Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-01T02:24:03.219Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The 1928–1936 Partisan Realignment: The Case for the Conversion Hypothesis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Robert S. Erikson  and
Kent L. Tedin
Robert S. Erikson
Affiliation:
University of Houston
Kent L. Tedin
Affiliation:
University of Houston
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An unresolved question concerning the New Deal realignment is the extent to which the Democratic surge in the vote resulted from either the conversion of former Republicans or the mobilization of newly active voters. Analyzing survey data from the Literary Digest straw polls and from early Gallup polls, we find evidence supporting the conversion hypothesis. New voters in 1928, 1932 and 1936 were only slightly more Democratic in their voting behavior than were established voters. Between 1924 and 1936, the vote among established voters was extremely volatile, largely accounting for the Democratic gains. After 1936, however, vote shifts became minimal and party identification had become highly consistent with presidential voting, suggesting a crystallization of the New Deal realignment by the late 1930s rather than a gradual evolution due to generational replacement.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 75 , Issue 4 , December 1981 , pp. 951 - 962
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1981

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andersen, Kristi (1979). The Creation of a Democratic Majority: 1928-1936. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Beck, Paul A. (1980). Review of The Creation of a New Democratic Majority: 1928-1936 by Kristi Andersen. American Political Science Review 74: 185–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnham, Walter Dean (1970). Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics. New York: W. W. Norton.Google Scholar
Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip, Miller, Warren, and Stokes, Donald (1960). The American Voter. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Cantril, Hadley (1951). Public Opinion 1935-1946. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Converse, Philip E. (1962). “Information Flow and the Stability of Partisan Attitudes.” Public Opinion Quarterly 26: 578–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Converse, Philip E. (1975). “Public Opinion and Voting Behavior.” in Greenstein, Fred I. and Polsby, Nelson W. (eds.), Handbook of Political Science, Vol. 4. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, pp. 75–169.Google Scholar
Converse, Philip E., and Markus, Gregory B. (1979). “Plus ça change …: The New CPS Election Study Panel.” American Political Science Review 73: 32–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dreyer, Edward C. (1971–1972). “Media Use and Electoral Choices: Some Political Consequences of Information Exposure.” Public Opinion Quarterly 35: 533–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howell, Susan E. (1980). “The Behavioral Component of Changing Partisanship.” American Politics Quarterly 8: 279–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Key, V. O. Jr., (1966). The Responsible Electorate. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ladd, Everett C., with Hadley, Charles W. (1978). Transformations of the American Party System, 2nd ed. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Literary Digest 99 (3 Nov. 1928).Google Scholar
Literary Digest 114 (5 Nov. 1932).Google Scholar
Literary Digest 122 (31 Oct. 1936).Google Scholar
Mann, Thomas E., and Wolfinger, Raymond E. (1980). “Candidate and Parties in Congressional Elections.” American Political Science Review 74: 617–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markus, Gregory B., and Converse, Philip E. (1979). “A Dynamic Simultaneous Equation Model of Electoral Choice.” American Political Science Review 75: 1055–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niemi, Richard G., Katz, Richard S. and Newman, David (1980). “Reconstructing Past Partisanship: The Failure of the Party Identification Recall Questions.” American Journal of Political Science 24: 633–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reiter, Howard L. (1980). “The Perils of Partisan Recall.” Public Opinion Quarterly 44: 385–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roper, Elmo (1936). “Forecasting Election Returns.” Review of Reviews 94: 54–61.Google Scholar
Shively, W. Philips (1971–1972). “A Reinterpretation of the New Deal Realignment.” Public Opinion Quarterly 35: 621–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sundquist, James L. (1973). Dynamics of the Party System. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Zukin, Cliff (1977). “A Reconsideration of the Effects of Information on Partisan Stability.” Public Opinion Quarterly 41: 244–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

A correction has been issued for this article:

Errata

Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.