Issue congruence between voters and parties: examining the democratic party mandate in Ireland

IF 0.8 4区 社会学 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE Irish Political Studies Pub Date : 2021-09-06 DOI:10.1080/07907184.2021.1973318
R. Costello
{"title":"Issue congruence between voters and parties: examining the democratic party mandate in Ireland","authors":"R. Costello","doi":"10.1080/07907184.2021.1973318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Political parties often employ the rhetoric of electoral mandates, claiming that the people who voted for them endorsed their policies. However, the level of voter-party issue congruence may vary across parties, issues, and elections; and the views of certain types of voters may be better represented by their party than others. This paper puts forward a series of hypotheses to explain variation in issue congruence, relating to how well-informed voters are about party policy, the role of non-policy determinants of vote choice, and the nature of policy competition between parties. The hypotheses are tested using data from surveys of voters and parties conducted during the 2020 general election and the 2019 European Parliament election in Ireland. Congruence is found to be higher when a party is particularly associated with an issue. Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, for whom non-policy attributes play a significant part in voters’ assessments, are found to have lower policy congruence with their voters overall than other parties. While there is no evidence that certain socio-demographic groups are systematically more or less well represented by their parties across all policy areas, some gaps in representation are identified, particularly in relation to so-called ‘cultural’ issues.","PeriodicalId":45746,"journal":{"name":"Irish Political Studies","volume":"36 1","pages":"581 - 605"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Irish Political Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/07907184.2021.1973318","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT Political parties often employ the rhetoric of electoral mandates, claiming that the people who voted for them endorsed their policies. However, the level of voter-party issue congruence may vary across parties, issues, and elections; and the views of certain types of voters may be better represented by their party than others. This paper puts forward a series of hypotheses to explain variation in issue congruence, relating to how well-informed voters are about party policy, the role of non-policy determinants of vote choice, and the nature of policy competition between parties. The hypotheses are tested using data from surveys of voters and parties conducted during the 2020 general election and the 2019 European Parliament election in Ireland. Congruence is found to be higher when a party is particularly associated with an issue. Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael, for whom non-policy attributes play a significant part in voters’ assessments, are found to have lower policy congruence with their voters overall than other parties. While there is no evidence that certain socio-demographic groups are systematically more or less well represented by their parties across all policy areas, some gaps in representation are identified, particularly in relation to so-called ‘cultural’ issues.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
选民和政党之间的一致性问题:审视爱尔兰的民主党授权
摘要政党经常使用选举授权的说辞,声称投票给他们的人支持他们的政策。然而,选民-政党问题一致性的程度可能因政党、问题和选举而异;某些类型选民的观点可能比其他人更能被他们的政党代表。本文提出了一系列假设来解释问题一致性的变化,涉及选民对政党政策的了解程度、非政策决定因素在选票选择中的作用以及政党之间政策竞争的性质。这些假设是使用2020年大选和2019年爱尔兰欧洲议会选举期间对选民和政党进行的调查数据进行检验的。当一方与某个问题特别相关时,一致性会更高。Fianna Fáil和Fine Gael的非政策属性在选民的评估中起着重要作用,他们被发现与其他政党相比,与选民的总体政策一致性较低。虽然没有证据表明某些社会人口群体在所有政策领域都或多或少地得到了其政党的系统性代表,但在代表性方面存在一些差距,特别是在所谓的“文化”问题方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Irish Political Studies
Irish Political Studies POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
28.60%
发文量
34
期刊最新文献
A critical appraisal of the case for progressive unionism in Northern Ireland today Troubling rhetoric: discourse theory and Irish Republican Army narratives (1962–1972) Front and centre? Northern Irish electoral behaviour in the age of Brexit Republic of Ireland 2022 Northern Ireland 2022
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1