Electoral myth and reality: Realignments in American politics

Mayhew [Mayhew, D.R., 2002. Electoral Realignments: A Critique of an American Genre. Yale University Press, New Haven and London] dismisses realignment theory, arguing that it is unable, in general, to distinguish effectively between realigning and non-realigning elections, and in particular, to offer proof of a post-1930 realignment. We conduct a test for realignments that uses a new technique, which is blind to the conventional wisdom; a newly collected and more reliable source of electoral data; and a measure of partisanship that provides a more precise barometer of long-term support than what is commonly used in realignment studies. Contrary to Mayhew, our findings affirm the status of the classical realignments, though with a slight temporal adjustment for one (1896), while adding two others (1834 and 1874) to the canon. In the time since 1932, only one election passes muster (1994), although in this instance the congressional vote may have served as a lagging rather than a leading indicator of realignment. Realignment theory stands up well as a guide to cycles in American politics, past and present.