THE DYNAMIC CHARACTER OF POLITICAL PARTY EVALUATIONS

Over the past 50 years, the American public has consistently been asked to compare the two major parties' ability to handle a variety of issues. The meaning of their answers is an under-studied phenomenon. In this article, I explore changes in comparative party evaluations over time and the source of those changes in attitudes towards the parties. Previous research is based on the assumption that the parties have enduring associations with particular issues and credibility in dealing with those issues. I argue instead that this phenomenon is dynamic and that the association of parties with issues varies in important ways over time. I test a model of dynamic change that emphasizes communication campaigns and institutional platforms. I use an ARIMA model and data on comparative party evaluations for seven issues from the 1950s to the present.