Partisan Moods: Polarization and the Dynamics of Mass Party Preferences

Abstract

Inquiry into the origins of partisan polarization has generally treated polarization as a simple, symmetric phenomenon-the degree to which the worldviews of the mass Democratic and Republican parties have or have not diverged from one another. In this article, we disaggregate polarization into its constituent parts, the dynamic preferences of the mass Democratic and Republican Parties. This approach allows for the possibility that intraparty dynamics may influence interparty differences and for the integration of studies of polarization with literatures addressing other dynamics in aggregate public opinion. Building on individual-level research on partisan identities and macrolevel research on public mood, we argue that party polarization may be catalyzed, in part, by the mass parties' differential responsiveness to changes in the macro political-economic context. We find support for this position, showing asymmetries in the dynamics of polarization that are associated with differential partisan responsiveness to domestic policy choices.

Backlash and Legitimation: Macro Political Responses to Supreme Court Decisions

“…Prior empirical analysis indicates that public mood changes over time as a function of economic conditions and the current supply of policy liberalism. First, the attractiveness of government policies is related to the current state of the macro economy, often indicated by the rates of inflation and unemployment (Enns and Kellstedt ; Erikson, MacKuen, and Stimson ; Ura and Ellis ). Greater unemployment spurs increased demand for public services and, therefore, more public opinion liberalism (more demand for government).…”

“…Enns and Kellstedt (2007) and Ellis and Ura () show that the strength of the positive association between unemployment and mood is conditional on political sophistication. In the aggregate, therefore, the relatively high responsiveness of more sophisticated cohorts “averages out” with the relatively low responsiveness of less sophisticated cohorts. Using somewhat different data and modeling approaches, some scholars have continued to find a stronger association between unemployment on public opinion liberalism (Enns and Kellstedt 2007; Erikson, Stimson, and MacKuen ), whereas others show a weaker, more limited relationship between the two (Ellis and Ura ; Ura and Ellis ; Ura and Socker ). This mixed set of results suggests a need for care in modeling opinion dynamics that vary systematically across various social and political cleavages in general and about the dynamic consequences of unemployment for policy mood in particular.…”

“…Using somewhat different data and modeling approaches, some scholars have continued to find a stronger association between unemployment on public opinion liberalism (Enns and Kellstedt 2007; Erikson, Stimson, and MacKuen ), whereas others show a weaker, more limited relationship between the two (Ellis and Ura ; Ura and Ellis ; Ura and Socker ). This mixed set of results suggests a need for care in modeling opinion dynamics that vary systematically across various social and political cleavages in general and about the dynamic consequences of unemployment for policy mood in particular.…”

An asymmetric partisanship effect: House price fluctuations and party positions

“…Adams and Somer‐Topcu () empirically show that left‐right voter distributions in 15 European countries are approximately single‐peaked. I assume that core voters have clearer ideological preferences and thus appear to the left or right of the centre of the policy space (see, e.g., Ura & Ellis () for the American case). Swing voters, by contrast, theoretically can be to either side of a party in a multiparty context.…”

Tracking the Coverage of Public Policy in Mass Media

“… As regards thermostatic responsiveness, see, e.g., Wlezien (), Erikson, MacKuen, and Stimson (), Jennings (), Soroka and Wlezien (), Ura and Ellis (), Ellis and Faricy (), Wlezien and Soroka (), Morgan and Kang (). As regards the public’s inattentiveness and information, see, e.g., Berelson, Lazarsfeld, and McPhee (), Converse (), Bennett (), Page and Shapiro (), Delli Carpini and Keeter (), Popkin and Dimock (). …”