Abstract
This analysis of electoral politics in the U.S. during the Reagan years includes discussion of what hasnot happened, with particular attention to the fact that the American electorate hasnot become more conservative in recent years; the fact that the younger members of the electorate havenot led the national swing away from the Democrats in favor of the Republicans; and the fact that Republican political elites havenot become more representative of the issue preferences of the national electorate. The study also notes some of the generally recognized changes in political life, including the recent sharp decline of the Democrats' margin, or plurality, among parly identifiers and the new dominance of the right wing among Republican party elites. Finally, the study introduces some previously unexamined evidence concerning the nature of various changes relating to partisanship, issue voting, and political leadership that have implications not anticipated either by conventional or unconventional wisdom.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., and Stokes, D. E. (1960).The American Voter, pp. 256–265. New York: Wiley.
Cassell, C. A. (1984). Issues in measurement: The “Levels of Conceptualization” Index of Ideological Sophistication.American Journal of Political Science 28: 617–645.
Hagner, P. R., and Pierce, J. C. (1982). Correlative characteristics of levels of conceptualization in the American public: 1956–1976.Journal of Politics 44: 779–807.
Jackson, J. S., III, Leavitt, B., and Bositis, D. (1982). Herbert McClosky and friends revisited: 1980 Democratic and Republican Party elites compared to the mass public.American Politics Quarterly 10 (April): 158–79.
Kirkpatrick, Jeane (1976).The New Presidential Elite. New York: Russell Sage Foundation and Twentieth Century Fund.
Klingemann, H. D., and W. E. Wright (1973). Models of conceptualization and the organization of issue beliefs. Paper presented at the World Congress of the International Political Science Association.
Knight, K. (1984). The dimensionality of partisan and ideological affect.American Politics Quarterly 12:305–334.
Knight, K. (1985). Ideology in the 1980 election: Ideological sophistication does matter.Journal of Politics 41(3): 828–853.
McClosky, H., Hoffman, P. J., and O'Hara, R. (1960). Issue conflict and consensus among party leaders.American Political Science Review 54 (June): 406–27.
Miller, W. E., and Jennings, M. K. (1986).Parties in Transition: A Longitudinal Study of Party Elites and Party Supporters, chaps. 8–10. New York: Russell Sage.
Miller, W. E., and Levitin, T. E. (1976).Leadership and Change, chap. 1. Cambridge, MA: Winthrop.
Miller, W. E., and Shanks, J. M. (1982). Policy directions and presidential leadership: alternative interpretations of the 1980 presidential election.British Journal of Political Science 12 (July): 299–356.
Mountjoy, R. S., Shaffer, W. R., and Weber, R. E. (1980). Policy preferences of party elites and masses: conflict or consensus?American Politics Quarterly 8 (July): 329–43.
Shanks, J. M., and Miller, W. E. (1985). Policy direction and performance evaluation: complementary explanations of the Reagan elections. APSA annual meetings, New Orleans.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Miller, W.E. A new context for presidential politics: The Reagan legacy. Polit Behav 9, 91–113 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00987300
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00987300