Democracy is often idealized as a system in which citizens have clear issue preferences, know where the parties stand on issues, and cast their ballots accordingly. Parties then pursue the policies expected of them. In such a system there is a direct connection between the issue preferences of citizens, party choice, and public policy. The spatial theory of elections is a natural representation of this classic concept. In the theory, liking of candidates is based on closeness to their issue positions. The theory requires two important assumptions: that people have specific positions on an issue and that those positions can be arrayed along a continuum. For example, on the issue of defense spending, each person would have an exact level of spending they most prefer. Empirical research has found that voters are not well enough informed about politics for these assumptions to be realistic. An alternate view is that democracy is a system which provides citizen input for resolving social conflicts. Sources of conflict or cleavage are abundant in any society. They can be related to demographic differences such as rich versus poor, Protestant versus Catholic, or management versus labor. They can be rooted in ideological and issue divisions such as egalitarians versus individualists, environmentalists versus materialists, or pro- choice versus pro-life. If the substance of politics is conflict, an appropriate role for parties is advocacy. Effective parties are effective advocates, and elections decide which side has greater weight in determining policy. The directional theory of issue voting is a natural vehicle for modeling conflict-oriented politics. In this theory, issues are understood as a choice between two alternatives. Voters may favor a policy, oppose it, or be neutral. This is a less demanding role for voters and more in line with empirical evidence. In directional theory, when voters choose, they do not ask "how close are your positions to mine?" Rather they ask, "are you on my side?" and "can I trust you to be responsible?" Both the directional and spatial theories can be represented mathematically and tested empirically. In prior research by the research team on the United States and Norway, the empirical evidence has clearly favored directional theory. In this continuation the researchers further develop and empirically test this theory. Specifically the investigators will: (1) examine the relationship between left-right ideology and support for political parties in several European countries; (2) test the discounting hypothesis; and, (3) test the rationalization hypothesis, i.e. the spatial model states that voters prefer candidates who are close to them on the issues but may rationalize candidate issue positions and assume they are close to them on the issues. This research promises to refine further our understanding of the relationship between directional theory and spatial theory
