POLITICAL ISSUES AND PARTY ALIGNMENTS: Assessing the Issue Evolution Perspective

Abstract

Although the study of realignment is an essential component of the rich and fruitful tradition of examining long-term partisan change, questions about the usefulness of the concept persist. We seek to redirect and reinvigorate the study of lasting political change by evaluating the critiques of classic realignment theory, examining the issue evolution perspective, and assessing whether the theory of issue evolution can be used to explain recent research on the relationship between political issues and partisan change. Our review of the theoretical and empirical literature investigating political issues and party alignments sheds light on both the utility of the issue evolution perspective and the conditions under which durable changes in party alignments are most likely to occur.

Issue evolution and partisan polarization in a European multiparty system: Elite and mass repositioning in Denmark 1968–2011

“…The issue evolution perspective centers around the role of political elites in the transformation of party systems and partisan alignments (Carmines andStimson, 1986, 1989;Adams, 1997;Lindaman and Haider-Markel, 2002;Carmines and Wagner, 2006). In a nutshell, vote-and officeseeking elites try to change the long-term political agenda by emphasizing issues that are able to break up existing alignments and which produce realignments to their own advantage.…”

“…The issue must be salient among the electorate for a longer time and the electorate must have developed strong feelings about the issues reflecting the polarization at the party level to fulfill the conditions for an issue-based realignment (Carmines and Stimson, 1989;Carmines, 1991;Lindaman and Haider-Markel, 2002;Carmines and Wagner, 2006).…”

“…To resolve such controversies about whether party system transformation is elite-driven or mass-driven, scholars of American politics have applied the issue evolution perspective (e.g., Carmines andStimson, 1986, 1989;Carmines, 1991;Adams, 1997;Layman, 2001;Lindaman and Haidar-Markel, 2002; also Carmines and Wagner, 2006 for a review). According to this perspective, partisan polarization and long-term realignments within the electorate are elite-driven and conditioned by the emergence of new issues cutting across existing alignments (Carmines and Stimson, 1989: 159-161).…”

Another Issue Comes Out: Gay Rights Policy Voting in Recent U.S. Presidential Elections

“…The neglect of gay rights issues in analyses of recent electoral behavior is curious, given scholars' longstanding attention to the influence of moral issues on mass political behavior (for recent discussions, see Abramowitz, 1997;Adams, 1997;Brewer & Stonecash, 2007;Carmines & Layman, 1997;Carmines & Wagner, 2006;Edsall, 1997;Fiorina, Abrams, & Pope, 2006;Hunter, 1991;Jelen, 1997;Kaufmann, 2002;Knuckey, 2005Knuckey, , 2007Layman, 2001;Lindaman & Haider-Markel, 2002;Mockabee, 2007;Mulligan, 2008;Sobnosky, 1993;White, 2003; for earlier discussions, see Ladd & Hadley, 1978;Phillips, 1969;Scammon & Wattenberg, 1970).…”

The South, the Suburbs, and the Vatican Too: Explaining Partisan Change Among Catholics

“…When the parties take clear and distinct stances on that issue, then the public adjusts their views of the parties based on this issue (Carmines & Stimson, 1989). Abortion is one of a number of "easy" issues that may have evolved in the second of half of the twentieth century as the parties have taken distinct stances on more issues (for a review see, Carmines & Wagner, 2006). In the years following Roe, there became no doubt which party supports abortion rights.…”