Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-28T22:58:48.409Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Macropartisanship

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 1989

Michael B. MacKuen ,
Robert S. Erikson  and
James A. Stimson
Michael B. MacKuen
Affiliation:
University of Missouri St. Louis
Robert S. Erikson
Affiliation:
University of Houston
James A. Stimson
Affiliation:
University of Iowa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

From an early, incorrect consensus that party identification was free of the short-term influences of political life, its aggregate, macropartisanship, drew little scholary notice. Though macropartisanship, typically seen as a biennial time series, appears essentially constant, our quarterly treatment demonstrates substantial and notably systematic movement of this crucial barometer of the U.S. party system. We demonstrate that it varies systematically with respect to time, has electoral consequences, and can be modeled as a function of economic evaluations and approval of the incumbent presidential administration. Macropartisanship, we argue, is a variable like others, subject to routine ebb and flow as citizens in the aggregate reflect their experiences of politics onto the parties. Its medium-term movements of considerable magnitude are lasting enough to matter but occur without connoting shifts in the underlying party system and can be understood without invoking the crises and convulsions of realignment theory.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 83 , Issue 4 , December 1989 , pp. 1125 - 1142
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1989

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

Achen, Christopher. 1975. “Mass Political Attitudes and the Survey Response.” American Political Science Review 69:1218–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allsop, Dee, and Weisberg, Herbert. 1988. “Measuring Change in Party Identification in an Election Campaign.” American Journal of Political Science 32:996–1017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alt, James E. 1985. “Political Parties, World Demand, and Unemployment: Domestic and International Sources of Economic Activity.” American Political Science Review 79:1016–40.10.2307/1956246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Box, George E. P., and Jenkins, Gwilym M.. 1976. Time Series Analysis: Forecasting and Control. San Francisco: Holden-Day.Google Scholar
Brody, Richard A. 1977. “Stability and Change in Party Identification: Presidential to Off-Years.” Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington.Google Scholar
Brody, Richard A. 1978. “Change and Stability in the Components of Party Identification.” Presented at the National Science Foundation conference on party identification, Tallahassee.Google Scholar
Calvert, Randall L., and MacKuen, Michael B.. 1985. “Bayesian Learning and the Dynamics of Public Opinion.” Presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Campbell, Angus, Converse, Philip, Miller, Warren, and Stokes, Donald. 1960. The American Voter. New York: John Wiley & Son.Google Scholar
Carmines, Edward G., and Stimson, James A.. 1989. Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clubb, Jerome, Flanagan, William H., and Zingale, Nancy H.. 1980. Partisan Realignment: Voters, Parties, and Government in American History. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Converse, Philip E. 1976. The Dynamics of Party Support: Cohort-analyzing Party Identification. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Converse, Philip E. 1986. “Popular Representation and the Distribution of Information.” Presented at the Conference on Information and Democratic Processes, Champaign-Urbana.Google Scholar
Converse, Philip E., and Markus, Gregory B.. 1979. “ Plus Ça change …: The New CPS Election Study Panel.” American Political Science Review 73:32–49.10.2307/1954729CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Declerq, Eugene R., Hurley, Thomas L., and Luttbeg, Norman R.. 1975. “Voting in American Presidential Elections: 1956–1972.” American Politics Quarterly 3:222–46.10.1177/1532673X7500300302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Downs, Anthony. 1957. An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Erikson, Robert S. 1982. “The ‘Uncorrelated Errors’ Approach to the Problem of Causal Feedback.” Journal of Politics 44:863–81.10.2307/2130522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorina, Morris P. 1981. Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Franklin, Charles H., and Jackson, John E.. 1983. “The Dynamics of Party Identification.” American Political Science Review 77:957–73.10.2307/1957569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, John R. 1983. “Granger Causality and the Time Series Analysis of Political Relationships.” American Journal of Political Science 27:327–58.10.2307/2111021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Arthur S. 1966. “Discerning a Causal Pattern among Data on Voting Behavior.” American Political Science Review 60:913–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granger, Clive W. J. 1969. “Investigating Causal Relations by Econometric Models and Cross Spectral Methods.” Econometrica 37:424–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, Donald, and Palmquist, Bradley. 1988. “Of Artifacts and Partisan Instability.” Presented at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Hibbs, Douglas A. 1982a. “The Dynamics of Political Support for American Presidents among Occupational and Partisan Groups.” American Journal of Political Science 26:312–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hibbs, Douglas A. 1982b. “Economic Outcomes and Political Support for British Governments among Occupational Classes: A Dynamic Analysis.” American Political Science Review 76:259–79.10.1017/S0003055400186976CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keech, William R. 1982. “Of Honeymoons and Economic Performance: Comment on Hibbs.” American Political Science Review 77:92–111.Google Scholar
Kenski, Henry. 1977. “The Impact of Economic Conditions on Presidential Popularity.” Journal of Politics 39:764–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kernell, Samuel. 1978. “Explaining Presidential Popularity.” American Political Science Review 72:506–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knoke, David, and Hout, Michael. 1974. “Social and Demographic Factors in American Political Party Affiliations, 1952–72.” American Sociological Review 39:700–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKuen, Michael B. 1981. “Social Communication and the Mass Policy Agenda.” In More Than News: Media Power in Public Affairs, ed. MacKuen, Michael B. and Coombs, Steven L.. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
MacKuen, Michael B. 1983. “Political Drama, Economic Conditions, and the Dynamics of Presidential Popularity.” American Journal of Political Science 27:165–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacKuen, Michael B., Erikson, Robert S., and Stimson, James A.. 1988. “On the Importance of Economic Experience and Expectations for Political Evaluations.” Presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington.Google Scholar
Maggiotto, Michael A., and Mishler, William. 1987. “Tracing the Economic Roots of Partisanship: A Time Series Analysis, 1946–1984.” Presented at the annual meeting of the Midwestern Political Science Association, Chicago.Google Scholar
Markus, Gregory B. 1982. “Political Attitudes during an Election Year: A Report on the 1980 NES Panel Study.” American Political Science Review 76:538–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markus, Gregory B., and Converse, Philip E.. 1979. “A Dynamic Simultaneous Equation Model of Electoral Choice.” American Political Science Review 73:1055–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, Arthur H., Miller, Warren E., Raine, Alden S., and Brown, Thad A.. 1976. “A Majority Party in Disarray: Policy Polarization in the 1972 Election.” American Political Science Review 70:753–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Monroe, Kristin. 1981. “Presidential Popularity: An Almon Distributed Lag Model.” Political Methodology 7:43–70.Google Scholar
Mueller, John. 1970. “Presidential Popularity from Truman to Johnson.” American Political Science Review 64:18–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mueller, John. 1973. War, Presidents, and Public Opinion. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Norpoth, Helmut, and Yantek, Thom. 1983. “Macroeconomic Conditions and the Fluctuations of Presidential Popularity: The Question of Lagged Effects.” American Journal of Political Science 27:785–807.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, Charles W. Jr., and Simon, Dennis M.. 1985. “Promise and Performance: A Dynamic Model of Presidential Popularity.” American Political Science Review 79:334–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Page, Benjamin I., and Jones, Charles C.. 1979. “Reciprocal Effects of Policy Preferences, Policy Loyalties, and the Vote.” American Political Science Review 73:1071–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petrocik, John R. 1981. Party Coalitions: Realignments and the Decline of the New Deal Party System. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Schulman, Mark A., and Pomper, Gerald M.. 1975. “Variability in Electoral Behavior: Longitudinal Perspectives from Causal Modeling.” American Journal of Political Science 19:1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shively, W. Phillips. 1980. “The Nature of Party Identification: A Review of Recent Developments.” In The Electorate Reconsidered, ed. Piece, John C. and Sullivan, John L.. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
Sims, Christopher R. 1977. “Exogeneity and Causal Ordering in Macroeconomic Models.” In New Methods of Business Cycle Research, ed. Sims, Christopher R.. Minneapolis: Federal Reserve Bank.Google Scholar
Sundquist, James L. 1983. Dynamics of the Party System: Alignment and Realignment of Political Parties in the United States. Rev. ed. Washington: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.