POLI 222 Lecture Notes - Lecture 12: Unmoved Mover
19 Oct 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Dependent Variable: Y
Eeney (Liberal)
Meany (green)
X
Miney (conservative)
Mo (New Democrat)
Partisan ID is DIFFERENT than vote choice
They are highly correlated, but they are two
different things
○
-
Explaining the vote
Columbia school
Long term factors: class, social group, etc.
Dependant on social structure
§
Doesn’t change that much - pretty stable
over time because social structures don’t
change that much
§
○
Campaigns don't matter
○
-
Michigan school
Medium to short term factors
○
PID: the unmoved mover
○
-
Partisan ID: psychological attachment to a particular
party
Identity is stable over time
○
Identification does not move, but the vote may
change/move
○
PID is independent of vote preference
○
Identifies a basic affiliation does that not move
that much so it is reasonably correlated with
vote choice (not same thing)
○
-
Ethnicity
Religion
Race
Education
Class
Parents
PID
Evaluations
Candidate
Issue
Campaign
Family and friends
VOTE
PID: Implications
PID key to partisan competition
Concept of a voter base
○
-
PID in Canada
As volatile as the vote itself?
Not stable across time therefore isn't a thing
§
○
Stability vs. consistency
○
Measurement error/survey design
The way your questions are worded about partisan ID affect your results
§
Better questions = better information
§
○
Partisanship in Canada is weaker
We don’t have voter registration
§
○
There isn't one party ID that is enforced all the time
○
-
Clarke & McCutcheon 2009: PID unmoved?
Time 1: 50% Liberal PID overall
-
Time 2: 50% Liberal PID overall
-
Aggregate stability in Liberal (red) PID over time, but lots of individual-level instability in PID
-
Michigan model
Socio-psychological
-
Identity/affect
reinforced through
social interactions
-
Campbell, Converse
Miller, Stokes, Green
-
Legal-institutional
model
Institutions
reinforce PID
choices
-
Voter registration,
primaries,
multiple
concurrent
elections
-
C and M: Empirical evidences belies Michigan claim
More individual level instability over time than Michigan would lead you to believe even in the
USA
-
USA: should see most stability
50% state durable identifiers
○
5% party switchers
○
30% party independent switchers
○
15% state independents
○
-
Canada
25% state durable identifiers
○
25% party switchers
○
25% party independent switchers
○
6% state independents
○
-
Upshot: PID is not as big an anchor as the Michigan Model would lead us to believe, it would put
more relative weight on voter registration
-
Still useful?
Yes
-
Still a central concept in voter behaviour research
-
How stable over what time period does PID have to be to no longer be useful?
-
Lecture 12 -Partisan/Party Identification
Tuesday, February 20, 2018
1:04 PM
Dependent Variable: Y
Eeney (Liberal)
Meany (green) X
Miney (conservative)
Mo (New Democrat)
Partisan ID is DIFFERENT than vote choice
They are highly correlated, but they are two
different things
○
-
Explaining the vote
Columbia school
Long term factors: class, social group, etc.
Dependant on social structure
§
Doesn’t change that much - pretty stable
over time because social structures don’t
change that much
§
○
Campaigns don't matter
○
-
Michigan school
Medium to short term factors
○
PID: the unmoved mover
○
-
Partisan ID: psychological attachment to a particular
party
Identity is stable over time
○
Identification does not move, but the vote may
change/move
○
PID is independent of vote preference
○
Identifies a basic affiliation does that not move
that much so it is reasonably correlated with
vote choice (not same thing)
○
-
Ethnicity
Religion
Race
Education
Class
Parents
PID
Evaluations
Candidate
Issue
Campaign
Family and friends
VOTE
PID: Implications
PID key to partisan competition
Concept of a voter base
○
-
PID in Canada
As volatile as the vote itself?
Not stable across time therefore isn't a thing
§
○
Stability vs. consistency
○
Measurement error/survey design
The way your questions are worded about partisan ID affect your results
§
Better questions = better information
§
○
Partisanship in Canada is weaker
We don’t have voter registration
§
○
There isn't one party ID that is enforced all the time
○
-
Clarke & McCutcheon 2009: PID unmoved?
Time 1: 50% Liberal PID overall
-
Time 2: 50% Liberal PID overall
-
Aggregate stability in Liberal (red) PID over time, but lots of individual-level instability in PID
-
Michigan model
Socio-psychological
-
Identity/affect
reinforced through
social interactions
-
Campbell, Converse
Miller, Stokes, Green
-
Legal-institutional
model
Institutions
reinforce PID
choices
-
Voter registration,
primaries,
multiple
concurrent
elections
-
C and M: Empirical evidences belies Michigan claim
More individual level instability over time than Michigan would lead you to believe even in the
USA
-
USA: should see most stability
50% state durable identifiers
○
5% party switchers
○
30% party independent switchers
○
15% state independents
○
-
Canada
25% state durable identifiers
○
25% party switchers
○
25% party independent switchers
○
6% state independents
○
-
Upshot: PID is not as big an anchor as the Michigan Model would lead us to believe, it would put
more relative weight on voter registration
-
Still useful?
Yes
-
Still a central concept in voter behaviour research
-
How stable over what time period does PID have to be to no longer be useful?
-
Lecture 12 -Partisan/Party Identification
Tuesday, February 20, 2018 1:04 PM
Document Summary
They are highly correlated, but they are two different things. Doesn"t change that much - pretty stable over time because social structures don"t change that much. Partisan id: psychological attachment to a particular party. Identification does not move, but the vote may change/move. Identifies a basic affiliation does that not move that much so it is reasonably correlated with vote choice (not same thing) Not stable across time therefore isn"t a thing. The way your questions are worded about partisan id affect your results. There isn"t one party id that is enforced all the time. Aggregate stability in liberal (red) pid over time, but lots of individual-level instability in. C and m: empirical evidences belies michigan claim. More individual level instability over time than michigan would lead you to believe even i. Upshot: pid is not as big an anchor as the michigan model would lead us to believe, it wo more relative weight on voter registration.
