Variations in the loss of seats in the House of Representatives by the president's party in midterm elections between 1854 and 1998 are analyzed from a historical perspective. Whereas in the latter three-fourths of the nineteenth century the president's party lost, on average, 22% of its share of House seats, in the twentieth century the average loss was 13%. Using district-level data, the author attributes the problematization of “midterm decline” to the growing power of incumbency (a consequence of the development of the Australian ballot), the decline in the number of partisanly competitive districts in open-seat elections, and the limitation, since 1912, of the size of the U.S. House of Representatives.

The author provides a critical response to the social scientific literature that cast political interest and cleavages as the projection of sociocultural dynamics onto the political scene. Sociopolitical cleavages in general, and nationalism in particular, are thus viewed as having taken form outside the partisan arena, and only subsequent to their societal formation do they take on political importance. Through a comparison of the development of political nationalism in interwar Scotland and Flanders, the author argues for the importance of political forces in defining and shaping the political and social meaning and significance of nationalism. In Scotland, despite the potential popular appeal of nationalism, it does not emerge as a significant and autonomous political cleavage, principally due to configurations of partisan programs and alliances, and a politically unfavorable “demographic geometry.” In Flanders, on the other hand, markedly different political conditions fostered the development and societal significance of nationalism. Hence, political nationalism did not emerge as a necessary concomitant to societal and cultural change; it was in part the result of political conditions and institutions that could foster or constrain the sociopolitical significance and meaning of nationalism.

This article examines the interests expressed by white Populists and black Republicans regarding political coalition in Virginia. Virginia is interesting because it is generally considered a failed site for the Populist movement and for interracial organizing under it. Such a coalition was untenable statewide, but economic, social, and historical conditions opened a space for it in a cluster of majority-black counties. The failure of the coalition was not due to incompatible interests but to changing calculations of the outcomes. The interests expressed by white Populists and black Republicans converged and then diverged sharply as the meaning of past interracial coalitions changed for both sides.

Anti-immigrant sentiments in California during the early 1990s raised questions about that state's association with nativism, the impact of recessions on public anxieties, and the validity of public opinion polls in measuring related attitudes and concerns. A series of California Field Polls administered statewide between 1982 and 1998 (most samples exceeding 1,000 persons) were used to examine Californians’ attitudes regarding legal and illegal immigration, amnesty for undocumented aliens, identification cards for immigrants, and job competition between immigrants and Americans. Employing cross-tabulations and logistic regression, the study found a consistent relationship between responses to the issues and such demographic variables as political ideology, education, age, income, Protestant religion, and Latino ethnicity as well as between those responses and shifts in respondents’ financial perceptions and expectations. The study concludes that California was more likely a microcosm of the nation, reflecting its dual attitudes toward immigrants, rather than the leader of a neonativist movement.