Text

theses

Traditionally, the Republican Party has taken hardline conservative stances on a variety of social issues. But some Republican elites, organizations, and highly engaged partisans are acting as “atypical issue advocates,” promoting issue positions within areas that challenge and outright oppose the stances held by the GOP’s platform, politicians, and base. Republican atypical issue advocates moreover purposely frame their messages in a way that sets them apart from other organizations and political actors that support these same causes. Unlike their advocacy counterparts, Republican atypical issue advocates employ a rhetorical strategy tailored solely to their own party, using frames that intentionally create an environment of cognitive dissonance by juxtaposing accepted Republican party affiliation and value orientations with more progressive issue positions. These cross-pressure frames may have a unique potential to resonate with their target audience of fellow Republicans and conservatives and influence attitudes on social issues where opinion has thus far seemed virtually immovable.
My dissertation project strives to shed light on the work of Republican atypical advocates and this unique framing device that they employ, assessing what effect – if any – this type of cross-pressure framing has on Republican attitudes regarding issues normally opposed by the party and its platform. I specifically follow the issue of samesex marriage throughout this project, using case studies and elite interviews with Republican atypical issue advocacy organizations and elites; a comparative content analysis of press releases from two of the top pro-LGBT advocacy organizations, one affiliated with the Democratic Party and one with the Republican Party; and an original survey experiment with a national sample of Republicans to assess the presence, purpose, content, and impact of these frames.
I find support that Republican atypical issue advocates 1) do indeed aim their work predominantly at members of their own party and 2) use accepted party rhetoric that diverges from the language used by their advocacy counterparts in order to frame their arguments. I also find evidence through my original survey experiment that these crosspressure frames evoking Republican Party affiliation and values resonate more with their target audience than frames evoking Democratic Party affiliation and values; Republicans are less likely to oppose – and are more accepting of – atypical issue stances under these cross-pressure frames than they are under stereotypical rival party frames. My dissertation thus expands the literature on the capabilities and limitations of new kinds of framing, frame resonance, and opinion formation in cross-pressure environments. This study also contributes to furthering an understanding of the battles inherent to framing and reframing, as well as both issue and political party evolution in the face of a changing electorate.

ETD_7722

Ph.D.

Includes bibliographical references

by Ashley A. Koning

doi:10.7282/T3ZG6VKV

ETD doctoral

The author owns the copyright to this work.