distinguish five great ideological groups: Liberals, Conservatives, Populists, Libertarians, and Moderates. These prove to have distinct voting behaviors, not just in the ballot for President but also in the propensity and manner by which they split their tickets. They have distinct perceptions of the main organizational referents in politics, both political parties and organized interests, while the distinction between objectively measured versus self-identified ideologies proves to be consequential as well. Finally, these ideological groups do not just evolve differently across the postwar years; they alter the substantive content of major-party coalitions at both the rank-and-file and the activist levels while doing so.
About the authors
William J.M. Claggett is an Associate Professor of Political Science at Florida State University and author of The American Public Mind and The Two Majorities, both with Byron E. Shafer, along with numerous articles on American electoral behavior in the American Political Science Review, the American Journal of Political Science, and the Journal of Politics, among others.
Pär Jason Engle is a graduate student in Political Science at the University of Wisconsin and manager of data and statistics in the Office of Educational Accountability (OEA) in the Department of Public Instruction for the State of Wisconsin.
Byron E. Shafer is Hawkins Chair of Political Science at the University of Wisconsin and author of, most recently, The American Political Landscape, with Richard H. Spady, and The American Public Mind, with William J.M. Claggett.
References
Abramowitz, Alan. 2010. The Disappearing Center: Engaged Citizens, Polarization, and American Democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Ansolabehere, Stephen, Jonathan Rodden, and James M. Snyder, Jr. 2006. “Purple America.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 20: 97–118.10.1257/jep.20.2.97Suche in Google Scholar
Argersinger, Peter H. 1995. The Limits of Agrarian Radicalism: Western Populism and American Politics. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Suche in Google Scholar
Bibby, John F., and L. Sandy Maisel. 1998. Two Parties – Or More? The American Party System. Boulder: Westview.Suche in Google Scholar
Boaz, David. 1997. Libertarianism: A Primer. New York: Free Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Carmines, Edward G., and Michael W. Wagner. 2006. “Political Issues and Party Alignments: Assessing the Issue Evolution Perspective.” Annual Review of Political Science 9: 67–81.10.1146/annurev.polisci.9.091905.180706Suche in Google Scholar
Carmines, Edward G., and Michael J. Ensley. 2004. “Ideologically Polarized Parties, Ideologically Inconsistent Voters, and Split-Ticket Voting in the United States.” Paper presented at the annual meetings of the American Political Science Association, 2004.Suche in Google Scholar
Carmines, Edward G., Michael J. Ensley, and Michael W. Wagner. 2012. “Political Ideology in American Politics: One, Two, or None?” The Forum 10 (3): Article 4.10.1515/1540-8884.1526Suche in Google Scholar
Claggett, William J. M., and Philip H. Pollock, III. 2006. “The Modes of Political Participation Revisited, 1980–2004.” Political Research Quarterly 59: 593–600.10.1177/106591290605900408Suche in Google Scholar
Claggett, William J.M., and Byron E. Shafer. 2010. The American Public Mind: The Issue Structure of Mass Politics in the Postwar United States. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511816420Suche in Google Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P., and Samuel J. Abrams. 2009. Disconnect: The Breakdown of Representation in American Politics. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Gillespie, J. David. 1993. Politics at the Periphery: Third Parties in Two-Party America. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Hyndman, Rob J. 1996. “Computing and Graphing Highest Density Regions.” The American Statistician 50: 120–126.Suche in Google Scholar
Kazin, Michael. 1998. The Populist Persuasion: An American History. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Lilie, Stuart A., and William Maddox. 1981. An Alternative Analysis of Mass Belief Systems: Liberal, Conservative, Populist, and Libertarian, Policy Analysis No. 3. Washington, DC: Cato Institute.Suche in Google Scholar
Lipset, Seymour Martin, and Stein Rokkan. 1967. “Cleavage Structures, Party Systems, and Voter Alignments.” In Party Systems and Voter Alignments: Cross-National Perspectives, edited by Lipset and Rokkan. New York: The Free Press.Suche in Google Scholar
McCarty, Nolan, Keith T. Poole, and Howard Rosenthal. 1997. Income Redistribution and the Realignment of American Politics. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.Suche in Google Scholar
McClosky, Herbert. 1964. “Consensus and Ideology in American Politics.” American Political Science Review 58: 361–382.10.2307/1952868Suche in Google Scholar
McClosky, Herbert, Paul Hoffman, and Rosemary O’Hara. 1960. “Issue Conflict and Consensus among Party Leaders and Followers.” American Political Science Review 54: 406–472.10.2307/1978302Suche in Google Scholar
Miller, Gary, and Norman Schofield. 2003. “Activism and Partisan Realignment in the United States.” American Political Science Review 97: 245–260.10.1017/S0003055403000650Suche in Google Scholar
Miron, Jeffrey A. 2010. Libertarianism from A to Z. New York: Basic Books.Suche in Google Scholar
Poole, Keith T., and Howard Rosenthal. 1997. Congress: A Political-Economic History of Roll Call Voting. New York: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Schofield, Norman, Gary Miller, and Andrew Martin. 2003. “Critical Elections and Partisan Realignment in the United States.” Political Studies 51: 217–240.10.1111/1467-923X.00181-i1Suche in Google Scholar
Shafer, Byron E. 1991. “What is the American Way? Four Themes in Search of Their Next Incarnation.” In Is America Different? A New Look at American Exceptionalism, edited by Shafer. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Shafer, Byron E., and William J.M. Claggett. 1995. The Two Majorities: The Issue Context of Modern American Politics. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Stanley, Ben. 2008. “The Thin Ideology of Populism.” Journal of Political Ideologies 13: 95–110.10.1080/13569310701822289Suche in Google Scholar
Trier, Shawn, and D. Sunshine Hillygus. 2009. “The Nature of Political Ideology in the Contemporary Electorate.” Public Opinion Quarterly 73: 679–703.10.1093/poq/nfp067Suche in Google Scholar
©2014 by De Gruyter
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Introduction
- Even the Geeks are Polarized: The Dispute over the ‘Real Driver’ in American Elections
- The Evolution of Mass Ideologies in Modern American Politics
- Mobilizing Marginalized Groups among Party Elites
- Modern Reconstructive Presidential Leadership: Reordering Institutions in a Constrained Environment
- Independent Spending in State Elections, 2006–2010: Vertically Networked Political Parties Were the Real Story, Not Business
- The Paradoxes of Politics in Colorado Springs
- Disclosing Disclosure: Lessons from a “Failed” Field Experiment
- Book reviews
- Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War
- How Change Happens – Or Doesn’t: The Politics of US Public Policy
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- Editorial
- Introduction
- Even the Geeks are Polarized: The Dispute over the ‘Real Driver’ in American Elections
- The Evolution of Mass Ideologies in Modern American Politics
- Mobilizing Marginalized Groups among Party Elites
- Modern Reconstructive Presidential Leadership: Reordering Institutions in a Constrained Environment
- Independent Spending in State Elections, 2006–2010: Vertically Networked Political Parties Were the Real Story, Not Business
- The Paradoxes of Politics in Colorado Springs
- Disclosing Disclosure: Lessons from a “Failed” Field Experiment
- Book reviews
- Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War
- How Change Happens – Or Doesn’t: The Politics of US Public Policy
