Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T12:55:20.996Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Growing Spatial Polarization of Presidential Voting in the United States, 1992–2012: Myth or Reality?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 October 2016

Ron Johnston ,
Kelvyn Jones  and
David Manley
Ron Johnston
Affiliation:
University of Bristol
Kelvyn Jones
Affiliation:
University of Bristol
David Manley
Affiliation:
University of Bristol
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

There has been considerable debate regarding a hypothesis that the American electorate has become spatially more polarized over recent decades. Using a new method for measuring polarization, this paper evaluates that hypothesis regarding voting for the Democratic party’s presidential candidates at six elections since 1992, at three separate spatial scales. The findings are unambiguous: polarization has increased substantially across the country’s nine census divisions, across the 49 states within those divisions, and across the 3,077 counties within the states—with the most significant change at the finest of those three scales.

Type
Articles
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 49 , Special Issue 4: Elections in Focus , October 2016 , pp. 766 - 770
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2016 

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

REFERENCES

Abrams, Samuel J. and Fiorina, Morris P.. 2012. “‘The Big Sort’ That Wasn’t: a Skeptical Reexamination.” PS: Political Science & Politics 45 (2): 203–10.Google Scholar
Bishop, Bill, with Cushing, Robert G.. 2008. The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-Minded America is Tearing Us Apart. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Browne, W. J., Subramanian, S. V., Jones, K. and Goldstein, H., 2005. “Variance Partitioning in Multilevel Logistic Models that Exhibit Overdispersion.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 168 (3): 599–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrington, William J. and Troske, Kenneth R.. 1997. “On Measuring Segregation in Samples with Small Units.” Journal of Business and Economic Statistics 15 (4): 402–9.Google Scholar
Cho, Wendy K. Tam, Gimpel, James G., and Hui, Iris S.. 2013. “Voter Migration and the Geographic Sorting of the American Electorate.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 103 (4): 856–907.Google Scholar
Duncan, Otis Dudley, Cuzzort, Ray P., Duncan, Beverly. 1961. Statistical Geography: Problems in Analysing Areal Data. Glencoe IL: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Elazar, Daniel J. 1972. American Federalism: a View from the States (2nd edition). New York: Thomas Y. Crowell.Google Scholar
Firebaugh, Glenn. 2003. The New Geography of Global Income Inequality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gimpel, James G. and Hui, Iris S.. 2015. “Seeking Politically Compatible Neighbors? The Role of Neighborhood Partisan Composition in Residential Sorting.” Political Geography 48 (1): 130–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glaeser, Edward L. and Ward, Bryce A.. 2005. Myths and Realities of American Political Geography. Cambridge MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, NBER Working Paper 11857.Google Scholar
Jones, Kelvyn, Johnston, Ron, Manley, David, Owen, Dewi, and Charlton, Chris. 2015. “Ethnic Residential Segregation: a Multi-Level, Multi-Group, Multi-Scale Approach – exemplified by London in 2011.” Demography 52 (6): 1995–2019.Google Scholar
Kinsella, Chad, McTague, Colleen, and Raleigh, Kevin N.. 2015. “Unmasking Geographical Polarization and Clustering: a Micro-Scalar Analysis of Partisan Voting Behavior.” Applied Geography 62 (3): 404–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lang, Corey and Pearson-Merkowitz, Shanna. 2015. “Partisan Sorting in the United States, 1972-2012: New Evidence from a Dynamic Analysis.” Political Geography 48 (1): 119–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leckie, George B., Pillinger, Rebecca, Jones, Kelvyn, and Goldstein, Harvey. 2012. “Multilevel Modelling of Social Segregation.” Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics 37 (1): 3–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manley, David., Johnston, Ron, Jones, Kelvyn, and Owen, Dewi. 2015. “Macro-, Meso- and Micro-Scale Segregation: Modelling Changing Ethnic Residential Patterns in Auckland, New Zealand, 2001-2013.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers 105 (5): 951–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, Ian. 2011. “Migration and Sorting in the American Electorate: Evidence from the 2006 Cooperative Congressional Election Study.” American Politics Research 39 (4): 512–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Myers, Adam S. 2013. “Secular Geographical Polarization in the American South: the Case of Texas, 1996-2010.” Electoral Studies 32 (1): 48–62.Google Scholar
Subramanian, S. V., Duncan, Craig, and Jones, Kelvyn. 2001. “Multilevel Perspectives on Modelling Census Data.” Environment and Planning A 33 (3): 399–417.Google Scholar
Wong, David W. 2005. “The Modifiable Areal Unit Problem (MAUP).” In Fotheringham, A. Stewart and Rogerson, Peter A. (eds.) The SAGE Handbook of Spatial Analysis. Los Angeles: SAGE, 105–124.Google Scholar