Skip to main content

Ethos, ideology, and partisanship: Exploring the paradox of conservative democrats

Abstract

Despite the increasingly liberal cast of the national Democratic Party, self-identified conservatives continue to represent a significant segment of the party. At least 25 percent of Democratic identifiers considered themselves to be conservatives during the 1972–1988 period. This paper explores the puzzle of why significant numbers of political conservatives continue to identify with the Democratic Party. We argue that conservative Democrats relate to their party not because of political ideology, as do Republicans and to a lesser extent, liberal/moderate Democrats, but because of the symbolic values associated with the main groups in the party—what we refer to as “party ethos.” This proposition is examined by analyzing a new set of open-ended questions included in the 1988 American National Election Study probing citizens' images and assessments of the Republican and Democratic parties.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  • Carmines, Edward G., and Harold W. Stanley (1990). Ideological realignment in the contemporary South: Where have all the conservatives gone? in Robert P. Steed, Laurence W. Moreland, and Tod A. Baker (eds.),The Disappearing South: Studies in Regional Change and Continuity. University, AL: University of Alabama Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmines, Edward G., and James A. Stimson (1989).Issue Evolution: Race and the Transformation of American Politics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conover, Pamela Johnston, and Stanley Feldman (1981). The origins and meaning of liberal/conservative self-identifications.American Journal of Political Science 25: 1617–645.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, H. M. (1979).Doctrine and Ethos in the Labour Party. London: George Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edsall, Thomas Byrne, with Mary D. Edsall (1991).Chain Reaction: The Impact of Race, Rights, and Taxes on American Politics, New York: W. W. Norton & Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, Jo (1986). The political culture of the Democratic and Republican parties.Political Science Quarterly 101: 327–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levitin, Teresa E., and Warren E. Miller (1979). Ideological interpretations of presidential elections.American Political Science Review 73: 751–771.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Warren E. (1988).Without Consent: Mass-Elite Linkages in Presidential Politics, Lexington, KY: University Press of Kentucky.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Warren E., and M. Kent Jennings, with Barbara G. Farah (1986).Parties in Transition: A Longitudinal Study of Party Elites and Party Supporters. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Warren E., and the National Election Studies (1989).American National Election Study, 1988: Pre- and Post-Election Survey. Conducted by the Center for Political Studies of the Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan, 2nd ICPSR ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, Kevin (1991).The Politics of Rich and Poor. New York: Harper Perennial.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polsby, Nelson W., and Aaron Wildavsky (1991).Presidential Elections: Contemporary Strategies of American Electoral Politics, 8th ed. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shafer, Byron (1986). Republicans and Democrats as social types: Or, notes toward an ethnography of the political parties.Journal of American Studies 20: 341–354.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, John Kenneth (1990).The New Politics of Old Values. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

The data utilized in this paper were made available by the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research. The data forAmerican National Election Study 1988: Pre- and Post-Election Survey were originally collected by Warren E. Miller and the National Election Studies. Neither the collector of the original data nor the Consortium bears any responsibility for the analyses or interpretations presented here.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Carmines, E.G., Berkman, M. Ethos, ideology, and partisanship: Exploring the paradox of conservative democrats. Polit Behav 16, 203–218 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01498877

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01498877

Keywords

  • Main Group
  • Political Ideology
  • Democratic Party
  • National Election
  • Election Study