2
Scholars of macro-level mass opinion have noticed a long-standing paradox (e.g., Free and
Cantril 1967, Stimson 1999): the American public is operationally liberal, but ideologically
conservative. In the aggregate, the mass public holds liberal preferences with respect to a wide range
of spending, social, and cultural issues. When asked about specific government programs and
specific social goals, citizens generally want government to do more rather than less, spend more
rather than less, and have a more progressive agenda rather than a less progressive one. At the same
time, the public identifies primarily as ideologically conservative and is skeptical of “the
government” in a broad sense. When asked about government intervention with respect to specific
social programs, in other words, Americans generally want more government involvement and more
government-based solutions to problems (the hallmarks of American “liberalism”), but when asked
about government intervention in general, Americans want government to be smaller, more efficient,
and less intrusive (the tenets of “conservatism”). At the micro level, this disconnect means that a
sizable segment of the population holds conflicted political preferences, identifying as conservative,
but holding predominantly liberal positions on issues.
This group of people [labeled by Stimson (2004) as “conflicted conservatives”], which
comprises around 20 percent of the American public and identifies in roughly equal numbers with the
Democratic and Republican parties, presents an important puzzle for scholars of public opinion.
Unlike “consistent” ideologues, conflicted conservatives do not represent the ideological and partisan
“bases” of the two major parties. Yet unlike wholly non-ideological “moderates,” (who respond to
the political environment, if at all, by rewarding “peace and prosperity” and punishing poor
performance), conflicted conservatives have the capacity to be persuaded by symbolic, ideological
campaign appeals as we commonly think of them. Understanding both the reasons for micro-level
conflict in the American public and the implications that this conflict has for electoral outcomes will
provide considerable insight into the dynamics of American public opinion.
Convention