Breaking Bonds?

• DOI: 10.1177/1065912908320669
• Author: Peter M. Holm,Hannah Goble
• Date: 01 June 2009
• Published date: 01 June 2009
• Subject Matter: Articles

Political Research Quarterly
Volume 62 Number 2
June 2009 215-229
© 2009 University of Utah
Breaking Bonds?
10.1177/1065912908320669
http://prq.sagepub.com
hosted at
The Iraq War and the Loss of Republican
http://online.sagepub.com
Dominance in National Security
Hannah Goble
Peter M. Holm
University of Wisconsin–Madison
For decades, Americans have trusted the Republicans over the Democrats to handle national security issues, by a wide
margin. Over the Bush presidency, that gap has disappeared. The authors explore the causes and consequences of this
loss and suggest several new avenues for research on issue ownership. Findings indicate that Bush’s handling of the
Iraq war has played a decisive role in diminishing the Republican Party’s reputational advantage on national security.
This has had significant electoral repercussions both for the president and his copartisans in Congress.
Keywords:
issue ownership; electoral behavior; political parties; policy performance; Iraq war; George W. Bush
Democrats also may have a residual disadvantage
Democrats had not enjoyed a public opinion advan-
going into 2008—a long-standing disposition
tage in this area since at least the end of the Cold
among voters to view Republicans as stronger
War, and almost certainly since the end of the
on issues involving national security. Without
Vietnam War.1 Throughout the 1990s, the Republican
question, Bush has done serious damage to the
Party maintained a 25- to 40-point advantage over
Republican brand in this arena. But, with the nation
the Democrats in public trust to handle national
waging two wars and terrorism still a threat, that
security problems. Yet by the 2006 elections, this
underlying sentiment might be one of the reasons
gap had all but disappeared in polling data—though
G.O.P. candidates appear competitive at all.
it is unclear whether this new arrangement is durable
or only temporary.
—Jay Carney 2007
Has the Iraq war cost the Republican Party its
issue ownership over national security? What has this
Looking back four years after the invasion of Iraq, loss looked like? And what are its consequences, both
striking changes in American public opinion have
for President Bush and for his copartisans in
occurred. President George W. Bush has not enjoyed
Congress? This article provides initial answers to
majority approval of his handling of foreign policy
these questions and uses this arresting case to spur
since the end of his first term. Approval of his perfor-
mance on the Iraq war fell below 50 percent well
Hannah Goble, PhD Candidate, Political Science Department,
before the 2004 elections and dipped to barely 25
University of Wisconsin; e-mail: hbgoble@wisc.edu.
percent in early 2007. Even on terrorism, Bush has
Peter M. Holm, PhD Candidate, Political Science Department,
not enjoyed majority support for his performance
University of Wisconsin; e-mail: pholm@wisc.edu.
since mid-2005. When asked which party would
Authors’ Note: This article was presented at the annual meetings
better handle the war in Iraq, Americans have
of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, April
expressed more confidence in the Democrats than the
12–15, 2007, and the Society for Political Methodology, State
Republicans since at least the end of 2005. With
College, PA, July 18–21, 2007. We thank Charles Franklin, Scott
regard to handling national security policy and the
Althaus, Jan Box-Steffensmeier, Jon Pevehouse, Joe Soss, and
war on terrorism generally, the gap between the two
two anonymous reviewers for their comments and assistance.
parties has effectively closed to zero.
Supplemental materials to be found online for this article include
appendices detailing our measurement model and describing the
The magnitude of these changes is enormous.
independent variables, a set of predicted probabilities for the pres-
Republican dominance on national security issues
idential and congressional vote models, and results from the vec-
had been sustained for twenty years or more; the
tor autoregression model.
215

---

216
Political Research Quarterly
development of the literature on issue ownership.
giving the opposing party a temporary issue “lease”—an
Existing work is surprisingly modest on questions of
advantage borne of the “irrefutable demonstration that
ownership loss, the drivers of such loss, and the link-
the incumbent party cannot handle the job” (p. 827)—
ages between policy performance and issue reputa-
though he discounts the possibility of lasting ownership
tions. Although this article cannot resolve all of these
change as a result of performance in office and does not
questions, we suggest some potential answers and lay
explore ownership loss empirically. Issue ownership
out questions for future research.
theory generally has little to say about the dynamics of
We find that the Republican Party is no longer the
ownership change and the specific relationships between
more trusted party to handle national security and
policy performance, incumbent evaluations, and party
that roughly 65 percent of its loss of public confi-
reputations. Other authors have mostly ignored the
dence on this issue can be attributed to Bush’s per-
dynamic aspects of issue ownership, assuming various
formance on Iraq. Through the end of 2006, this loss
issues as owned by one party or the other and proceed-
was heavily concentrated among Democrats and
ing with analysis from there. By contrast, we take up the
Independents; Republican partisans, though some-
question of reputational change itself.
what reduced in number since 2002, remained highly
Do declining presidential performance evaluations
likely to express trust in their own party to handle
drive down a party’s issue advantage, or can general
national security. Further, this ownership loss nega-
dissatisfaction with the incumbent or even mass par-
tively affected both President Bush and Republican
tisan polarization account for the change? When poor
congressional candidates in the 2004 and 2006 elec-
performance tarnishes the party brand, how is this
tions, even after controlling for contemporaneous
loss distributed across partisan groups? A loss com-
performance evaluations, partisanship, and a battery
ing only at the hands of opposition partisans might
of relevant covariates.
suggest that mass polarization is more fundamental
than poor performance to the Bush-era decline in
Republican national security fortunes, whereas a loss
Issue Ownership, Presidential
spread among Independents and erstwhile
Performance, and the Vote
Republicans would indicate the opposite. Our analy-
sis demonstrates the insufficiency of overall Bush
Petrocik’s (1996) theory of issue ownership sug-
approval to explain the loss, and it points to the cen-
gests that parties sometimes enjoy fundamental
trality of declining performance evaluations on Iraq,
advantages on particular issues such that they can
although the intensification of an already existing
reap electoral rewards by priming the public to vote
trend toward polarization has not aided the
on the basis of those issues (also see Budge and Farlie
Republican position.
1983; Petrocik, Benoit, and Hansen 2003/2004).
Finally, what are the effects of issue reputations on
These “issue-handling reputations,” once established,
the vote, particularly when voters have salient perfor-
are supposed to be stable and long lasting—“regularly
mance evidence readily available? Do issue reputa-
tested and reinforced” through political conflict
tions and performance evaluations exert independent
(Petrocik 1996, p. 828). Thus, “most change is con-
and additive effects? If so, poor presidential perfor-
fined to a reinforcement of the general perception”
mance leading to ownership loss should be doubly
(Petrocik 1996, n. 2). Indeed, this supposition would
troubling to his copartisans in Congress (and of those
fit with existing research on party images, which
copartisans running to succeed him). Our findings
finds that voters actively tend to seek out information
suggest that these actors have reason to worry; party
that comports with existing party stereotypes and are
issue reputations do drive voting behavior in both
highly dubious of information that does not do so
presidential and congressional elections over and
(Markus and Zajonc 1985; Rahn 1993), and with
above the effect of contemporaneous performance
work in social psychology suggesting that confirma-
evaluations of the president.
tory biases may serve to make people more likely to
The rapidity of the Republicans’ reputational loss
accept positive news about advantaged parties and to
is striking, and it raises the question of whether the
reject evidence that would contradict their precon-
issue ownership framework can contain it. We believe
ceptions (Nisbett and Ross 1980).
it can, but that it may require a refinement of our
Petrocik (1996) anticipates the possibility that
thinking on how issue reputations are created and
strongly negative performance evaluations of the
sustained. Normal politics may often fail to regularly
incumbent party can contribute to electoral defeat by
test and reinforce ownership over certain issues.

---

Goble, Holm / Iraq War and Republicans in National Security
217
Rather, established party reputations may coast
through the “middle” of the corrected data. The house
along relatively untested, either from a dearth of
effects represent the systematic differences from the
opportunities for serious challenge or from cogni-
underlying...