Liberals and Conservatives
dimension is the primary tool for evalu-
ating the presence and direction of ide-
ological thinking among the public.
The 2004 election was marked by talk of
None of these studies seriously consid-
"bringing out the base." Both parties turned
ers the possibility that the public's belief
their attention to finding and engaging people
systems may be organized in more
already inclined to vote for them. As early as
diverse and complex ways. Citizens
1992, political scientist Raymond E. Wolfinger
whose attitudes do not fit the liberal-
argued that most independents vote as weak
conservative definition are categorized
partisans, like "closet Republicans and Demo-
crats."1 Joshua Green reported in the Atlantic
as nonideological or inconsistent.5
that the 2000 election had seen "the lowest
voter crossover ever documented."2 With that in
Challenging the Liberal-Conservative
mind, Bush pollster Matthew Dowd argued
Continuum
immediately after the election that the empha-
Evidence shows that not all Americans are
sis on swing voters was misplaced; the key to
in fact either liberal, conservative, or con-
reelection would be "base motivation."3 Demo-
fused. Maddox and Lilie, in a 1981 paper and
then in a 1984 book, laid out a four-way
cratic nominee John F. Kerry, less appealing to
Libertarians are
matrix of American ideologies (Figure 1):
moderate voters than Bill Clinton, likewise
increasingly a
focused on finding and motivating Democratic
We propose a two-dimensional approach
voters.
swing vote, and
as the basis for the analysis of mass belief
In many ways the 2004 strategists were
they are a larger
systems. We measure attitudes toward
just acting on what political scientists had
share of the
economic intervention by government
long been saying. The traditional premise of
and attitudes toward individual liberties
postwar political science was that Americans
electorate than
as separate dimensions and consider
could be divided into liberals, conservatives,
the fabled "soccer
four ideological categories based on
and "confused." The orthodox definition was
these two dimensions: liberal, conserva-
that a liberal favors government intervention
moms" and
tive, libertarian and populist. Our defini-
in the economy and protection of civil liber-
"NASCAR dads."
tions of liberal and conservative are gen-
ties, while a conservative is opposed to both
erally consistent with current practice;
economic intervention and the expansion of
there are also, we will argue, valid
civil liberties. Anyone whose views did not fit
grounds for including the categories of
those categories was explained away as "con-
libertarian and populist. Our approach,
fused." Scholars such as Herbert McClosky,
then, is an outgrowth and complement
Angus Campbell, Philip Converse, Everett
to current research in that it includes the
Carll Ladd, Charles Hadley, Norman Nie, and
liberal and conservative categories as tra-
Sidney Verba relied heavily on that liberal-
ditionally defined, but attempts to
conservative continuum as the organizing
account for many of those others who
principle for examining American ideology.
are [in the words of one highly regarded
That tendency was strengthened by evidence
political science book] "consistent in
that political activists, especially party
ways we do not recognize."6
activists, do closely fit the liberal-conservative
dichotomy.4 Political scientists William S.
Maddox and Stuart A. Lilie of the University
Drawing on poll data from the University of
of Central Florida wrote in 1984:
Michigan's Center for Political Studies, they
constructed a new matrix of political ideologies.
If we look closely at the way in which
They selected three CPS questions relating to
ideology has been studied, we find that
government intervention in the economy and
all these studies share a common
three others involving personal freedom and
approach: A single liberal-conservative
"social issues." On the basis of answers to those
3