Voters can assign a party its identity before the party itself realizes it.

Evidence

However, this electoral success did not come about as a result of the party’s mobilization efforts or program appeals. The party failed to respond to the growing identification of the PDS by the voters as a “East German” party until the elections of 1994. Until then, it focused attention on ecological issues, women’s rights, and denouncing capitalism. Its identification as a representative of East German interests was first made by its voters, and it took the PDS four years to realize why its constituency voted for it. Insofar as it succeeded electorally, it did so in spite of the party’s chosen strategy, and its role was limited to that of a “spoiler” party, able to take votes away from other parties at the margin and serve as an outlet for protest, but unable to establish a broad following of its own. — Anna M. Grzymala-Busse, Redeeming The Communist Past, 1480

Categorization

• XREF: Forced-march relevance: this suggests party identity is co-constructed with the electorate — the PDS became an East German party because voters imposed that role. Speaks to whether identity is manufactured by elites or arises from demand-side attribution. — connects to: Voters can hold fundamentally different, not just opposite, ideological meanings — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1991; Identity is a positional political choice, not an ascribed primordial given

Broader Connections

• Voters can hold fundamentally different, not just opposite, ideological meanings #expands (0.75) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1991
• Identity is a positional political choice, not an ascribed primordial given #exemplifies (0.75)