"Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties"

Currin‐Percival, Mary; Percival, Garrick L.; Bowler, Shaun; Johnson, Martin

doi: 10.1080/17457280903450666pmid: N/A

Abstract Since the US presidential election of 2000, a great deal of attention has been paid to the conduct of elections – most especially to the mechanics of voting and ballot counting. Less attention has been paid to how voters respond to the structure of elections more generally and the primary system in particular. In this paper we examine the extent to which citizens support or oppose different versions of the primary system. We find that a significant and persistent majority of Americans support making fundamental changes to the presidential election system. These opinions, moreover, have systematic components and do not, then, simply reflect a momentary and possibly inchoate disgruntlement. Support for fundamental changes to the system is directly attributable to self‐interested political motivations, individuals’ partisan preferences, and disaffection with the political system.

Goodwin, Matthew J.

doi: 10.1080/17457280903450690pmid: N/A

Abstract Whilst the electoral performance of contemporary extreme right parties has generated much interest there are few studies of extreme right party activists. Focusing on the case of the British National Party (BNP) this article investigates who joins the extreme right and considers the motive for active participation. The study draws on qualitative life‐history interviews with activists and analysis of internally‐orientated party literature. Like its electorate, the BNP recruits much of its active support from older working‐class males, though “types” of activist who are drawn to the party and who follow quite different routes into the extreme right are identified. In terms of the motive for activism, findings suggest the importance of ideological motives and collective incentives, in particular ethnic nationalist beliefs and a desire to defend the native in‐group from perceived threats. In conclusion, the article raises implications for the study of extreme right parties and activism.

Bengtsson, Åsa; Wass, Hanna

doi: 10.1080/17457280903450724pmid: N/A

Abstract Until recently, voters’ views on the representational roles of MPs have been a largely unexplored field in the studies of political behaviour. With the exception of the work by Carman, and Mendez‐Lago & Martínez, the few existing studies have mainly been conducted in the US and are fairly dated. In this study, we are partly filling this gap by examining voters’ views on representational roles in the Finnish open‐list PR system with mandatory preferential voting, which is characterized by a strong degree of candidate centeredness. Based on the Finnish national election study 2007 (FSD2138, N = 1,422), we first analyse support for various representational styles most often discussed in the literature, i.e. resemblance, delegation and trustee model, and then account for it through the social and political background of the respondents. The results show that both the delegate and trustee styles of representation are almost equally popular. The support for the different styles of representation is connected to socio‐demographic factors and to some extent political integration and orientation. Based on our findings we argue that the Finnish context becomes particularly evident in the heavy investment placed by voters on individual representatives. Finally, more research in the field, and especially development of more nuanced survey instruments are required in order to fully account for the complex nature of citizens’ expectations of the representational relationship.

Bélanger, Éric; Gélineau, François

doi: 10.1080/17457280903450757pmid: N/A

Abstract In this article, we argue that the extent to which Canadian federal incumbents are punished for past economic deterioration is contingent upon the political party forming government. Examining the effect of national macroeconomic conditions on incumbent vote in Canadian federal elections over a 50‐year period (1953–2000), the article proposes an aggregate‐level model of economic voting that takes into account the partisan affiliation of the incumbent government. The results of the pooled cross‐sectional time‐series analysis indicate that Liberal incumbents are not as strongly affected by macroeconomic conditions as Conservative incumbents. Contrary to what prior scholarship has suggested, the observed difference does not appear to be caused by the parties’ respective ideological priorities, but rather by the parties’ reputation (or perceived competence) in handling economic problems.

Ellis, Christopher

doi: 10.1080/17457280903450773pmid: N/A

Abstract This paper develops a model that relates changes in the macro‐political context to changes in the nature of individual‐level party identification, then uses this model to explain transformations in the size and issue bases of American mass party coalitions over the past 30 years. Elite party polarization over the past three decades has altered the relative importance that individuals attach to various factors when thinking about party identification, increasing the relevance of policy preferences – primarily on the scope‐of‐government dimension of conflict that has divided parties since at least the New Deal era – and decreasing the relevance of socialization and certain types of group identification. These effects, in turn, have led to changes in the size and scope of mass party coalitions, as citizens have become more likely to identify with the party that most closely represents their views on scope‐of‐government matters. Over the past 30 years, people with conservative scope‐of‐government preferences have become increasingly likely to identify with the Republican Party. Those with liberal scope‐of‐government preferences were, and remain, reliably Democratic. The substantive implication is that even amidst the long‐recognized decay of the “New Deal Coalition”, the American party system is defined more by the public’s preferences on traditional New Deal matters than at any time in recent history.

Elo, Kimmo; Rapeli, Lauri

doi: 10.1080/17457280903450799pmid: N/A

Abstract The media, newspapers especially, has in several studies been associated with high levels of political knowledge. Those whose preferred source of political information is newspapers show higher levels of political knowledge compared with those who prefer other information sources. In this article we claim that studying the effects of media on political knowledge is not a meaningful exercise unless a differentiation between structural knowledge and political information is made. The results of the analysis carried out in this article support this argument. Newspaper readership seems to have a moderate impact on political information but not on structural political knowledge. In general, mass media loses most of its relative importance as a predictor when political interest, age, education and gender are included. The results suggest that if we do not differentiate between different types of knowledge when measuring political knowledge, we lose a useful discriminant.