Partisan Realignment

1
Partisan Realignment

• POLS 125 Political Parties Elections

2
1860
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
3
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
dont believe we will be bothered with any more
silver bills or boy orators for some time.
Charles C. KingNew Brighton, New
YorkNovember 29, 1896
1896
4
A Sharp Right Turn Republicans and Democrats
Alike See New Era in 80s Returns The Washington
Post, November 6, 1980
1980
5
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 changes 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
majoritys belief that government is growing too
big, intrusive, domineering and remoteand
wasteful of tax dollars at all levels William
Safire, November 10, 1994
6
Realignment Theory
Realignment theory provides a framework for
understanding patterns of partisan change,
characterized by long periods of stable political
alignments that are disrupted periodically by
dramatic events that produce critical
elections.
Classic examples include the years 1860, 1896,
and 1932 (some scholars add 1800, 1828, 1968, and
1980).
7
Realignment Theory

• A critical election occurs when there is a sharp
  and durable electoral realignment between
  parties.
• Realignments do not take place during a critical
  election, but gradually. A realigning era is a
  cumulative process that responds to new national
  problems as they arise.
• A party system is that long period of relative
  stability in voting patterns that follows a
  realignment. It represents a time of normalcy,
  or politics-as-usual.

8
V.O. Key
E.E. Schattsneider
9
The Vocabulary of Realignments

• Critical election
• Realigning era
• Party system
• Periodicity

10
Realignment Theory
11
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

12
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

13
Mayhew calls this a grand, even magnificent
interpretative structure but is it true?
14
Characteristics of a Realignment

• A partisan realignment is precipitated by the
  rise of a new political issue, or cluster of
  issues.
• The new issue cuts across the existing line of
  party cleavage.
• The new issue is powerful enough to dominate
  political debate and polarize the community.
• The major parties take distinct and opposing
  policy positions that are easily understood.

15
Characteristics of a Realignment

1. If the existing political parties attempt to
   straddle the new issue, a 3rd party may form to
   address it.
2. The intensity of the election is high. Citizens
   care deeply about the new issue, and this results
   in higher voter turnout.
3. The realignment process may extend over a length
   of time both before and after a critical
   election, but it the end it produces a
   fundamentally new political agenda, and a new
   partisan majority.

16
Classic Realignments 1860
The discussion of slavery dominated American
politics throughout the 1850s. The issue cut
squarely across the major political parties of
the timethe Whigs and the Democratsand split
the country North/South. The election of 1860
marked the final downfall of the Whig Party, and
the ascendance of the modern Republican Party.
17
Classic Realignments 1860
18
1860
Old line of party cleavage
WHIG PARTY
DEMOCRATIC PARTY
19
Classic Realignments 1896
The election of 1896 reflected growing class and
regional cleavages in the American electorate.
The most important issue at stake was monetary
policy. Currency backed by the gold standard
tilted the economic scale in favor of industrial
elites in the East, and against Western farmers.
Free silver would have allowed the repayment of
debt in cheaper dollars.
20
Classic Realignments 1896
21
Classic Realignments 1932
Following the stock market crash of 1929, the
Great Depression split the parties along class
and ideological lines. The election of Franklin
D. Roosevelt in 1932 created a new and lasting
Democratic majority centered around a social
welfare state at home and interventionism abroad.

22
Classic Realignments 1932
23
The Periodicity of Realignments
Notice how these critical elections occurred
with regular frequencyevery 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.

24
FIRST PARTY SYSTEM, 1788-1824
SECOND PARTY SYSTEM, 1828-1854
THIRD PARTY SYSTEM, 1856-1896
FOURTH PARTY SYSTEM, 1896-1928
FIFTH PARTY SYSTEM, 1932-?
25
Like Waiting for Godot
If generational change makes realignment
possible, and if our last realignment was in
1932, why havent we experienced a critical
election since then? Theory suggests that we are
ripe for a realignment

• 1968 War in Vietnam, Civil Rights movement,
  Johnsons 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?????

26
Dealignment?
In recent years we have seen a major deviation
from the cyclical pattern that has up until this
point characterized American political history.
According to some scholars, instead of
re-aligning, voters have stayed dislodged. Why?

• As elections become more candidate-centered,
  political parties become less important.
• No one party dominates. The country is evenly
  divided.
• Voters are more cynical about politics.
• Citizens increasingly engage in split-ticket
  voting.

27
(No Transcript)
28
(No Transcript)
29
The Presidential Vote, 1948-2004
30
(No Transcript)
31
The phrase red state, blue state was voted the
Word of the Year in 2004 by the American Dialect
Society.
32
2008 election results by state
33
2008 election results, by county
34
2008 election results cartogram, adjusted for
population
35
The 49 Percent Nation
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.

• BLUE STATES Metropolitan, educated, black,
  Northeastern, Rust belt, West.
• RED STATES Rural and suburban, religious, South
  and Midwest. God-fearing and gun-loving.

36
(No Transcript)
37
The Two Americas
What divides us?
GEOGRAPHY As Barone points out, Democratic
candidates do well in the Northeast, in Rust
Belt states, and on the west coast, especially
in densely populated urban areas where Clintons
personal peccadilloes raised few hackles.
Meanwhile, Republicans thrive in the rural and
suburban South and Midwest.
RELIGION - According to Barone the two Americas
apparent in the 48 percent to 48 percent 2000
election are nations of different faiths. One is
observant, tradition-minded, moralistic. The
other is unobservant, liberation-minded,
relativistic.
38
A Comparison of Red State and Blue State Voters,
2004
RED STATE VOTERS BLUE STATE VOTERS DIFFERENCE
RELIGION
Protestant 69 41 28
Catholic 16 35 -19
Jewish, other, none 15 24 -9
CHURCH ATTENDANCE
Weekly or more 54 34 20
Seldom, never 32 53 -21
GUN OWNING HOUSEHOLD 53 22 29
PRO-CHOICE ON ABORTION 46 69 -23
OPPOSE GAY MARRIAGE OR CIVIL UNIONS 51 26 25
APPROVE OF IRAQ WAR 60 45 15
VOTED FOR BUSH 60 44 16
39
Purple America
Today, Barone says we are a 51 percent nation,
given Bushs 51-48 victory over John Kerry in
2004. But Red and Blue state designations
can be misleading given the narrow margins by
which some states are won. A better approach
shows variations of degree.
Should we use this map to criticize the Electoral
Colleges winner-take-all approach?
40
Purple America
In 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
41
Purple America cartogram, 2004
42
Whats Next?
How long can a near 50/50 split in the electorate
last without a clear break in one direction or
the other? Did we finally see that break in 2008?

• External events
• Shifting demographics
• Ideological positioning
• Candidate charisma

43
Whats Next?
How long can a near 50/50 split in the electorate
last without a clear break in one direction or
the other? Did we finally see that break in 2008?

• Might external events alter the 50/50 equilibrium
  (e.g., aftermath of 9/11, the war in Iraq,
  Hurricane Katrina)?
• Will a shifting population break the 50/50
  impasse? It may depend on whether urban
  Democratic voters who move to pro-Bush states
  make those regions more liberal, or are instead
  assimilated into Red State culture.
• Are we deeply divided into opposing camps, or
  rather evenly divided right down the middle? The
  answer to that question may hold the key

44
(No Transcript)
45
(No Transcript)
46
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 Washingtons
ability to accomplish big things.
47
Whose Emerging Majority?

• Judis and Teixeira believe that the Democratic
  Party will build a new majority coalition whose
  members are educated professionals, working
  women, minorities, and middle-class Americans who
  live in urban areasplaces they term
  ideopolises.
• In contrast, Casse insists that a Republican
  majority is emerging. He argues that the party
  has reinvented itself, moving away from
  traditional conservative themes such as limited
  government, reduced spending, and local
  empowerment, while embracing moral issues and an
  aggressive foreign policy.
• Would either of these trends constitute a
  realignment?

48
Potential Realignment 2008?
The view that 2008 marks a historic
realignment is favor of the Democrats is
misleadingor at least premature. Obamas
victory offers no guarantee of a realignment. It
is only an opportunity to bring one about. Paul
Starr
49
2008 Election Results by State
50
Here's how America has changed in 4 years