politics now mo fiorina political polarization

7 Things I’ve Learned About Political Polarization

Morris P. Fiorina

Pearson Politics Now Conference

April 16, 2010

1a. Elites have polarized (and sorted),but

Depends on Baseline

Why has Congress Polarized since the 1960s?

010

2030

4050

Fre

quen

cy

-1 -.5 0 .5 1DW-Nominate First Dimension

87th House of Representatives (1961-1962)

010

20

30

40

50

Fre

qu

en

cy



Source: Data provided by Keith Poole.

Why has Congress Depolarized since 1900?

010

20

30

40

50

Fre

qu

en

cy





Congressional Polarization A Century Apart

010

20

30

40

50

Fre

qu

en

cy





1b. Elites have polarized (and sorted), but

Agenda Dependency Snyder (LSQ 1992)Roberts and Smith (AJPS 2006)Lee (2010)

Agenda Dependence

1c. Elites have polarized (and sorted), but

Agenda Dependency

Behavioral Polarization

Preference Polarization?

Ideology Thermometer Scores of Party Identifiers and Activists

Source: ANESNotes: Activists are defined as respondents who engaged in 3 or more campaign activities as coded in vcf0723. Leaners are coded as partisans. The Liberal/Conservative Index (vcf0801) measures a respondent's relative thermometer ratings of "Liberals" and "Conservatives." It is calculated by subtracting the Liberal Thermometer score from 97 and averaging the result with the Conservative Thermometer score. Cases are weighted by vcf0009.

Party Elites Have Become More Extreme (From Self-Placement of National Convention Delegates on 5-Point Liberal-Conservative Scale through 2008)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s

Decade

% o

f D

ele

ga

tes

on

Th

eir

Re

sp

ec

tiv

e P

art

y E

xtr

em

e

Very Conservative Republicans Very Liberal Democrats

Note: Based on a 5-point Liberal-Conservative Scale. % of Republicans identifying on the most conservative position and Democratic identifying on the most liberal position.Source: Compiled by Sam Abrams from various convention delegate polls. ICPSR and Roper.

2. Respondents believe that elites

have polarized

Respondent Perceptions

Source: ANES

Average Placement of Party Positions

Source: ANES

3. Respondent positions have not polarized

No Ideological Polarization in 2008

No Increasing Ideological PolarizationPercentage of Americans who classify themselves as moderates or DK)

No Polarization on Policy Issues in 2008*

Source: 2008 ANES * “Haven’t thought much about it” responses recoded as moderates

Minimal Changes in Policy Views: 1984-2008

(Percentage Point Changes in Scale Position between 1984 and 2008)

Extremely Liberal-----------------------------------Extremely Conservative

Left Shift

Health Insurance 5 4 3 0 -1 -30

Spending/Services 4 3 5 -6 -3 -1 0

Right Shift

Aid to Minorities -2 -2 -6 -8 -4 5 14Defense Spending -1 -2 0 -4 2 2 1Jobs/SoL -1 1 -1 -2 1 1 3

4. Voter choices and evaluations

have become more polarized

Republican Percent of Two-Party Presidential Vote

Source: American National Election Studies.Note: Party identification includes strong and weak partisans.

Polarization of Choices

Centrist Strategy

Base Strategy

Gore Bush

D

R D

JFK Nixon

R

Distribution of State Presidential Approval

Distribution of State Senatorial Approval

Distribution of State Gubernatorial Approval

The 2004 Presidential Election

Party Control: Post-2004 Elections

5. Partisans have become better sorted, but imperfect and lots of issue variation (Levendusky), and far less than elites

When Should Abortion Be Legal? (2008 NES)

Strong Democrats

Strong Republicans

Never 11% 28

Only in case of rape, incest, or when the woman's life is in danger

26 35

For a clear need 13 16

Always as a personal choice 50 22

Source: ANES, 2008

2008 NYT Delegate Survey

Delegate Difference Identifier Difference

Illegal Immigration is a Very Important Problem 43 28

Very/Fairly Good National Economy 55 33

More important to Provide Health Care

than to Hold Down Taxes

87 50

2001 Tax Cuts Should be Made Permanent 84 13

Abortion Should Be Generally Available 61 23

Right Thing for the US to Have Taken Military Action Against Iraq

78 56

More Important to protect Environment

than to Meet Energy Needs

27 21

Personal Religious Beliefs Should Be Discussed in Presidential Campaigns

24 17

More Strict Gun Control 54 38

No Legal Recognition of Gay Relationships 41 28

Source: NYTimes/CBS Poll. September 1, 2008.

6. Many (most) statistical analyses of

electoral behavior over time are

under-identified

Candidate Competition in Two Dimensions: Arial View

Economic

Moral

Clinton

LBJ

Bush

Gore

Goldwater

Democrats and Republicans Separate on the Moral Dimension

Economic

Moral

Clinton

LBJ

Bush

Gore

Goldwater

Simulation: Unchanging Voters, Moving Candidates

Unchanging Voters Appear to Change As Candidates Move

-0.45

-0.4

-0.35

-0.3

-0.25

-0.2

-0.15

-0.1

-0.05

0

0.05

T1 T2 T3 T4

Period

Reg

ress

ion

Coe

ffic

ient

Voters' economic coefficient Voters' moral coefficient

BISHOP: THE BIG SORT

County Vote Change 1976-2004:

More competitive: 33 %

Less competitive: 67

Landslide counties: + 22%

7. Gerrymandering doesn’t cause

polarizationAnsolabehere and Snyder (AJPS 2001)

McCarty, Poole and Rosenthal (AJPS 2009)

The End

Thank you

Mayer: Trends in U.S. Public Opinion

Dependent Variable Coefficient t-stat (n)

Seven Point Scales

General Ideology .004 2.98 (17)

Guaranteed Jobs -.004 -2.67 (17)

Role of Women -.022 -17.12 (16)

Defense Spending -.002 -.63 (12)

Services vs. Spending .000 -.55 (12)

Aid to Blacks .002 .65 (9)

Health Insurance -.001 -.53 (8)

Thermometers

Liberals -.005 -.16 (17)

Conservatives .019 .64 (17)

Labor Unions -.003 -.06 (15)

The Military -.095 -3.79 (12)

Big Business -.032 -.98 (12)

People on Welfare -0.67 -1.38 (12)

Gays and Lesbians .046 1.03 (9)

Environmentalists -.021 -.22 (6)

“Issues and groups that are divisive today were just as divisive in the 1970s and 1980s.”

William Mayer

Average Placement ofParty Positions

Source: ANES


Source: 2008 ANES * “Haven’t thought much about it” responses recoded as moderates


Source: 2008 ANES

Percentage of Respondents Who See Important Differences Between What the Parties Stand For: 1960 - 2008

Source: ANES

Party Sorting without Increasing Polarization

Democrats Independents Republicans

Period I 60 liberals,

40 conservatives

100 moderates 40 liberals,

60 conservatives

Period 2 90 liberals,

10 conservatives

100 moderates 10 liberals,

90 conservatives

Should Federal Government Make it More Difficult to Buy a Gun?

Strong Democrats

Strong Republicans

Make it easier 2% 6%

About the same 19 54

More difficult 78 40

Source: 2004 ANES

Candidate Competition in Two Dimensions

So, marginal distributions of positions have not changed since the 1970s, but

4. Dimensions are more correlated (more later)

Ideological Scores of Median Legislators, Committee Chair, and Prestige ChairsDemocratic Controlled House of Representatives, Elected 1948 - 2006

Districts of Selected Democratic Representatives

Source: Jay Cost and Real Clear Politics. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/

2004 NYT Delegate Survey

Delegate Difference

Identifier Difference

Government should do more to solve national problems

72 % 13

Cut taxes to improve economy 67 35

Make all or most tax cuts permanent 88 35

Abortion generally available 62 32

New anti-terrorism laws excessively restrict civil liberties

62 28

Extremely important to work through UN

72 35

No legal recognition of gay relationships

44 19

Partisan Differences: 1987-2007

9 11 12 912 12 15 14

10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Average percentage difference between the answers of Republicans and Democrats on 40 questions asked consistently for 20 years

Source: The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, 2007.

Average Placement of the Democratic and Republican Parties on the Lib-Con

Scale

Source: ANES

No Polarization of Policy Positions: 1984-2008(Percentage Point Changes in Scale Position between 1984 and 2008)

Extremely Liberal------------Extremely Conservative

Left Shift

Women’s Role 32 3 -4 -21 -4 -1 -3Health Insurance 5 4 3 0 -1 -3 0Spending/Services 4 3 5 -6 -3 -1 0

Right Shift

Aid to Minorities -2 -2 -6 -8 -4 5 14Defense Spending -1 -2 0 -4 2 2 1Jobs/SoL -1 1 -1 -2 1 1 3

No Ideological Polarization in 2008

1

6

2

67 7

2

4 4

1

No Polarization on Policy Issues in 2008

Source: 2008 ANES

politics now mo fiorina political polarization

Documents