No abstract

P arty activists have played a leading role in "conflict extension"-the polarization of the parties along multiple issue dimensions-in contemporary American politics. We argue that open nomination systems and the ambitious politicians competing within those systems encourage activists with extreme views on a variety of issue dimensions to become involved in party politics, thus motivating candidates to take noncentrist positions on a range of issues. Once that happens, continuing activists with strong partisan commitments bring their views into line with the new candidate agendas, thus extending the domain of interparty conflict. Using cross-sectional and panel surveys of national convention delegates, we find clear evidence for conflict extension among party activists, evidence tentatively suggesting a leading role for activists in partisan conflict extension more generally, and strong support for our argument about change among continuing activists. Issue conversion among activists has contributed substantially to conflict extension and party commitment has played a key role in motivating that conversion.

A heated scholarly debate rages over the ‘culture wars thesis’ in American politics. Drawing on the literature on mass opinion constraint and its sources, we propose a resolution to this debate: the culture wars influence mass political behaviour in special religious, policy and political contexts where logical, psychological, social and electoral sources of opinion constraint are in effect. Using data pooled from the 1992, 1996 and 2000 American National Election Studies, we find strong support for our argument. We conclude that the cultural wars are waged by limited religious troops on narrow policy fronts under special political leadership, and a broader cultural conflagration is largely a rumour.

In this article, we examine the impact of religious variables on the vote in the 2004 presidential election. First, we review and evaluate two theories that underlie many interpretations of religion’s role in American electoral politics, namely, the ethnoreligious and the religious restructuring perspectives. Using both approaches, we deploy a comprehensive classification incorporating religious affiliations, beliefs, and practices that is quite successful in capturing the electoral impact of religion. We show that religious groups exhibited distinctive political priorities, attitudes toward the role of religion in the election, stands on critical campaign issues, and evaluations of President Bush’s performance in office. We find that some religious factors had an important role in the Republican victory, especially in the so‐called battleground states. Finally, we discuss some substantive implications of the findings for understanding public policies and policy making.