IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/apsrev/v104y2010i02p324-346_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Activists and Conflict Extension in American Party Politics

Author

Listed:
  • LAYMAN, GEOFFREY C.
  • CARSEY, THOMAS M.
  • GREEN, JOHN C.
  • HERRERA, RICHARD
  • COOPERMAN, ROSALYN

Abstract

Party activists have played a leading role in “conflict extension”—the polarization of the parties along multiple issue dimensions—in contemporary American politics. We argue that open nomination systems and the ambitious politicians competing within those systems encourage activists with extreme views on a variety of issue dimensions to become involved in party politics, thus motivating candidates to take noncentrist positions on a range of issues. Once that happens, continuing activists with strong partisan commitments bring their views into line with the new candidate agendas, thus extending the domain of interparty conflict. Using cross-sectional and panel surveys of national convention delegates, we find clear evidence for conflict extension among party activists, evidence tentatively suggesting a leading role for activists in partisan conflict extension more generally, and strong support for our argument about change among continuing activists. Issue conversion among activists has contributed substantially to conflict extension and party commitment has played a key role in motivating that conversion.

Suggested Citation

  • Layman, Geoffrey C. & Carsey, Thomas M. & Green, John C. & Herrera, Richard & Cooperman, Rosalyn, 2010. "Activists and Conflict Extension in American Party Politics," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 104(2), pages 324-346, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:104:y:2010:i:02:p:324-346_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S000305541000016X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Christopher Hare & Tzu-Ping Liu & Robert N. Lupton, 2018. "What Ordered Optimal Classification reveals about ideological structure, cleavages, and polarization in the American mass public," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 57-78, July.
    2. Raymond Foxworth & Amy H. Liu & Anand Edward Sokhey, 2015. "Incorporating Native American History into the Curriculum: Descriptive Representation or Campaign Contributions?," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 96(4), pages 955-969, December.
    3. Julia Azari & Marc J. Hetherington, 2016. "Back to the Future? What the Politics of the Late Nineteenth Century Can Tell Us about the 2016 Election," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 667(1), pages 92-109, September.
    4. Timothy Callaghan & Lawrence R. Jacobs, 2014. "Process Learning and the Implementation of Medicaid Reform," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 44(4), pages 541-563.
    5. Geoffrey Layman & Frances Lee & Christina Wolbrecht, 2023. "Political Parties and Loser’s Consent in American Politics," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 708(1), pages 164-183, July.
    6. Lee, Jeoung Yul & Jiménez, Alfredo & Choi, Seong-jin & Choi, Yun Hyeong, 2022. "Ideological polarization and corporate lobbying activity: The contingent impact of corruption distance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 448-461.
    7. Hans Noel, 2016. "Ideological Factions in the Republican and Democratic Parties," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 667(1), pages 166-188, September.
    8. Oluwole Owoye & Matthew Dabros, 2017. "The Analysis of White House Occupant and Political Polarization in the United States," Review of Social Sciences, LAR Center Press, vol. 2(4), pages 1-18, April.
    9. Amer Ait Sidhoum & Teresa Serra, 2016. "Volatility Spillovers in the Spanish Food Marketing Chain: The Case of Tomato," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(1), pages 45-63, January.
    10. Alrababah, Ala & Casalis, Marine & Masterson, Daniel & Hangartner, Dominik & Wehrli, & Weinstein, Jeremy, 2023. "Reducing Attrition in Phone-based Panel Surveys: A Web Application to Facilitate Best Practices and Semi-Automate Survey Workflow," OSF Preprints gyz3h, Center for Open Science.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:apsrev:v:104:y:2010:i:02:p:324-346_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/psr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.