Partisan preferences and valence voting
نویسنده
چکیده
This paper examines the nature of partisan preferences on a range of issue scales. It compares preferences in a period of strong ideological focus, in the late eighties and early nineties, with preferences in 2000 and 2001 – a period of weak ideological focus. Where partisan preferences were formerly polarised, they are now more consensual. I argue that once positional issues now resemble valence issues. This has implications for the positions we can expect parties to rationally adopt: theories of party position based on polarised partisan preferences do not apply in the current time. I offer a mechanism for how changes from positional to valence issues create competence based evaluations, and question the application of ‘core vote’ theories of party behaviour.
منابع مشابه
Voting Behavior, Preference Aggregation and Tax Design
The empirical evidence on voting behavior suggests that the individuals’ choice of the vote is explained, among other things, by policy issues and the voters’ partisan preferences over the party that rules the government. The evidence also indicates that the voters’ partisan preferences are the best predictor of the choice of the vote (Republican and Democratic voters tend to vote, respectively...
متن کاملThe Polarization of Public Opinion about Competence
The existing literature on polarization has focused predominantly on spatial polarization and partisanship. This paper extends the focus of polarization to the literature on issue ownership, and competence. Using ANES data from 1972 to 2012, we identify a pattern of partisan polarization in competence assessments in parallel with elite polarization in the US and some evidence of increasing comp...
متن کاملA Dynamic Model of Voting∗
We propose and estimate a dynamic model of voting which incorporates the three main factors affecting voting choices of individual citizens: party identification, policy preferences and candidates’ valence. Using individual level data on voting decisions in two consecutive presidential elections we identify and estimate (1) the distribution of voters’ policy positions, and (2) candidates’ valen...
متن کاملAn empirical analysis of valence in electoral competition
Spatial models of voting have dominated mathematical political theory since the seminal work of Downs. The Downsian model assumes that each elector votes on the basis of his utility function which depends only on the distance between his preferred policy platform and the ones proposed by candidates. A succession of papers introduces valence issues into the model, i.e. candidates’ characteristic...
متن کاملCompeting Agendas in Theories of Congress: Assessing Agenda Control Using Counterfactual Data
In legislative studies, a “roll rate” refers to the proportion of votes where a member or group of members is “rolled”—voting no on a measure that passes. Roll rates analysis is a potentially useful tool for evaluating arguments that the majority party in the House exercises influence by controlling what does and does not make it onto the agenda. Despite its promise, so far the use of roll rate...
متن کامل