Rockefeller Republicans Redux: Political Moderates on the Right in New York State

Jason Barabas

Nelson A. Rockefeller Center for Public Policy and the Social Sciences, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH, USA.

DOI: 10.4236/ojps.2024.143025                

Abstract

While ideological consistency is often prized by academic scholars, many citizens adopt odd mixtures of political views. These amalgams sometimes become recognizable brands, such as the “Rockefeller Republicans” of the mid-20^th century. However, Rockefeller-like policy moderates on the right portion of the political spectrum appear to be relatively scarce in contemporary America. More specifically, and in a highly polarized era with combative partisans at the extremes, the conventional wisdom is that Republicans are monolithically conservative in their ideology and policy views. As part of an investigation of uniformity within the major political parties in America, statewide surveys from New York state reveal a surprising degree of diversity within the subset of respondents who identify as Republicans. Many modern-day Republicans in New York hold moderate or liberal views across dozens of public policy and attitudinal questions. Consistent with scholarship that questions the depth of conservative ideology in America (e.g., “conflicted conservatives,” “conservative egalitarians,” or “operational liberals”), policy moderates in the Republican party are plentiful and, many times, are largely in agreement with moderate Democrats on economic and social policy issues. These results extend to other surveys of Americans and even to Blue Dog Democrats on the middle-to-left part of the political landscape. Considered as a whole, the empirical results provide a counterintuitive perspective on the extent of mass political polarization in the United States.

Keywords

Rockefeller Republicans, Moderates, Ideology, Partisanship

1. Introduction

Most Americans are hard to categorize politically. While the world is often portrayed by pundits as an ideological battle between the right and the left, in reality, many citizens hold mixed political views, blending conservative and liberal attitudes and preferences (Converse, 1964; Page & Jacobs, 2009). For much of the 20^th century, such mingled political views were problematic, at least from a democratic theory perspective. For instance, Philip Converse demonstrated that ideologues with constrained political views were the exception, not the rule; he demonstrated that few people “know what goes with what” politically (Converse, 1964). Moreover, and especially as high-quality public opinion surveys proliferated, many respondents were shown to be not only inconsistent at any given moment in time but also across time, shifting their views dramatically over relatively short periods (Converse, 1964; 1970). As Christopher Achen (Achen, 1975, p. 1220) summarized it, the lack of meaningful political views meant that, “democracy theory loses its starting point.” A government built upon public preferences could unravel if those views are highly contradictory.

In subsequent years, there were attempts to resuscitate democratic citizenship in various ways by anchoring political views in highly stable partisanship or social groups attitudes (Campbell et al., 1960; Kane, 2019; Groenendyk, 2013), through better measurement techniques (Achen 1975; Ansolabehere, Rodden, & Snyder, 2008), by reconceiving the nature of survey opinions (Zaller & Feldman, 1992), or by shifting the focus to the macro-level (Page & Shapiro, 1992; Druckman & Leeper, 2012). But while scholars were debating the existence and merits of ideological consistency, the political world features atypical political combinations. Some politicians have thrived as ideological mavericks at the national level (e.g., Wallace et al., 1984), but this sort of phenomenon was especially prevalent at the state level. Governors like George Romney in Michigan or William Scranton in Pennsylvania showed their electoral appeal in large urban states. Around the same time in New York, Nelson Rockefeller won four gubernatorial elections as a Republican in a state often seen as reliably in the Democratic column for presidential elections, with only two Republicans (i.e., Reagan and Nixon) winning the state since the 1960s.

However, the tables may have finally turned. In the early 21^st century, scholars have come to appreciate nuances in political attitudes. Americans are increasingly viewed as operational liberals but philosophically conservative (Page & Jacobs, 2009), or to put it another way, they could be considered “conflicted conservatives” (Ellis & Stimson, 2012). Americans hold ambivalent views, with sympathies on various sides of an issue (Lavine, Johnson, & Steenbergen, 2012). More specifically, Americans often appear to be liberal with respect to specific policy preferences but conservative in more general ideological attitudes (Grossman & Hopkins, 2015). This conflicts with the conventional wisdom, particularly at the elite-level, suggesting that the parties are at historical levels of partisan polarization (Mason, 2018; McCarty, 2019). It also begs the question of whether the hybrids noted years ago—e.g., Rockefeller Republicans, Blue Dog Democrats (e.g., Watts, 2010; Cook, 2001)—are still accurate descriptors.

This study picks up at a critical moment. Scholars are increasingly open to the idea that policy moderation is a real and coherent perspective, while some accounts paint a picture of stark polarization. For analytical leverage, it helps to return to one of the states that helped bring about policy moderates: New York and its early support for Rockefeller Republicans. Is it the case that these moderate-to-liberal identifiers exist in the modern era? Using several statewide surveys, this study shows that they are a small but consistent subgroup. The paper further demonstrates that party adherents are not monolithic. The moderate wings of each party often have more in common with each other than they do with the strongest identifiers in each of their respective parties. In that sense, and at least in the state of New York, sizeable proportions of the parties are more aligned from a policy point of view than it might seem.

1.1. Rockefeller Republicans in Historical Context

Nelson A. Rockefeller was the grandson of the John D. Rockefeller, a legendary businessman and creator of the Standard Oil Trust during the Gilded Age before it was broken up by the federal government in 1911. While the Rockefellers are perhaps best known for their business and philanthropic endeavors, Nelson rose to great heights politically, winning four gubernatorial elections in the 1950s, 1960s, and early 1970s as governor of New York. In 1975, President Gerald Ford tapped Nelson Rockefeller to be the Vice President of the United States in the wake of Richard Nixon’s resignation. Ironically, Rockefeller’s initial appeal to Ford and moderate establishment Republicans may have been what led to his downfall. The country was in the midst of change, politically, not just in the Democratic Party, but also in the Republican Party (Hare & Poole, 2014). Conservatives succeeded in handing the Republican presidential nomination to Barry Goldwater in 1964, but the senator from Arizona was defeated decisively in the general election.

In addition to being a dynamic public leader from an iconic family, Rockefeller was known for taking a variety of atypical political stances, including being fairly progressive on the environment, education, transportation, and free trade. For instance, he was an early champion of solar power and energy conservation (Rockefeller, 1977: p. 5). In a quote from an era well before widespread climate consciousness, Rockefeller was quoted as saying, “As for the possibility of converting sunlight into a substitute for fossil fuels…, ‘I could not be more interested.’” (Norton Smith, 2014: p. 220). Rockefeller also was an early advocate of public health measures; for instance, he was put in charge of an effort to distribute the Salk vaccine globally and spoke of the need for health and sanitation during his trips abroad. Furthermore, Nelson Rockefeller pressed the White House to establish a national council of the arts (Norton Smith, 2014: p. 233). Rockefeller wanted to decrease defense spending by billions (Norton Smith, 2014: p. 330) while he would also entertain tax increases or fees (Gervasi 1964: pp. 226-30). He had “passionate support of Medicare” (Rockefeller, 1968: p. 66) as well as state provided health care and medical research. At the same time, he was a staunch anti-communist and gained a reputation as being harsh on crime. Rockefeller enlarged the state police force (Gervasi, 1964: p. 237), and the Rockefeller Drug laws were seen, especially years later, as being punitive (Fortner, 2015). Many states, including by Republicans in New York, later repealed the mandatory minimum sentences, particularly for first time non-violent drug offenses.

While the racial implications of Rockefeller’s crime policies might lead some to suspect that the right-ward stance would carry over to proximate issues, that was not the case. In fact, few issue areas defined the Rockefeller Republican brand more than his progressive stance on civil rights. Under Governor Rockefeller, New York banned racial discrimination in the sale or rental of apartments, commercial space, and private housing developments (Norton Smith, 2014). Rockefeller also supported the civil rights movement in the south, endorsing the Freedom March (Norton Smith, 2014: p. 457) and securing funding for historically black colleges. The nomination of Barry Goldwater in 1964 was a key moment. As Wright Rigueur writes, “For many black Republicans, endorsing Goldwater was tantamount to betraying their race. Athlete-turned-activist Jackie Robinson aggressively promoted New York governor Nelson Rockefeller as a respected alternative to Goldwater” (Wright Rigueur, 2014: p. 54). As Dionne notes, Republicans have abandoned the cause of civil rights and voting rights that had been from “the Lincoln era to Rockefeller’s time, the GOP’s [or Grand Old Party’s] calling card” (Dionne, 2019). Yet, progressive stances on race relations for Republicans hardly seem commonplace in American politics during the 21^st century¹. These views and the others just discussed are also at odds with the contemporary experience; as explored next, many commentators openly discuss the demise of the entire political brand.

1.2. Do Rockefeller Republicans Still Exist?

In New York, the populous northeastern state where Rockefeller was first elected, local newspapers have run headlines in the last few years proclaiming, “‘Rockefeller Republicans’ are scarce in New York these days” (McCarthy, 2016). Likewise, scholars like Geoffrey Kabaservice have argued that moderate Republicans are essentially extinct as a political species. That is, the period since the time Rockefeller served in office has witnessed, “…the transformation of the Republican Party over the past half-century into a monolithically conservative organization” (Kabaservice, 2012: p. xvi) or that moderates in the Republican Party experienced “…near complete disappearance during the first decade of the twenty-first century…” (p. 395). The same scholar of American politics and history describes the combative nature of the conservative-moderate fight, writing:

In the years after Ronald Reagan’s election in 1980, however, moderates did not simply die out, but were killed off by conservative enmity from within their own party as well as Democratic opposition and their own failures. The first decade of the twenty-first century witnessed the final decline and virtual extinction of moderates’ power and representation in the Republican party (Kabaservice, 2012: p. xiv).

These impressions are not unique. Another commentator writes, “It is a mark of the success of the Goldwater movement that in the ensuing decades, it did more than simply drive liberals and then moderates out of the Republican Party” (Dionne, 2016: p. 5). He goes on to say that there were efforts to keep the conservative brand from becoming more tolerant on the use of government to correct societal problems².

Yet, conservatives used moderates in their party as a foil. In particular, conservatives defined themselves in opposition to Rockefeller. One insult GOP commentators used was to accuse centrists in the Republican party sounding like Nelson Rockefeller (Balz, 1999). At the same time, there have been some who wonder what happened to Republicans (Cobb, 2021), with some observers speculating that the Republican party may be on the verge of destroying itself (Patterson, 2021). On this point, some of the rhetoric might be anti-Trumpism, with Republicans defecting to support Joe Biden (Kabaservice, 2020)³.

Given the consternation, one can see why many people would be tempted to write obituaries for Rockefeller Republicans and other moderates on the right. Even wealthy right-leaning “Greenwich Republicans” threw their support to Donald Trump (Osnos, 2020; 2021). Yet, scholars increasingly believe that liberal and conservative views may be held in tandem. An alternative to the typical left-right view of American politics may once again accurately describe many citizens who demonstrate consistency of their own: they reliably champion views that while they seem at odds, represent a distinct worldview for a sizable percentage of the public. Moreover, they may have more in common with partisans on the other side of the aisle than they do with extreme parts of their own party.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Data

This investigation draws upon four public opinion polls from Siena College Research Institute in the state of New York, all of which were accessed from the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research data archive. The polls were conducted from January 2019 through March 2020, just as the COVID-19 pandemic was becoming more severe. Although some questions are repeated or slightly reworded across different polls, many questions are unique within each survey. Compiling the data from these four surveys allowed for deeper insight into a broader range of policy topics affecting New Yorkers.

2.2. Survey Datasets

All four surveys randomly sampled registered voters in New York. More specifically, the Siena Research Institute describes the sampling process as “a stratified dual frame probability sample of both landline and cell phone telephone numbers drawn from registered voters from within New York State.” The datasets were statistically adjusted (using post-stratification weights supplied by Siena College Research Institute) by age, party by region, race/ethnicity, and gender to increase representativeness on the selected dimensions. The field dates and sample sizes for the polling are shown below:

• January 2019(Field Dates: January 6-10, 2019)n = 805

• February 2019(Field Dates: February 4-7, 2019)n = 778

• April 2019(Field Dates: April 8-11, 2019)n = 735

• March 2020(Field Dates: March 22-26, 2020)n = 566

It is worth noting that the geographical focus of the surveys takes on special relevance. As noted earlier, New York is a highly diverse state and one that was Rockefeller’s starting point in electoral politics. While Rockefeller served in several presidential administrations across the political spectrum, his ability to win in New York put his name in contention for loftier ambitions. Rockefeller considered running for president in 1960, even dabbling a bit to keep people guessing, but he actively contested the 1964 and 1968 primaries. Nelson Rockefeller did not prevail in any of these elections, but he kept his visibility high nationally and was ultimately tapped by President Gerald Ford to be his vice president (Norton Smith, 2023). As a first cut, then, looking for evidence of Rockefeller Republicans in New York in the 21st century could provide clues on the continued viability of this particular political brand. Moreover, there could be added support for a revisionist view of ideological coherence, one that embraces citizens who prefer policies from across the political spectrum.

2.3. Topics and Questions

The Siena surveys feature a range of different policy questions and attitudes toward state officials and the direction of the state. Broadly, the surveys pertain to gun control, environmental policy, economic policy, election policy, criminal policy, and identity politics in the policy domains. There are also broad evaluations of state and national figures (e.g., Gov. Cuomo and President Trump) as well as approval and beliefs about COVID-19 response actions. Instead of targeting specific areas, I examine all attitudinal questions in the surveys to avoid creating a biased impression by favoring some topics over others⁴.

There are dozens of survey questions. Appendix A contains a detailed list of the questions by topic and for each survey, if that survey asked a question in that topical area. Please note that in the tables, the wording was adapted to identify a particular policy position. Additionally, in the appendix, questions were adapted to the positive form of possible responses (e.g., “support” or “approve” instead of “oppose” or “disapprove”). As an example, one question in the February 2019 survey read: “The Census is supposed to count all people living in New York regardless of whether or not they are citizens, whether or not they are here legally. Do you support or oppose adding a question to the 2020 Census that asks whether or not each person is a United States citizen?” In the appendix (and in the tables), this question was shortened in the tables to a variant of “support asking citizenship on the US census.” Once the position was clear, dichotomous variables were generated for the question such that higher values indicated support and lower values were set to zero for opposition or refusal/don’t know answers⁵.

2.3. Coding Rockefeller Republicans and Their Democratic Counterparts

While the Siena surveys are comprehensive with respect to issues, they are more limited in terms of partisanship and ideology variables. More specifically, rather than a five or seven-point scale that assess the strength of partisanship or ideology, Siena uses three point substantive scales with added categories for refusal or don’t know responses. As such, I reclassify them into three-point measures (−1 = Republican, 0 = Independent or Refuse/DK, 1 = Democrat as well as the same from −1 = Conservative to 1 = Liberal).

The next step was to create the variables of Rockefeller Republicans (denoted “RRs”) and Blue Dog Democrats (“BDDs”) to capture particular intersections of the party identification and ideology variables. Specifically, RRs are defined as those respondents who identify with the Republican Party, and who have a liberal or moderate ideology. BDDs are defined as those respondents who identify with the Democratic Party, and who have a conservative or moderate ideology. In other words, any moderate or liberal republican was classified as a Rockefeller Republican. Any moderate or conservative Democrat was classified as a BBD⁶.

2.4. Positions on Policy Issues & Gaps

Once Rockefeller Republican and Blue Dog Democratic positions were defined as variables, the next step in our analysis was to find how these groups differed in policy preferences from others within their own party. In other words, it was important to determine how much Rockefeller Republicans differed from conservative Republicans, and—on the other side of the aisle—how much Blue Dog Democrats differed from liberal Democrats. This difference is a “gap,” which helps illustrate the disunity that exists even within a shared party identity. From that point, the main analysis uses a survey-weighted chi-Square 2 × 2 cross tabulation to determine, within the party, the percentage of Rockefeller Republicans who supported the policy versus the percentage of non-Rockefeller Republicans (i.e., conservative Republicans) who supported the policy. For the Democrats, the next step was to calculate the percentage of Blue Dog Democrats who supported the policy versus the percentage of non-Blue Dog Democrats (i.e., liberal Democrats) who supported the policy.

To return to the citizenship question discussed earlier, 91% of conservative Republicans support asking a citizenship question in the U.S. census, while 81% of Rockefeller Republicans support it. On the other side of the political aisle, 64% of Blue Dog Democrats support the census U.S. citizenship question, while only 23% of liberal Democrats feel the same. Thus, the gaps, in terms of absolute values, were much bigger on the Democratic side (almost 40 points versus 10 points) for this issue.

After determining the percentages of Rockefeller Republicans, non-Rockefeller Republicans, Blue Dog Democrats, and non-Blue Dog Democrats who support a policy (or have some other position towards it), the next step was to calculate the “gaps.” Within a party, the gap is the absolute value of the difference in these percentages between the two factions we defined. Worth noting is that the unit of the gaps is in percentage points. Importantly, this choice does not specify policy preferences based on party identification or ideology. Rather, the gap tells us how much disunity exists within a party. It tells us that there is a significant difference in the percentage of Rockefeller Republicans or Blue Dog Democrats who support a policy versus their more extreme party members.

To confirm the presence of meaningful differences, the analysis employs several significance tests using a variety of techniques to determine whether “gap” in the policy preferences within a party was large enough to conclude that there were compelling divides among voters of the same party identification. The appendices report chi-square statistics on 2 × 2 tables (e.g., RR or non-RR by support or oppose) as well as a variety of regression analysis with or without controls for education, income, age, race, and gender. These subsequent tests often confirmed the initial chi-squared results. The results presented below use common statistical significance levels at the 90, 95, and 99 confidence thresholds (e.g., p < 0.10), p < 0.05, or p < 0.01).

3. Results

3.1. Gaps in Policy Preferences

Some stark patterns emerge. First, there are large and significant gaps between the Rockefeller Republicans (i.e., liberals or moderates in terms of ideology) as compared to conservative Republicans. Abortion is one area of major disagreement. In the analyses (not shown) moderate/liberal Republicans overwhelmingly support legalized abortion (78%) while conservatives mostly oppose it (only 36% support), which is a highly significant 42-point gap (p < 0.01). Support for immigration is another area of significant disagreement with a 30-point gap between RR and non-RR (40% vs. 10%, p < 0.01). The same holds for gun control with a 34-percentage point gap (81% support vs. 47%, a 34-point difference, p < 0.01). These patterns continue on most issues (see Appendix B). In other areas, though, the gaps were insignificant. There is basically no difference in support for a statewide childhood victims Act (1 point, not significant or “n.s.”) and making election day a state holiday (RR = 55% vs. 48% for non-RR, n.s.). True to their historic roots, RRs are only modestly in support of eliminating monetary bail for misdemeanors as compared to 48% among non-RRs, which is an insignificant 7-point gap. The average gap was about 16 percentage points in nearly 88 comparisons, but most were significant and sometimes it rose to more than 50 percentage points (max = 52 pts).

In addition to looking at gaps on specific policies, I also considered trends by type of policy issue. shows average gaps after sorting each specific policy position into types of issues (e.g., gun control, economic, election, immigration, criminal, health and medical, identity and non-discrimination, general political evaluations, COVID).

Looking at the bar chart in Figure 1, Republicans in New York are most divided on identity and non-discrimination policy, with a gap of 43 percentage points between Rockefeller Republicans and conservative Republicans on their support for related policies. Looking at Democrats, Blue Dogs and liberal Democrats experience their most dramatic divide of 26 percentage points when it comes to matters of immigration policy, such as the DREAM Act. Such disunity within the parties demonstrates that policy positions are not always driven by party identification, particularly when it comes to contentious topics that feel more personal or social.

When it comes to evaluating political leaders (not shown), Rockefeller Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats remain loyal to their parties; and while policy decisions on the COVID-19 pandemic act as unifiers within each party, they are a divider between them. Despite the existing gaps within parties, positions on supporting political leaders and COVID-19 responses from political players illustrate the greatest gaps between centrists (Rockefeller Republicans and Blue Dog

Figure 1. Average percentage point gaps in policy views by partisan subgroup.

Democrats). These centrist groups generally follow their parties when it comes to supporting leaders such as politicians or institutions.

Finally, on a range of issues, there was less of a “gap” between Rockefeller Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats than there was between each group and the other members of their respective parties. In other words, on these issues, Rockefeller Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats agreed more with each other than they did with more extreme members of their own party. These sorts of within and between party gaps are presented in Table 1.

These patterns suggest important implications for the two-party system. Having the same party identification does not always mean having the same policy position. The two-party system often encourages over-generalization of parties and their positions, but there is much more disagreement and complexity within the parties than it sometimes seems. In practice, political centrists such as Rockefeller Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats may be closer to each other than they are within their parties when it comes to agreeing on policy positions.

3.2. Other Survey Evidence on Subgroup Partisan Gaps

It is possible to see similar patterns in national surveys from Pew Research Center.

Table 1. Issues where Rockefeller Republicans (RR) and Blue Dog Democrats (BDD) are more unified with each other (Across Party Lines) than with their own party.

Poll Date	Policy Position	GOP Abs Gap %	Dems Abs Gap %	RR/BDD Abs Gap %
Jan 2019	Support more gun control	34	15	5
Apr 2019	Ban single-use plastic bags in grocery stores	11	30	10
Ave. Jan/April 2019	Support congestion pricing	18	20	3
Jan 2019	Support eliminating “LLC loophole”	20	15	2
Feb 2019	Approve of deal to locate Amazon in NY	16	21	8
Jan 2019	Support a ban on corp. campaign contributions	17	6	1
Apr 2019	Support increase governor’s salary	14	18	7
Apr 2019	Allow undocumented immigrants to get license	25	30	12
Jan/Feb/April 2019	Support legalization of marijuana	18	27	6
Apr 2019	Eliminating monetary bail for misdemeanors	31	27	1
Apr 2019	Ban release of criminal mugshots	12	19	3
Feb 2019	Support Child Victims Act	19	7	2
Jan 2019	Support legalized abortion	42	18	2
Apr 2019	Support vaccination for school children	2	9	0
Feb 2019	Support legalizing physician assisted suicide	4	27	6
Feb 2019	Support gender expression nondiscrimination	52	29	6

These surveys are (A) national in scope, and (B) have more nuanced questions when it comes to partisanship. For instance, “is the federal government doing enough to combat climate change?” Among Republican adults, only 24% of conservative Republicans think the federal government is doing too little to reduce the effects of climate change; in contrast, 65% percent of moderate/liberal Republicans think the federal government is doing too little to reduce the effects of climate change. This is a 41-percentage point gap between conservative and moderate/liberal Republicans. On immigration, the question was “should the U.S. increase security along the U.S. Mexico border?” An extremely high 95% of conservative Republicans say that increasing the security along the US-Mexico border is a very or somewhat important goal for US immigration policy, compared to 85% of moderate/liberal Republicans who agreed. This is a 10-point gap between conservative and moderate/liberal Republicans. With respect to economic policy, Americans in the Pew survey were asked, “should there be a universal income for U.S. adults?” In response, 87% of conservative republicans either strongly or somewhat oppose the federal government providing a universal basic income of about $ 1000 a month for all adult citizens, whether or not they work. Fully 65% of moderate/liberal republicans had the same sentiment. This is a 22-point gap.

And finally, on a topic where there were big differences in the Siena data, the same sort of gaps manifest in the Pew surveys. Roughly 61% of conservative republicans strongly agree with the GOP on abortion policy, while only 17% of moderate/liberal republicans do. With respect to strong support for GOP abortion policy, there is a 44 percentage point gap between conservative republicans and moderate/liberal republicans. Clearly, then, the GOP is not entirely in agreement on major policy issues.

4. Conclusion

Patterns consistent with the Rockefeller Republican profile can be found in contemporary surveys. Even in a highly polarized era with partisans often portrayed at the extremes, the political right is not monolithic. There are many who self-categorize as Republicans but who hold distinctive policy views. In many instances, the partisan cleavages are more apparent within parties than across them. Thus, despite rumors of their demise (e.g., Kabaservice, 2012; Dionne, 2016), survey evidence points to many respondents on the right, even in “blue” state like New York, holding a mixture of policy positions. In other words, citizens are not reliably conservative if they self-identify as Republicans, or for that matter, liberal if they are Democrats.

For years, this lack of constraint and consistency was deemed problematic. As with the scholars who were flummoxed by ideological consistency, pundits found it hard to locate Nelson A. Rockefeller as well. As one of the most celebrated and influential biographers of Rockefeller once wrote, “To observers, Nelson seemed to have no discernable ideology” (Norton Smith, 2014: p. 149). Yet, the archetype remains. Rockefeller Republicans are sometimes cast as conflicted conservatives or operational liberals (e.g., Page & Jacobs, 2009; Ellis & Stimson, 2012; Kinder & Kalmoe, 2017)—but the important point is that the underlying worldview of political moderates has not vanished.

This study is not the first to draw insights about the state of American politics from an analysis of gaps within public opinion preferences (e.g., Holbrook, 2002; Norrander, 1999; Page & Barabas, 2000; Page & Shapiro, 1992). Of course, the analyses here were largely confined to the state of New York, using polling evidence from randomly sampled voters statewide. In the future, it would be beneficial to see if these patterns hold in other areas or even nationally. On that note, though, there was a brief dive into some national surveys and the patterns were broadly consistent. Additionally, it would help to consider other analytical techniques and time periods to show the ebb and flow of these patterns. Finally, the analyses only went to the point of preferences and evaluations, but it would help to see the patterns in voting behavior as well as in survey experiments to pin down the causal pathways.

Nevertheless, the early 21^st century has been tumultuous politically, even to the point of sparking political violence. Perhaps presciently, some have warned that the disappearance of moderates would lead to such extreme politics. In particular, and in a book written years before some of the most turbulent periods of the early 21^st century, Kabaservice wrote, “…As the Republican party continues to reject its own [moderate] heritage and forgets the hard lessons of the 1960s, it seems increasingly likely that right-wing activists may prevail over the party professionals and nominate an extreme presidential candidate” (Kabaservice, 2012: p. 401). While many doubt whether a recurrence of progressive views is likely⁷, or whether it would be enough to pull the country back from the brink of hostilities, the divisions within the parties may ultimately help bring partisans together across the political spectrum.

Author Biography

Jason Barabas, Ph.D., is the Director of the Rockefeller Center for Public Policy and the Social Sciences at Dartmouth College and a Professor in the Government Department. As a faculty member, Barabas teaches and conducts research on American politics in the areas of political knowledge, deliberation, public policy, and democratic performance.

Acknowledgements

A graduate of Dartmouth College, Cristina Javens ‘22, provided valuable research assistance on this project. A current Dartmouth College undergraduate, Hailey King ‘27, offered helpful comments. The Rockefeller Center for Public Policy and the Social Sciences at Dartmouth helped fund this research. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the State Politics and Policy Conference at Florida State University in Tallahassee, Florida.

Appendix A. Question Wording

Data on the positions on policy issues were adapted from the questions and available response choices in the four Siena College Research Institute polls in New York from January 2019 to March 2020. See https://scri.siena.edu/ and the text of the article for more details.

Date	Position on Policy Issue	Full Question Wording
GUN POLICY
Jan 2019	Support more gun control	Extend the waiting period for purchasing a gun from three days to 10 days [IF NEEDED: I ́d like you to tell me whether you support or oppose this proposal.]
Feb 2019	Support more gun control	The new gun control laws [IF NEEDED: Tell me if you think each new law will be good for New York or bad for New York.]
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
Apr 2019	Ban single-use plastic bags in grocery stores good	I ́m going to ask you about several provisions included in the recently passed state budget and I want you to tell me if you think these new laws passed as part of the budget will be good for New York or bad for New York. Banning single-use plastic bags at grocery stores
ECONOMIC POLICY
Jan 2019	Support congestion pricing	Institute congestion pricing for parts of Manhattan to help fund the MTA, which operates New York City Subways, downstate suburban railroads and many downstate bridges and tunnels[IF NEEDED: I ́d like you to tell me whether you support or oppose this proposal.]
Apr 2019	Congestion pricing good	I ́m going to ask you about several provisions included in the recently passed state budget and I want you to tell me if you think these new laws passed as part of the budget will be good for New York or bad for New York. Instituting congestion pricing for parts of Manhattan to help fund the MTA, which operates New York City Subways, downstate suburban railroads and many downstate bridges and tunnels
Jan 2019	Support making property tax cap permanent	Make New York ́s two percent property tax cap permanent[IF NEEDED: I ́d like you to tell me whether you support or oppose this proposal.]
Apr 2019	Permanent tax cap good	I ́m going to ask you about several provisions included in the recently passed state budget and I want you to tell me if you think these new laws passed as part of the budget will be good for New York or bad for New York. Making permanent the two percent property tax cap
Jan 2019	Support elimination of “LLC loophole”	Eliminate the so-called LLC loophole that allows corporations or individuals to donate almost unlimited amounts of money to candidates in New York[IF NEEDED: I ́d like you to tell me whether you support or oppose this proposal.]
Feb 2019	Support online sports betting	The state is expected to soon allow sports betting at the four upstate commercial casinos. Do you support or oppose broadening the sports betting law to allow for online sports betting?
Feb 2019	Approve Amazon NY deal	Do you approve or disapprove of the recently announced deal between Amazon and New York, which grants up to 3 billion dollars in state and city incentives to Amazon in return for Amazon locating its corporate offices in Queens, where it is projected to generate 25 thousand jobs?
Apr 2019	Sales tax online good	I ́m going to ask you about several provisions included in the recently passed state budget and I want you to tell me if you think these new laws passed as part of the budget will be good for New York or bad for New York. Requiring all online retailers to collect sales tax on purchases made by New Yorkers
Apr 2019	State budget overall good	Overall, do you think the recently passed state budget will be good for New York or bad for New York?
Feb 2019	Support education of job skills; Guaranteed education for all ages	The state ́s constitution guarantees the right of all children to receive an education. Some education advocates pointing towards rapid changes in technology and needed job skills, call for guaranteeing educational opportunities for all New Yorkers regardless of age. One proposal would amend New York ́s Constitution to guarantee public library services for all residents of New York State, and require state funding for the maintenance and support of public libraries. Do you support or oppose such an amendment?
ELECTION POLICY
Jan 2019	Support making election day a state holiday	Make election day a state holiday [IF NEEDED: I ́d like you to tell me whether you support or oppose this proposal.]
Jan 2019	Support banning corporate campaign contributions	Ban corporate campaign contributions in New York elections [IF NEEDED: I ́d like you to tell me whether you support or oppose this proposal.]
Apr 2019	Support public campaign financing plan	Another action in this year ́s state budget was the creation of a commission to implement a system of public campaign financing for candidates for statewide and legislative races. The commission is required to put forward a plan for public campaign financing by December 1. Its plan will become law unless changed by the Legislature and Governor before the end of the year. This new public campaign finance system will cost the state up to one hundred million annually. Based on what you know, do you support or oppose the public campaign finance plan included in the state budget?
Apr 2019	Support increase governor’s salary	As you may know, last year a pay commission increased the salary of state legislators—which hadn ́t increased since 1999—from $79,500 to $110,000 this year, increasing to $130,000 in 2021. As part of the budget this year, the Legislature approved an increase in the Governor ́s salary—as recommended by the pay commission—from $179,000 to $200,000 this year, and $250,000 in 2021. Do you support or oppose the Legislature increasing the Governor ́s salary?
Jan 2019	Support raising salaries of elected officials	On another topic, last month a special pay commission created by the Governor and Legislature raised the base pay of state legislators from $79,500 to $110,000 annually, increasing to $130,000 in 2021. At the same time, the commission limited legislators ́ outside income to no more than 15 percent of their legislative salary, and the commission eliminated nearly all stipends for legislative leadership positions. Overall, do you approve or disapprove of the pay commission ́s actions to increase legislative salaries and limit outside income and legislative stipends?
IMMIGRATION POLICY
Jan 2019	Support DREAM Act	Pass the New York Dream Act, which would allow the children of undocumented immigrants to receive financial aid for higher education [IF NEEDED: I ́d like you to tell me whether you support or oppose this proposal.]
Feb 2019	Support DREAM Act	The New York Dream Act [IF NEEDED: Tell me if you think each new law will be good for New York or bad for New York.]
Feb 2019	Believe Democrats should support funding a border wall	Do you think Democrats in Congress should or should not include the border wall funding President Trump has called for in order to avoid a second partial government shutdown?
Feb 2019	Support declaring a national emergency to fund a border wall	Do you think President Trump should or should not declare a national emergency in order to fund a border wall if Congress fails to fund the wall?
Apr 2019	Support allowing undocumented immigrants to get driver’s license	Now I want to ask you about some proposed new laws being debated in Albany and I ́d like you to tell me for each whether you support or oppose that proposal. Allowing undocumented immigrants to get a New York driver ́s license
Feb 2019	Support census US citizenship question	The Census is supposed to count all people living in New York regardless of whether or not they are citizens, whether or not they are here legally. Do you support or oppose adding a question to the 2020 Census that asks whether or not each person is a United States citizen?
CRIMINAL POLICY
Jan 2019	Support legalize marijuana	Legalize the recreational use of marijuana [IF NEEDED: I ́d like you to tell me whether you support or oppose this proposal.]
Feb 2019	Support legalize marijuana	Switching gears, do you support or oppose legalizing the recreational use of marijuana?
Apr 2019	Support legalizing marijuana	Now I want to ask you about some proposed new laws being debated in Albany and I ́d like you to tell me for each whether you support or oppose that proposal. Legalizing the recreational use of marijuana
Jan 2019	Support eliminating monetary bail for misdemeanor	Pass a law to eliminate monetary bail for people facing misdemeanor and non-violent felony charges [IF NEEDED: I ́d like you to tell me whether you support or oppose this proposal.]
Apr 2019	Eliminating monetary bail for misdemeanors good	I ́m going to ask you about several provisions included in the recently passed state budget and I want you to tell me if you think these new laws passed as part of the budget will be good for New York or bad for New York. Eliminating monetary bail for people facing misdemeanor and non-violent felony charges
Apr 2019	Ban release of mugshots good	I ́m going to ask you about several provisions included in the recently passed state budget and I want you to tell me if you think these new laws passed as part of the budget will be good for New York or bad for New York. Banning the release of mugshots by police for people arrested in New York
Jan 2019	Support Child Victims Act	Pass the Child Victims Act, which would, among other provisions, eliminate the statute of limitations for all sexually-related criminal cases when committed against a person less than 18 years old, and extend the statute of limitations for civil litigation [IF NEEDED: I ́d like you to tell me whether you support or oppose this proposal.]
Feb 2019	Support Child Victims Act	The Child Victims Act [IF NEEDED: Tell me if you think each new law will be good for New York or bad for New York.]
HEALTH AND MEDICAL POLICY
Jan 2019	Support legalize abortion	Make New York ́s law on abortion consistent with the 1973 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Roe versus Wade [IF NEEDED: I ́d like you to tell me whether you support or oppose this proposal.]
Feb 2019	Support Reproductive Health Act	The Reproductive Health Act [IF NEEDED: Tell me if you think each new law will be good for New York or bad for New York.]
Apr 2019	Support requirement of parents to have children vaccinated for schools	Now I want to ask you about some proposed new laws being debated in Albany and I ́d like you to tell me for each whether you support or oppose that proposal. Requiring parents to have their children vaccinated for diseases such as measles before the children can attend school, regardless of the parents ́ religious beliefs
Apr 2019	Support implementing single-payer health insurance system	Now I want to ask you about some proposed new laws being debated in Albany and I ́d like you to tell me for each whether you support or oppose that proposal. Implementing a single-payer health insurance system in New York State, similar to the ``Medicare for All ́ ́ proposal in Washington. It would be state-run insurance and eliminate private insurance.
Feb 2019	Support legalize physician assisted suicide	Do you support or oppose legislation that would allow a doctor to prescribe lethal drugs that a terminally ill patient with demonstrated decision making capacity would take on their own in order to end their own life?
IDENTITY AND NON-DISCRIMINATION POLICY
Jan 2019	Support Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act	Pass the Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act to provide protections for transgendered New Yorkers [IF NEEDED: I ́d like you to tell me whether you support or oppose this proposal.]
Feb 2019	Support Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act	The Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act[IF NEEDED: Tell me if you think each new law will be good for New York or bad for New York.]
GENERAL POLITICAL EVALUATIONS
Jan 2019	Believe NY is on the right track	Is New York State on the right track, or is it headed in the wrong direction?[IF NEEDED: “Based on anything you may have seen or heard, if you had to pick, would you say right track or wrong direction?”]
Feb 2019	Believe NY is on the right track	Is New York State on the right track, or is it headed in the wrong direction?[IF NEEDED: “Based on anything you may have seen or heard, if you had to pick, would you say right track or wrong direction?”]
Apr 2019	Believe NY on right track	Is New York State on the right track, or is it headed in the wrong direction?
Mar 2020	Believe NY on right track	Is New York State on the right track, or is it headed in the wrong direction?
Jan 2019	Believe US is on the right track	Is the United States on the right track, or is it headed in the wrong direction?[IF NEEDED: “Based on anything you may have seen or heard, if you had to pick, would you say right track or wrong direction?”]
Feb 2019	Believe US is on the right track	Is the United States on the right track, or is it headed in the wrong direction?[IF NEEDED: “Based on anything you may have seen or heard, if you had to pick, would you say right track or wrong direction?”]
Apr 2019	Believe US on right track	Is the United States on the right track, or is it headed in the wrong direction?
Mar 2020	Believe US on right track	Is the United States on the right track, or is it headed in the wrong direction?
Jan 2019	Believe Cuomo excellent/good	How would you rate the job that Andrew Cuomo [QUO-mo] is doing as Governor? Would you rate it as excellent, good, fair, or poor?
Feb 2019	Believe Cuomo excellent/good	How would you rate the job that Andrew Cuomo [QUO-mo] is doing as Governor? Would you rate it as excellent, good, fair, or poor?
Apr 2019	Believe Cuomo excellent/good	How would you rate the job that Andrew Cuomo [QUO-mo] is doing as Governor? Would you rate it as excellent, good, fair, or poor?
Mar 2020	Believe Cuomo excellent/good	How would you rate the job that Andrew Cuomo [QUO-mo] is doing as Governor? Would you rate it as excellent, good, fair, or poor?
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Andrew Cuomo	I’m going to read a series of names of people and institutions in public life and I’d like you to tell me whether you have a favorable opinion or an unfavorable opinion of each person or institution I name. Andrew Cuomo
Feb 2019	Believe Trump excellent/good	How would you rate the job that Donald Trump is doing as President? Would you rate it as excellent, good, fair, or poor?
Apr 2019	Believe Trump excellent/good	How would you rate the job that Donald Trump is doing as President? Would you rate it as excellent, good, fair, or poor?
Mar 2020	Believe Trump excellent/good	How would you rate the job that Donald Trump is doing as President? Would you rate it as excellent, good, fair, or poor?
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Donald Trump	I’m going to read a series of names of people and institutions in public life and I’d like you to tell me whether you have a favorable opinion or an unfavorable opinion of each person or institution I name. Donald Trump
Jan 2019	Believe minorities in NY experience racial/ethnic discrimination	Do you think minorities including African-Americans, Hispanics and Asians who live in New York State experience racial or ethnic discrimination, or not?
Jan 2019	Believe NY fiscal condition excellent/good	How would you describe the fiscal condition of New York State right now? Would you describe it as excellent, good, fair, or poor?
Apr 2019	Believe NY fiscal condition excellent/good	How would you describe the fiscal condition of New York State right now? Would you describe it as excellent, good, fair, or poor?
Feb 2019	Believe Democrat control will move New York State on the right track	Turning back to New York State, would you say that having the governorship and both houses of the State Legislature controlled by the Democrats will—over the next two years—move New York State on the right track or move it in the wrong direction?
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Joe Biden	I’m going to read a series of names of people and institutions in public life and I’d like you to tell me whether you have a favorable opinion or an unfavorable opinion of each person or institution I name. Joe Biden
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Chuck Schumer	I’m going to read a series of names of people and institutions in public life and I’d like you to tell me whether you have a favorable opinion or an unfavorable opinion of each person or institution I name. Chuck Schumer
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Nancy Pelosi	I’m going to read a series of names of people and institutions in public life and I’d like you to tell me whether you have a favorable opinion or an unfavorable opinion of each person or institution I name. Nancy Pelosi

Appendix B. Expanded Data Tables and Significance Tests for Gaps within Partisan Subgroups

Table B1 sorts individual policy issues by theme and shows the absolute values of the percentage “gaps” for three different groups: the Republican Party, the Democratic Party, and the moderates of both parties. For example, the Absolute Percentage Gap within the Republican Party is the absolute value of the difference between the percentage of Conservative Republicans (i.e., “non-RR GOP” below) and the percentage of Rockefeller-Republicans (i.e., moderate or “liberal” Republicans, designated as RR GOP below) who support particular policy or evaluation. Similarly, the Absolute Percentage Gap within the Democratic Party is the absolute value of the difference between the percentage of Liberal Democrats and the percentage of Blue-Dog-Democrats (i.e., moderate or “conservative” Democrats, designated as “BD Dems”) who support a particular policy or evaluation. The yellow column repeats this process using the “moderates” of both parties as its two groups. Thus, the Absolute Percentage Gap (“Abs Gap %”) between the centrists is the absolute value of the difference between the percentage of Rockefeller Republicans and the percentage of Blue-Dog Democrats who support particular policy or evaluation. This permits readers to compare the “gaps” – which correlate to(dis)unity – that exist within each party and across party lines within the group of centrists. Table B2 and Table B3 report significance tests using five techniques and specifications on the sizes of the gaps within partisan groups for Republicans and Democrats, respectively.

Table B1. Gaps Within and between party adherents in the siena research institute data for New York, 2019-2020.

Date	Position on Policy Issue	non-RR GOP %	RR GOP %	Abs Gap %	non-BD Dems %	BD Dems %	Abs Gap %	Centrists Abs Gap %
GUN POLICY
Jan 2019	Support more gun control	47	81	34***	91	76	15***	5
Feb 2019	Support more gun control	25	44	19*	91	73	18***	29
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
Date	Position on Policy Issue	non-RR GOP %	RR GOP %	Abs Gap %	non-BD Dems %	BD Dems %	Abs Gap %	Centrists Abs Gap %
Apr 2019	Ban single-use plastic bags in grocery stores good	55	66	11	86	56	30***	10
ECONOMIC POLICY
Date	Position on Policy Issue	non-RR GOP %	RR GOP %	Abs Gap %	non-BD Dems %	BD Dems %	Abs Gap %	Centrists Abs Gap %
Jan 2019	Support congestion pricing	31	58	27*	74	57	17**	1
Apr 2019	Congestion pricing good	32	41	9	69	46	23***	5
Jan 2019	Support making property tax cap permanent	74	72	2	75	80	5	8
Apr 2019	Permanent tax cap good	72	84	12	78	67	11	17
Jan 2019	Support eliminating “LLC loophole”	43	63	20*	76	61	15**	2
Feb 2019	Support allowing online sports betting	47	58	11	49	50	1	8
Feb 2019	Approve Amazon NY deal	46	62	16	49	70	21**	8
Apr 2019	Sales tax online good	40	32	8	61	53	8	21
Apr 2019	State budget overall good	24	33	9	78	59	19**	26
Feb 2019	Support education of job skills; Guaranteed education for all ages	66	77	11	89	86	3	9
ELECTION POLICY
Date	Position on Policy Issue	non-RR GOP %	RR GOP %	Abs Gap %	non-BD Dems %	BD Dems %	Abs Gap %	Centrists Abs Gap %
Jan 2019	Support making election day a state holiday	36	47	11	82	64	18***	17
Jan 2019	Support banning corporate campaign contributions	58	75	17*	80	74	6	1
Apr 2019	Support public campaign financing plan	6	14	8	58	27	31***	13
Apr 2019	Support increase governor’s salary	14	28	14*	53	35	18**	7
Jan 2019	Support raising salaries of elected officials	5	10	5	24	22	2	12
IMMIGRATION POLICY
Date	Position on Policy Issue	non-RR GOP %	RR GOP %	Abs Gap %	non-BD Dems %	BD Dems %	Abs Gap %	Centrists Abs Gap %
Jan 2019	Support DREAM Act	10	40	30***	92	65	27***	25
Feb 2019	Support DREAM Act	19	44	25**	97	75	22***	31
Feb 2019	Believe Democrats should support fund wall	89	72	17*	8	39	31***	33
Feb 2019	Support declaring national emergency to fund wall	62	40	22*	6	2	4***	38
Apr 2019	Allow undocumented immigrants to get driver’s license	7	32	25***	74	44	30***	12
Feb 2019	Support census US citizenship question	91	81	10	23	64	41***	17
CRIMINAL POLICY
Date	Position on Policy Issue	non-RR GOP %	RR GOP %	Abs Gap %	non-BD Dems %	BD Dems %	Abs Gap %	Centrists Abs Gap %
Jan 2019	Support legalize marijuana	33	47	14	82	55	27***	8
Feb 2019	Support legalize marijuana	29	50	21*	78	51	27***	1
Apr 2019	Support legalize marijuana	25	45	20*	81	53	28***	8
Jan 2019	Support eliminating monetary bail for misdemeanor	48	55	7	83	72	11*	17
Apr 2019	Eliminating monetary bail for misdemeanors good	24	55	31***	83	56	27***	1
Apr 2019	Ban release of mugshots good	21	33	12	55	36	19**	3
Jan 2019	Support Child Victims Act	83	84	1	89	80	9*	4
Feb 2019	Support Child Victims Act	72	91	19*	96	89	7	2
HEALTH AND MEDICAL POLICY
Date	Position on Policy Issue	non-RR GOP %	RR GOP %	Abs Gap %	non-BD Dems %	BD Dems %	Abs Gap %	Centrists Abs Gap %
Jan 2019	Support legalize abortion	36	78	42***	94	76	18***	2
Feb 2019	Support Reproductive Health Act	11	34	23**	93	58	35***	24
Apr 2019	Support requirement of parents to have children vaccinated for schools	83	81	2	90	81	9*	0
Apr 2019	Support implementing single-payer health insurance system	13	35	22*	83	60	23***	25
Feb 2019	Support legalize physician assisted suicide	53	57	4	78	51	27***	6
IDENTITY AND NON-DISCRIMINATION POLICY
Date	Position on Policy Issue	non-RR GOP %	RR GOP %	Abs Gap %	non-BD Dems %	BD Dems %	Abs Gap %	Centrists Abs Gap %
Jan 2019	Support Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act	32	66	34***	92	81	11*	15
Feb 2019	Support Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act	23	75	52***	98	69	29***	6
GENERAL POLITICAL EVALUATIONS
Date	Position on Policy Issue	non-RR GOP %	RR GOP %	Abs Gap %	non-BD Dems %	BD Dems %	Abs Gap %	Centrists Abs Gap %
Jan 2019	Believe NY is on the right track	6	43	37***	81	68	13*	25
Feb 2019	Believe NY is on the right track	11	27	16*	90	51	39***	24
Apr 2019	Believe NY on right track	10	28	18*	79	56	23***	28
Mar 2020	Believe NY on right track	35	47	12	84	76	8	29
Jan 2019	Believe US is on the right track	76	45	31***	12	27	15**	18
Feb 2019	Believe US is on the right track	76	53	23**	10	32	22***	21
Apr 2019	Believe US on right track	76	64	12	6	39	33***	25
Mar 2020	Believe US on right track	88	65	23**	16	36	20***	29
Jan 2019	Believe Cuomo excellent/good	13	35	22*	57	52	5	17
Feb 2019	Believe Cuomo excellent/good	8	14	6	50	49	1	35
Apr 2019	Believe Cuomo excellent/good	9	24	15**	60	46	14*	22
Mar 2020	Believe Cuomo excellent/good	22	45	23**	82	77	5	32
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Andrew Cuomo	38	51	13	92	90	2	39
Feb 2019	Believe Trump excellent/good	77	47	30***	8	21	13**	26
Apr 2019	Believe Trump excellent/good	86	51	35***	2	29	27***	22
Mar 2020	Believe Trump excellent/good	87	70	17*	2	16	14***	54
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Donald Trump	88	71	17*	3	20	17***	51
Jan 2019	Believe minorities in NY experience racial/ethnic discrimination	40	63	23*	93	80	13***	17
Jan 2019	Believe NY fiscal condition excellent/good	8	28	20***	48	38	10	10
Apr 2019	Believe NY fiscal condition excellent/good	21	26	5	40	36	4	10
Feb 2019	Believe Democrat control will move New York State on the right track	9	15	6	94	62	32***	47
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Joe Biden	17	36	19*	72	81	9	45
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Chuck Schumer	12	27	15*	84	70	14	43
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Nancy Pelosi	6	17	11	80	71	9	54
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Mitch McConnell	84	62	22*	3	16	13***	46
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Mike Pence	87	71	16	7	30	23***	41
Mar 2020	Would vote Biden (D) for POTUS right now	5	24	19**	99	86	13***	62
COVID-19 PANDEMIC-SPECIFIC POLITICAL EVALUATIONS
Date	Position on Policy Issue	non-RR GOP %	RR GOP %	Abs Gap %	non-BD Dems %	BD Dems %	Abs Gap %	Centrists Abs Gap %
Mar 2020	Approve Trump COVID-19 response	91	78	13	13	26	13*	52
Mar 2020	Approve Cuomo COVID-19 response	71	76	5	93	97	4	21
Mar 2020	Approve Pence COVID-19 response	91	81	10	13	35	22***	46
Mar 2020	Approve Fauci COVID-19 response	93	98	5	91	95	4	3
Mar 2020	Approve US House COVID-19 response	48	55	7	69	68	1	13
Mar 2020	Approve US Senate COVID-19 response	72	65	7	33	44	11	21
Mar 2020	Approve Bill de Blasio COVID-19 response (NYC)	44	38	6	76	79	3	41
Mar 2020	Approve local govt. leader COVID-19 response (not NYC)	83	87	4	80	85	5	2
Mar 2020	Approve local health dept. COVID-19 response	84	89	5	86	83	3	6
Mar 2020	Approve CDC COVID-19 response	86	86	0	79	78	1	8
Mar 2020	Very/somewhat concerned about COVID-19 pandemic	82	90	8	96	96	0	6
Mar 2020	Very/somewhat concerned getting COVID-19	64	65	1	91	82	9*	17
Mar 2020	Believe Federal government is doing all it can to help protect the health of Americans	91	76	15*	16	35	19***	41
Mar 2020	Believe NY government is doing all it can to help protect the health of New Yorkers	88	75	13	81	80	1	5
Mar 2020	Believe Federal government is doing enough to meet the financial needs of average Americans	76	51	25**	11	31	20***	20
Mar 2020	Believe Federal government is doing enough to meet the financial needs of America ́s most affected industries	69	65	4	32	32	0	33
Mar 2020	Believe Federal government is doing enough to meet the financial needs of America ́s small, local businesses	57	47	10	9	20	11*	27

Significance is derived from regression analysis: ***p ≤ 0.001, **p < 0.01, and *p < 0.05.

Table B2 and Table B3 show the results of significance tests for percentage “gaps” for between the Rockefeller Republican (“RR”) and non-RR groups. Five versions of the significance tests are employed, ranging from tabular chi-square tests to ordinary least squares regression and logit models, with and without control variables. The controls included common demographics (e.g., age, race, income, education, and gender).

Table B2. Republican party, survey weighted percentages and gaps with significance tests.

Date	Position on Policy Issue	non- RR GOP %	RR GOP %	Abs Gap %	Statistical Significance
					ChSq 2 × 2	Regress	Logit	Regress w/ Controls		Logit w/ Controls
GUN POLICY
Jan 2019	Support more gun control	47	81	34	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001		p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Feb 2019	Support more gun control	25	44	19	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05		p < 0.05	p < 0.05
		Avg gap =		26.5
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
Apr 2019	Ban single-use plastic bags in grocery stores	55	66	11	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
ECONOMIC POLICY
Jan 2019	Support congestion pricing	31	58	27	p < 0.01	p < 0.05	p < 0.05		p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Jan 2019	Support eliminating the “LLC loophole”	43	63	20	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05		p < 0.1	p < 0.1
Feb 2019	Approve Amazon NY deal	46	62	16	p < 0.1	p < 0.1	p < 0.1		p < 0.1	p < 0.1
Apr 2019	Permanent tax cap good	72	84	12	n.s.	p < 0.1	n.s.		p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Feb 2019	Allow online sports betting	47	58	11	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	p < 0.1
Feb 2019	Support job skills and guaranteed education for all ages	66	77	11	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Apr 2019	Congestion pricing good	32	41	9	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Apr 2019	State budget overall good	24	33	9	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Apr 2019	Sales tax online good	40	32	8	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Jan 2019	Support making property tax cap permanent	74	72	2	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
		Avg gap =		12.5
ELECTION POLICY
Jan 2019	Support banning corp. campaign contributions	58	75	17	p < 0.1	p < 0.05	p < 0.1		p < 0.1	p < 0.1
Apr 2019	Support increase governor’s salary	14	28	14	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05		p≤0.05	p < 0.05
Jan 2019	Support making election day a state holiday	36	47	11	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Apr 2019	Support public campaign financing plan	6	14	8	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Jan 2019	Support raising salaries of elected officials	5	10	5	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		p < 0.1	n.s.
		Avg gap =		11
IMMIGRATION POLICY
Jan 2019	Support DREAM Act	10	40	30	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001		p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Feb 2019	Support DREAM Act	19	44	25	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.01		p < 0.1	p < 0.1
Apr 2019	Support allowing undocumented immigrants to get driver’s license	7	32	25	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001		p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Feb 2019	Support declaring national emergency to fund wall	62	40	22	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p≤0.05		p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Feb 2019	Believe Democrats should support fund wall	89	72	17	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p≤0.05		p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Feb 2019	Support census US citizenship question	91	81	10	p < 0.1	p < 0.1	p < 0.1		p < 0.1	p < 0.1
		Avg gap =		21.5
CRIMINAL POLICY
Apr 2019	Eliminating monetary bail for misdemeanors good	24	55	31	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001		p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Feb 2019	Support legalize marijuana	29	50	21	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05		p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Apr 2019	Support legalize marijuana	25	45	20	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05		p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Feb 2019	Support Child Victims Act	72	91	19	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05		p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Jan 2019	Support legalize marijuana	33	47	14	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Apr 2019	Ban release of mugshots good	21	33	12	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Jan 2019	Support eliminating monetary bail for misdemeanor	48	55	7	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Jan 2019	Support Child Victims Act	83	84	1	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
		Avg gap =		15.6
HEALTH AND MEDICAL POLICY
Jan 2019	Support legalize abortion	36	78	42	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001		p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Feb 2019	Support Reproductive Health Act	11	34	23	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.01		p < 0.01	p < 0.01
Apr 2019	Support implementing single-payer health insurance system	13	35	22	p < 0.001	p < 0.05	p < 0.05		p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Feb 2019	Support legalize physician assisted suicide	53	57	4	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Apr 2019	Support requirement of parents to have children vaccinated for schools	83	81	2	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
		Avg gap =		18.6
IDENTITY AND NON-DISCRIMINATION POLICY
Feb 2019	Support gender expression nondiscrimination Act	23	75	52	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p ≤ 0.001		p < 0.001	p ≤ 0.001
Jan 2019	Support Gender Expression Non Discrimination Act	32	66	34	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001		p ≤ 0.001	p < 0.05
		Avg gap =		43
GENERAL POLITICAL EVALUATIONS
Jan 2019	Believe NY is on the right track	6	43	37	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001		p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Apr 2019	Believe Trump excellent/good	86	51	35	p < 0.001	p ≤ 0.001	p ≤ 0.001		p ≤ 0.001	p < 0.05
Jan 2019	Believe US is on the right track	76	45	31	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p ≤ 0.001		p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Feb 2019	Believe Trump excellent/good	77	47	30	p < 0.001	p ≤ 0.001	p ≤ 0.001		p ≤ 0.001	p < 0.05
Feb 2019	Believe US is on the right track	76	53	23	p < 0.05	p ≤ 0.01	p < 0.05		p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Mar 2020	Believe US on right track	88	65	23	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.1		p < 0.05	p < 0.1
Mar 2020	Believe Cuomo excellent/good	22	45	23	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.01		p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Jan 2019	Believe minorities in NY experience racial/ethnic discrimination	40	63	23	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05		p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Jan 2019	Believe Cuomo excellent/good	13	35	22	p < 0.01	p < 0.05	p < 0.05		p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Mitch McConnell	84	62	22	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05		p ≤ 0.05	p < 0.1
Jan 2019	Believe NY fiscal condition excellent/good	8	28	20	p < 0.01	p ≤ 0.001	p < 0.05		p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Joe Biden	17	36	19	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05		p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Mar 2020	Would vote Biden (D) for POTUS right now	5	24	19	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.05		p < 0.05	p < 0.1
Apr 2019	Believe NY on right track	10	28	18	p < 0.01	p < 0.05	p < 0.05		p < 0.01	p ≤ 0.01
Mar 2020	Believe Trump excellent/good	87	70	17	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05		p < 0.1	n.s.
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Donald Trump	88	71	17	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05		n.s.	n.s.
Feb 2019	Believe NY is on the right track	11	27	16	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05		p < 0.1	p < 0.1
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Mike Pence	87	71	16	p < 0.1	p < 0.1	p < 0.1		n.s.	n.s.
Apr 2019	Believe Cuomo excellent/good	9	24	15	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.01		p < 0.01	p < 0.01
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Chuck Schumer	12	27	15	p < 0.1	p < 0.05	p < 0.1		p < 0.1	p < 0.1
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Andrew Cuomo	38	51	13	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Believe NY on right track	35	47	12	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Apr 2019	Believe US on right track	76	64	12	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	p < 0.05
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Nancy Pelosi	6	17	11	p < 0.1	p < 0.1	p < 0.1		p < 0.1	n.s.
Feb 2019	Believe Cuomo excellent/good	8	14	6	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Feb 2019	Believe Democrat control will move New York State on the right track	9	15	6	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Apr 2019	Believe NY fiscal condition excellent/good	21	26	5	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
		Avg gap =		18.7
COVID-19 PANDEMIC-SPECIFIC POLITICAL EVALUATIONS
Mar 2020	Believe Federal government is doing enough to meet the financial needs of average Americans	76	51	25	p < 0.05	p < 0.01	p < 0.05		p < 0.1	p < 0.1
Mar 2020	Believe Federal government is doing all it can to help protect the health of Americans	91	76	15	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05		n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Approve Trump COVID-19 response	91	78	13	p < 0.1	p < 0.1	p < 0.1		n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Believe NY government is doing all it can to help protect the health of New Yorkers	88	75	13	p < 0.1	p < 0.1	p < 0.1		p < 0.1	p < 0.1
Mar 2020	Approve Pence COVID-19 response	91	81	10	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Believe Federal government is doing enough to meet the financial needs of America ́s small, local businesses	57	47	10	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Very/somewhat concerned about COVID-19 pandemic	82	90	8	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		p < 0.1	p < 0.1
Mar 2020	Approve US House COVID-19 response	48	55	7	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Approve US Senate COVID-19 response	72	65	7	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Approve Bill de Blasio COVID-19 response (NYC)	44	38	6	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	error
Mar 2020	Approve Cuomo COVID-19 response	71	76	5	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Approve Fauci COVID-19 response	93	98	5	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		p < 0.1	n.s.
Mar 2020	Approve local health dept.COVID-19 response	84	89	5	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Approve local govt. leader COVID-19 response (not NYC)	83	87	4	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Believe Federal government is doing enough to meet the financial needs of America ́s most affected industries	69	65	4	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Very/somewhat concerned getting COVID-19	64	65	1	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Approve CDC COVID-19 response	86	86	0	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.		n.s.	n.s.
		Avg gap =		8.1

Table B3. Democratic party, survey weighted percentages and gaps with significance tests.

Date	Position on Policy Issue	non- BD Dems %	BD Dems %	Abs Gap %	Statistical Significance
					ChSq 2 × 2	Regress	Logit	Regress w/ Controls	Logit w/ Controls
GUN POLICY
Feb 2019	Support more gun control	91	73	18	p ≤ 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.01	p ≤ 0.001	p ≤ 0.001
Jan 2019	Support more gun control	91	76	15	p < 0.01	p ≤ 0.001	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.05
		Avg gap =		16.5
ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY
Apr 2019	Ban single-use plastic bags in grocery stores good	86	56	30	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
ECONOMIC POLICY
Apr 2019	Congestion pricing good	69	46	23	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p ≤ 0.001	p < 0.01	p < 0.01
Feb 2019	Approve Amazon NY deal	49	70	21	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Apr 2019	State budget overall good	78	59	19	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Jan 2019	Support congestion pricing	74	57	17	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p ≤ 0.05	p < 0.1
Jan 2019	Support eliminating “LLC loophole”	76	61	15	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	n.s.	n.s.
Apr 2019	Permanent tax cap good	78	67	11	p < 0.1	p < 0.1	p < 0.1	n.s.	n.s.
Apr 2019	Sales tax online good	61	53	8	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Jan 2019	Support making property tax cap permanent	75	80	5	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Feb 2019	Support education of job skills; Guaranteed education for all ages	89	86	3	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Feb 2019	Support allowing online sports betting	49	50	1	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
		Avg gap =		12.3
ELECTION POLICY
Apr 2019	Support public campaign financing plan	58	27	31	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Apr 2019	Support increase governor’s salary	53	35	18	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.1	p < 0.1
Jan 2019	Support making election day a state holiday	82	64	18	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p ≤ 0.001	p < 0.01	p < 0.05
Jan 2019	Support banning corporate campaign contributions	80	74	6	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Jan 2019	Support raising salaries of elected officials	24	22	2	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
		Avg gap =		15
IMMIGRATION POLICY
Feb 2019	Support census US citizenship question	23	64	41	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Feb 2019	Believe Democrats should support fund wall	8	39	31	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Apr 2019	Support allowing undocumented immigrants to get driver’s license	74	44	30	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Jan 2019	Support DREAM Act	92	65	27	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Feb 2019	Support DREAM Act	97	75	22	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p ≤ 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Feb 2019	Support declaring national emergency to fund wall	6	2	4	p < 0.01	p ≤ 0.001	p < 0.01	p ≤ 0.001	p < 0.01
		Avg gap =		25.8
CRIMINAL POLICY
Apr 2019	Support legalize marijuana	81	53	28	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Apr 2019	Eliminating monetary bail for misdemeanors	83	56	27	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Feb 2019	Support legalize marijuana	78	51	27	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Jan 2019	Support legalize marijuana	82	55	27	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Apr 2019	Ban release of mugshots	55	36	19	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p ≤ 0.01
Jan 2019	Support eliminating monetary bail for misdemeanor	83	72	11	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.11	p < 0.1
Jan 2019	Support Child Victims Act	89	80	9	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.1	n.s.	n.s.
Feb 2019	Support Child Victims Act	96	89	7	n.s.	p < 0.1	n.s.	p < 0.1	n.s.
		Avg gap =		19.4
HEALTH AND MEDICAL POLICY
Feb 2019	Support Reproductive Health Act	93	58	35	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Feb 2019	Support legalize physician assisted suicide	78	51	27	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Apr 2019	Support implementing single-payer health insurance system	83	60	23	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Jan 2019	Support legalizing abortion	94	76	18	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Apr 2019	Support requirement of parents to have children vaccinated for schools	90	81	9	p < 0.1	p < 0.05	p < 0.1	n.s.	n.s.
		Avg gap =		22.4
IDENTITY AND NON-DISCRIMINATION POLICY
Feb 2019	Support Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act	98	69	29	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Jan 2019	Support Gender Expression Non-Discrimination Act	92	81	11	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	n.s.	n.s.
		Avg gap =		20
GENERAL POLITICAL EVALUATIONS
Feb 2019	Believe NY is on the right track	90	51	39	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Apr 2019	Believe US on right track	6	39	33	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Feb 2019	Believe Democrat control will move New York State on the right track	94	62	32	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Apr 2019	Believe Trump excellent/good	2	29	27	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001
Apr 2019	Believe NY on right track	79	56	23	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p ≤ 0.001
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Mike Pence	7	30	23	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p ≤ 0.001	p ≤ 0.001
Feb 2019	Believe US is on the right track	10	32	22	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p ≤ 0.001
Mar 2020	Believe US on right track	16	36	20	p < 0.01	p ≤ 0.001	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.05
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Donald Trump	3	20	17	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p ≤ 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.01
Jan 2019	Believe US is on the right track	12	27	15	p < 0.01	p < 0.01	p < 0.001	p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Mar 2020	Believe Trump excellent/good	2	16	14	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.01	p < 0.001	p ≤ 0.01
Apr 2019	Believe Cuomo excellent/good	60	46	14	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.1	p < 0.1
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Chuck Schumer	84	70	14	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Jan 2019	Believe NY is on the right track	81	68	13	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	n.s.	n.s.
Feb 2019	Believe Trump excellent/good	8	21	13	p < 0.05	p < 0.01	p < 0.05	p < 0.001	p < 0.01
Jan 2019	Believe minorities in NY experience racial/ethnic discrimination	93	80	13	p < 0.01	p ≤ 0.001	p < 0.01	p < 0.1	p < 0.1
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Mitch McConnell	3	16	13	p < 0.01	p ≤ 0.001	p < 0.01	p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Mar 2020	Would vote Biden (D) for POTUS right now	99	86	13	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.01	p < 0.001	n.s.
Jan 2019	Believe NY fiscal condition excellent/good	48	38	10	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Joe Biden	72	81	9	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Nancy Pelosi	80	71	9	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Believe NY on right track	84	76	8	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Believe Cuomo excellent/good	82	77	5	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Jan 2019	Believe Cuomo excellent/good	57	52	5	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Apr 2019	Believe NY fiscal condition excellent/good	40	36	4	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Favorable opinion of Andrew Cuomo	92	90	2	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Feb 2019	Believe Cuomo excellent/good	50	49	1	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
		Avg gap =		15.2
COVID-19 PANDEMIC-SPECIFIC POLITICAL EVALUATIONS
Mar 2020	Approve Pence COVID-19 response	13	35	22	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p ≤ 0.001	p < 0.01
Mar 2020	Believe Federal government is doing enough to meet the financial needs of average Americans	11	31	20	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.001	p < 0.01	p < 0.01
Mar 2020	Believe Federal government is doing all it can to help protect the health of Americans	16	35	19	p < 0.01	p < 0.001	p ≤ 0.001	p < 0.05	p ≤ 0.05
Mar 2020	Approve Trump COVID-19 response	13	26	13	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Believe Federal government is doing enough to meet the financial needs of America ́s small, local businesses	9	20	11	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	p < 0.05	n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Approve US Senate COVID-19 response	33	44	11	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Very/somewhat concerned getting COVID-19	91	82	9	p < 0.01	p < 0.05	p < 0.01	p < 0.05	p < 0.05
Mar 2020	Approve local govt. leader COVID-19 response (not NYC)	80	85	5	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Approve Cuomo COVID-19 response	93	97	4	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Approve Fauci COVID-19 response	91	95	4	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Approve Bill de Blasio COVID-19 response (NYC)	76	79	3	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Approve local health dept.COVID-19 response	86	83	3	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Believe NY government is doing all it can to help protect the health of New Yorkers	81	80	1	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Approve US House COVID-19 response	69	68	1	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Approve CDC COVID-19 response	79	78	1	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Very/somewhat concerned about COVID-19 pandemic	96	96	0	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
Mar 2020	Believe Federal government is doing enough to meet the financial needs of America ́s most affected industries	32	32	0	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
		Avg gap =		7.5

NOTES

¹Contrast the Rockefeller Republicans with the prevailing view, captured by Valentino and Sears, that “…over time racial conservativism has become closely associated with Republican partisanships [especially] in the White south…” (Valentino & Sears, 2005: p. 674).

²So-called “Blue Dog” Democrats with conservative views, who were once plentiful, may also be on the decline (Block Rubin, 2017; Kane, 2014; Blake, 2012).

³In earlier writings, Kabaservice reminds us that many prominent conservatives once considered themselves to be moderates who supported Nelson Rockefeller. This list includes Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Mitch McConnell as well as Newt Gingrich. On the latter, “In fact, when [Gingrich] became involved with politics in the late 1960s, as a Ph.D. student in history at Tulane University, he was a moderate or even progressive Republican with connections to the Ripon Society. At the 1968 Republican national convention, Gingrich was one of New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller’s strongest Southern supporters….He believed that ‘one of the gravest mistakes the Reagan Administration made was its failure to lead aggressively in civil rights.’ He identified with ‘the classic moderate wing of the party, where, as a former Rockefeller state chairman, I’ve spent most of my life.’” (Kabaservice, 2012: p. 371).

⁴This project does not concentrate upon subgroup differences in demographic factors (e.g., gender or racial gaps). However, it is worth considering whether Rockefeller Republicans (RR) are demographically distinctive. While the sample sizes are small (e.g., only 167 Republicans in the April 2019 Siena survey), the only significant predictor of RR is gender, which is negatively related, with women being about 17 percentage points less likely to be classified as RR (OLS coeff. = −0.17, se = 0.08); the only other time this variable was significant was Feb. 2019, at p < 0.10. Other factors, such as education, income age, and being black or Hispanic, were not significant predictors in most surveys; education was p < 0.10 in the March 2020 survey with more highly educated being more apt to be a RR. These results replicate with logit specifications for the dichotomous outcome variables.

⁵Many questions followed the “support vs. oppose,” “approve vs. disapprove,” “good vs. bad” dichotomies. The evaluation questions, which had multiple levels of response, were similarly recoded into a dichotomous variable using top-2 box responses. For example, when response options were “excellent, good, fair, or poor,” the dichotomous variable created corresponded to either “excellent/good” or “fair/poor.”

⁶While a narrow definitions of RRs or BBDs might exclude moderates of either party, self-defined moderates within in each party are included within each partisan group, respectively.

⁷As Kabaservice writes, “Conservatives dominate every aspect of the party and its political infrastructure, and moderates would be hard put to mount a serious challenge in any area” (Kabaservice, 2012: p. 401).

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

References

[1]	Achen, C. H. (1975). Mass Political Attitudes and the Survey Response. American Political Science Review, 69, 1218-1223. https://doi.org/10.2307/1955282
[2]	Ansolabehere, S., Rodden, J., & Snyder, J. M. (2008). The Strength of Issues: Using Multiple Measures to Gauge Preference Stability, Ideological Constraint, and Issue Voting. American Political Science Review, 102, 215-232. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055408080210
[3]	Balz, D. (1999, October 7). Bush Shows a Shadow of Clintonism: Criticism of Hill GOP Mirrors President’s “Triangulation”. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/1999-10/07/081r-100799-idx.html
[4]	Blake, A. (2012, April 25). Why the Blue Dogs’ Decline was Inevitable. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/post/why-the-blue-dogs-decline-was-inevitable/2012/04/25/gIQAhOw8gT_blog.html
[5]	Block Rubin, R. (2017). Building the Bloc: Intraparty Organization in the U.S. Congress. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108226967
[6]	Campbell, A., Converse, P. E., Miller, W. E., & Stokes, D. E. (1960). The American Voter. Wiley.
[7]	Cobb, J. (2021, March 15). What Is Happening to the Republicans? The New Yorker. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/03/15/what-is-happening-to-the-republicans
[8]	Converse, P. E. (1964). The Nature of Belief Systems in Mass Publics. In D. E. Apter (Ed.), Ideology and Discontent (pp. 206-261). The Free Press.
[9]	Converse, P. E. (1970). Attitudes and Non-Attitudes: Continuation of a Dialogue. In E. R. Tufte (Ed.), The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems (pp. 168-189). Addison-Wesley.
[10]	Cook, C. (2001). Tax-Cut Politics and “Blue Dog” Democrats. National Journal, 33, 510.
[11]	Dionne, E. J. (2016). Why the Right Went Wrong: Conservativism from Goldwater to Trump and Beyond. Simon and Schuster.
[12]	Dionne, E. J. (2019, February 19). History Will Mark How Many Republicans Shy from Trump’s Extremism. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/history-will-mark-how-many-republicans-shy-from-trumps-extremism/2019/02/24/e8e21514-36e4-11e9-af5b-b51b7ff322e9_story.html
[13]	Druckman, J. N., & Leeper, T. J. (2012). Is Public Opinion Stable? Resolving the Micro/Macro Disconnect in Studies of Public Opinion. Daedalus, 141, 50-68. https://doi.org/10.1162/DAED_a_00173
[14]	Ellis, C., & Stimson, J. A. (2012). Ideology in America. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139094009
[15]	Fortner, M. J. (2015). Black Silent Majority: The Rockefeller Drug Laws and the Politics of Punishment. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674496088
[16]	Gervasi, F. (1964). The Real Rockefeller. Atheneum.
[17]	Groenendyk, E. (2013). Competing Motives in the Partisan Mind: How Loyalty and Responsiveness Shape Party Identification and Democracy. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199969807.001.0001
[18]	Grossman, M., & Hopkins, D. A. (2015). Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats: The Asymmetry of American Party Politics. Perspectives on Politics, 13, 119-139. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592714003168
[19]	Hare, C., & Poole, K. T. (2014). The Polarization of Contemporary American Politics. Polity, 46, 411-429. https://doi.org/10.1057/pol.2014.10
[20]	Holbrook, T. M. (2002). Presidential Campaigns and the Knowledge Gap. Political Communication, 19, 437-454. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600290109997
[21]	Kabaservice, G. (2012). Rule and Ruin: The Downfall of Moderation and the Destruction of the Republican Party, from Eisenhower to the Tea Party. Oxford University Press.
[22]	Kabaservice, G. (2020, October 30). What’s Driving So Many Republicans to Support Joe Biden? Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2020/10/30/whats-driving-so-many-republicans-support-joe-biden/
[23]	Kane, J. V. (2019). Enemy or Ally? Elites, Base Relations, and Partisanship in America. Public Opinion Quarterly, 83, 534-558. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfz031
[24]	Kane, P. (2014, January 15). Blue Dog Democrats, Whittled Down in Number, Are Trying to Regroup. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/blue-dog-democrats-whittled-down-in-number-are-trying-to-regroup/2014/01/15/37d4e7e2-7dfd-11e3-95c6-0a7aa80874bc_story.html
[25]	Kinder, D. R., & Kalmoe, N. P. (2017). Neither Liberal nor Conservative: Ideological Innocence in the American Public. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226452593.001.0001
[26]	Lavine, H. G., Johnson, C. G., & Steenbergen, M. R. (2012). The Ambivalent Partisan: How Critical Loyalty Promotes Democracy. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199772759.001.0001
[27]	Mason, L. (2018). Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became our Identity. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226524689.001.0001
[28]	McCarthy, R. J. (2016, March 3). “Rockefeller Republicans” Are Scarce in New York These Days. Buffalo News. https://buffalonews.com/news/local/rockefeller-republicans-are-scarce-in-new-york-these-days/article_beb2cafa-a685-5ebd-8acc-8038024aff72.html
[29]	McCarty, N. (2019). Polarization: What Everyone Needs to Know. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/wentk/9780190867782.001.0001
[30]	Norrander, B. (1999). The Evolution of the Gender Gap. Public Opinion Quarterly, 63, 566-576. https://doi.org/10.1086/297871
[31]	Norton Smith, R. (2014). On His Own Terms: A Life of Nelson Rockefeller. Random House.
[32]	Norton Smith, R. (2023). An Ordinary Man: The Surprising Life and Historic Presidency of Gerald R. Ford. HarperCollins and Blackstone Publishing.
[33]	Osnos, E. (2020, May 3). How Greenwich Republicans Learned to Love Trump. The New Yorker. https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/05/11/how-greenwich-republicans-learned-to-love-trump
[34]	Osnos, E. (2021). Wildland: The Making of America’s Fury. Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
[35]	Page, B. I., & Barabas, J. (2000). Foreign Policy Gaps between Leaders and Citizens. International Studies Quarterly, 44, 339-364. https://doi.org/10.1111/0020-8833.00163
[36]	Page, B. I., & Shapiro, R. Y. (1992). The Rational Public. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226644806.001.0001
[37]	Page, B. I., & Jacobs, L. R. (2009). Class War? What Americans Really Think about Economic Inequality. University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226644561.001.0001
[38]	Rockefeller, N. A. (1968). Unity, Freedom & Peace: A Blueprint for Tomorrow. Random House.
[39]	Rockefeller, N. A. (1977). Vital Resources, Vol. 1 of Critical Choices for Americans. Lexington Books.
[40]	Valentino, N. A., & Sears, D. O. (2005). Old Times There Are Not Forgotten: Race and Partisan Realignment in the Contemporary South. American Journal of Political Science, 49, 672-688. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2005.00136.x
[41]	Watts, D. (2010). Dictionary of American Government and Politics. Edinburgh University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780748635023
[42]	Wright Rigueur, L. (2014). The Loneliness of the Black Republican. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400852437
[43]	Zaller, J., & Feldman, S. (1992). A Simple Theory of the Survey Response. American Journal of Political Science, 36, 579-616. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111583