partisan realignment pols 125: political parties & elections
TRANSCRIPT
Partisan Realignment
POLS 125: Political Parties & Elections
“The election, so far as the City and State of New-York are concerned, will probably stand, hereafter as one of the most remarkable in the political contests of the country; marked, as it is, by far the heaviest popular vote ever cast in the City, and by the sweeping, and almost uniform Republican majorities in the country.”
—The New York Times November 7,
1860
1860
“We had quite a line at the election. I never knew New York City to go against the Democrats before, but they got a good scare this time. I don’t believe we will be bothered with any more silver bills or boy orators for some time.”
—Charles C. KingNew Brighton, New York
November 29, 1896
1896
“A Sharp Right Turn: Republicans and Democrats Alike See New Era in 80s Returns”
—The Washington Post, November 6, 1980
1980
1994
“Tsunami is the Japanese word for ‘great wave caused by underwater seismic shock.’ What was the shock that caused the conservative wave of 1994?
No inchoate choler at incumbents; not lust for change for change’s sake; not negative advertising used by both sides; not solely disappointment with the character or personality of Bill Clinton.
The quake was caused by the majority’s belief that government is growing too big, intrusive, domineering and remote—and wasteful of tax dollars at all levels…”
—William Safire, November 10, 1994
The Vocabulary of Realignments
• Critical election• Realigning era• Party system• Periodicity
Realignment Theory
Party system
Realigning era
Critical election
Realignment Theory
• American national elections can be sorted into two kinds: realigning and non-realigning
• These elections fall into patterns (e.g., periodicity)
• Oscillation in and out of the cycle takes roughly 30 years
• Oscillation is caused by a strengthening and weakening of party identification
• Voter turnout is unusually high in realigning elections
Realignment Theory
• Third parties tend to form • A new issue, or cluster of issues,
replaces the old• There is an increase in ideological
polarization• Realignments are associated with major
changes in government policy• Realignments bring on long spans of
unified government• Voters express themselves “effectively
and consequentially” during electoral realignments, but not otherwise
Mayhew calls this a “grand, even magnificent interpretative structure…” but is it true?
Classic Realignments: 1860
Old line of party cleavage
WHIG PARTY DEMOCRATIC PARTY
New line of party cleavage
REP
UB
LIC
AN
P
AR
TY
DEMOCRATIC PARTY
Northern Democrats
Anti-Slavery North
Southern Whigs Pro-Slavery South
1860
Classic Realignments: 1896
Classic Realignments: 1932
The Periodicity of RealignmentsNotice how these “critical elections” occurred with regular frequency—every 30-40 years. Why? Because of generational change:
• 1st generation: Their party identity is forged in crisis. They are likely to have a strong and emotional commitment to a political party that will last the remainder of their lives.
• 2nd generation: Children of the realignment generation may follow their parents’ party affiliation, but with less intensity and determination.
• 3rd generation: These are children of “normal” politics. Having grown up during a period of stability, their party allegiance is weak.
If generational change makes realignment possible, and if our last realignment was in 1932, why haven’t we experienced a critical election since then? Theory suggests that we are “ripe” for a realignment…
Like Waiting for Godot…
• 1968: War in Vietnam, Civil Rights movement, Johnson’s “Great Society”
• 1980: Reduction in government spending and taxation, expansion of national defense
• 1994: Partisan shift in the balance of power in Congress favoring the Republican Party
• 2000-2008: A secular realignment into “Red” and “Blue” states?????
The phrase “red state, blue state” was voted the Word of the Year in 2004 by the American Dialect Society.
2008 election results by state
2008 election results, by county
2008 election results cartogram, adjusted for population
The 49 Percent Nation
• BLUE STATES: Metropolitan, educated, black, Northeastern, Rust belt, West.
• RED STATES: Rural and suburban, religious, South and Midwest. God-fearing and gun-loving.
In 2001, Michael Barone wrote a now famous essay titled “The 49 Percent Nation.” In it he argues that there are now two Americas, almost evenly divided, split by geography, as well as social, religious and cultural differences.
The Two AmericasThe Two AmericasWhat divides us?What divides us?
RELIGIONRELIGION - According to Barone “…the two - According to Barone “…the two Americas apparent in the 48 percent to 48 Americas apparent in the 48 percent to 48 percent 2000 election are nations of percent 2000 election are nations of different faiths. One is observant, tradition-different faiths. One is observant, tradition-minded, moralistic. The other is minded, moralistic. The other is unobservant, liberation-minded, unobservant, liberation-minded, relativistic.”relativistic.”
GEOGRAPHYGEOGRAPHY – As Barone points out, – As Barone points out, Democratic candidates do well in the Democratic candidates do well in the Northeast, in “Rust Belt” states, and on Northeast, in “Rust Belt” states, and on the west coast, especially in densely the west coast, especially in densely populated urban areas where Clinton’s populated urban areas where Clinton’s “personal peccadilloes raised few “personal peccadilloes raised few hackles.” Meanwhile, Republicans hackles.” Meanwhile, Republicans thrive in the rural and suburban South thrive in the rural and suburban South and Midwest.and Midwest.
A Comparison of Red State and Blue A Comparison of Red State and Blue State Voters, 2004State Voters, 2004
RED RED STATE STATE
VOTERSVOTERS
BLUE BLUE STATE STATE
VOTERSVOTERS
DIFFERENDIFFERENCECE
RELIGIONRELIGION
ProtestantProtestant 69%69% 41%41% +28%+28%
CatholicCatholic 16%16% 35%35% -19%-19%
Jewish, other, noneJewish, other, none 15%15% 24%24% -9%-9%
CHURCH ATTENDANCECHURCH ATTENDANCE
Weekly or moreWeekly or more 54%54% 34%34% +20%+20%
Seldom, neverSeldom, never 32%32% 53%53% -21%-21%
GUN OWNING HOUSEHOLDGUN OWNING HOUSEHOLD 53%53% 22%22% +29%+29%
PRO-CHOICE ON ABORTIONPRO-CHOICE ON ABORTION 46%46% 69%69% -23%-23%
OPPOSE GAY MARRIAGE OR CIVIL OPPOSE GAY MARRIAGE OR CIVIL UNIONSUNIONS
51%51% 26%26% +25%+25%
APPROVE OF IRAQ WAR 60% 45% +15%
VOTED FOR BUSH 60% 44% +16%
Purple America
Today, Barone says we are a Today, Barone says we are a 51 percent 51 percent nationnation, given Bush’s 51-48 victory over , given Bush’s 51-48 victory over John Kerry in 2004. But “Red” and “Blue” John Kerry in 2004. But “Red” and “Blue” state designations can be misleading state designations can be misleading given the narrow margins by which some given the narrow margins by which some states are won. A better approach shows states are won. A better approach shows variations of degree.variations of degree.
Should we use this map to criticize the Electoral College’s winner-take-all approach?
Purple AmericaIn this 3D version of the “purple America” map, height represents voter density (e.g., voters per square mile).
“It was almost as if two different Americas were voting…”
—Michael Barone, 2001
Purple America cartogram, 2004
What’s Next?What’s Next?
• External eventsExternal events• Shifting demographicsShifting demographics• Ideological positioningIdeological positioning• Candidate charismaCandidate charisma
How long can a near 50/50 split in the electorate How long can a near 50/50 split in the electorate last without a clear break in one direction or the last without a clear break in one direction or the other? Did we finally see that break in 2008?other? Did we finally see that break in 2008?
Is breaking the 50/50 split really what we want? Is it what is best for the country? As columnists David Broder and Dan Balz note “The partisan wars have severely limited Washington’s ability to accomplish big things.”
Potential Realignment: 2008?
…[T]he view that 2008 marks a historic realignment is favor of the Democrats is misleading—or at least premature. Obama’s victory offers no guarantee of a realignment. It is only an opportunity to bring one about.”
—Paul Starr
2008 Election Results by State
Here's how America has changed in 4 years: