Political Behavior

, Volume 16, Issue 4, pp 467–503 | Cite as

A normal vote approach to electoral change: Presidential elections, 1828–1984

  • Peter F. Nardulli
Article

Abstract

This article offers a macro-level approach to a core concept in the study of electroral behavior, the normal vote. The approach uses interrupted time-series analysis and focuses upon electorally homogeneous political regions within states. After developing the approach used to generate normal vote estimates, analyses using those estimates are compared with (1) parallel analyses using survey-based research, and (2) across levels of analysis (national, regional). The comparison with survey-based analyses show that the macro-level measure follows the actual vote more closely and is more sensitive to shortterm influences. Comparisons across levels of analysis demonstrate that national level analyses obscure a volatile, dynamic electorate that exists at the regional level. These findings suggest that the creative use of the macro-level measure at the regional level has the potential to contribute new and important insights into the role of citizens in American politics, and the forces that drive the behavior of the electorate. Its particular strengths lie in the study of electoral change and its ability to contribute toward a developmental perspective on American democracy.

Keywords

Presidential Election American Politics Developmental Perspective Political Psychology American Democracy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abramson, Paul R., and Charles W. Ostrom Jr. (1992). Response.American Political Science Review 86: 481–486.Google Scholar
  2. Abramson, Paul R. and Charles W. Ostrom Jr. (1991). Macropartisanship: An empirical reassessment.Google Scholar
  3. Aldenderfer, Mark S., and Roger K. Blashfield (1984).Cluster Analysis. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Box, G. E. P., and G. C. Tiao (1975). Intervention analysis with applications to economic and environmental problems.Journal of the American Statistical Association 70: 70–79.Google Scholar
  5. Burnham, Walter Dean (1970).Critical Elections and the Mainsprings of American Politics. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  6. Burnham, Walter Dean (1991). Critical realignment: Dead or alive. In Byron, Schafer (ed.),The End of Realignment? Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  7. Campbell, Angus, Philip E. Converse, Warren E. Miller, and Donald E. Stokes (1960).The American Voter New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  8. Carmines, Edward, and James A. Stimson (1989).Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Clubb, Jerome M., William H. Flanigan, and Nancy H. Zingale (1980).Partisan Realignment: Voters Parties, and Government in American History. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  10. Converse, Philip E. (1966). The concept of a normal vote. In Angus Campbell, Philip E. Converse, Warren Miller, and Donald Stokes (eds),Elections and the Political Order. New York: John Wiley and Son.Google Scholar
  11. Elazar, Daniel J. (1970),Cities of the Prairie. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  12. Fenton, John H. (1957),Politics in the Border States. New Orleans: Hauser Press.Google Scholar
  13. Fenton, John H. (1966).Midwest Politics. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  14. Fiorina, Morris P. (1981).Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Fiorina, Morris P. (1990). The electorate in the voting booth. In L. Sandy Maisal (ed.),The Parties Respond: Changes in the American Party System. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  16. Gottman, John (1984).Time-Series Analysis for Social Scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Huckfeldt, Robert, and John Sprague (1993). Citizens, contexts, and politics. In Ada Finifter (ed.),Political Science: The State of The Discipline (2nd Ed.). Washington, D.C.: APSA.Google Scholar
  18. Key, V. O. (1949).Southern Politics in State and Nation. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  19. Key, V. O. (1955). A theory of critical elections.Journal of Politics 17: 3–18.Google Scholar
  20. Kleppner, Paul (ed.) (1981).The Evolution of American Electoral Systems. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  21. Leighley, Jan E. and Jonathan Nagler (1992). Socioeconomic bias in turnout 1964–1988: The voters remain the same.American Political Science Review 86: 725–736.Google Scholar
  22. Lockard, Duane (1959).New England State Politics. Chicago: Henry Regnery.Google Scholar
  23. Lorr, Maurice (1987).Cluster Analysis for Social Scientists., San Francisco: Josey Bass.Google Scholar
  24. MacKuen, Michael B., Robert S. Erickson, and James A. Stimson (1989). Macropartisanship.American Political Science Review 83: 1125–1142.Google Scholar
  25. MacKuen, Michael B., Robert S. Erickson, and James A. Stimson, (1992). Question wording and macropartisanship.American Political Science Review 86: 475–481.Google Scholar
  26. MacKuen, Michael B., Robert S. Erickson, and James A. Stimson (1992a). Peasants or bankers? The American electorate and the U.S. economy.American Political Science Review 86: 597–611.Google Scholar
  27. McCleary, Richard, and Richard A. Hay, Jr. (1980).Applied Time Series Analysis for the Social Sciences. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  28. McDowall, David, Richard McCleary, Erroll E. Meidinger, and Richard A. Hay, Jr. (1980).Interrupted Time Series Analysis. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  29. Miller, Warren (1991). Party identification, realignment, and party voting: Back to basics,American Political Science Review 85: 557–570.Google Scholar
  30. Nardulli, Peter F. (1989). Geo-political cleavages, conflict and the American states. InDiversity, Conflict, and State Politics, Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
  31. Nardulli, Peter F. (1995). The concept of a critical realignment, electoral behavior, and political change.American Political Science Review (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  32. Petrocik, John R. (1989). An expected party vote: New data for an old concept.American Journal of Political Science 33: 44–66.Google Scholar
  33. Shafer, Byron E. (1991).The End of Realignment? Interpreting American Electoral Eras. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  34. Shafer, Byron E. (1991a). The notion of an electoral order. In Byron Shafer (ed.),The End of Realignment? Interpreting American Electoral Orders. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  35. Shively, W. Phillips (1992). From differential abstention to conversion: A change in electoral change, 1864–1988.American Journal of Political Science 36: 309–330.Google Scholar
  36. Silbey, Joel H. (1991).The American Political Nation, 1838–1893. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Sundquist, James L. (1973).Dynamics of the Party System: Alignment and Realignment of Political Parties in the United States. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  38. Wattenberg, Martin P. (1990).The Decline of American Political Parties, 1952–1988. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter F. Nardulli
    • 1
  1. 1.University of IllinoisIllinoisUSA

Personalised recommendations