What do you think?
Rate this book
Tides of Consent: How Public Opinion Shapes American Politics
Tracking trends in American public opinion, this study examines moods of public policy over time. James Stimson looks at shorter term movements as the public approves or disapproves politicians, trusts or distrusts government. His book is distinctive in that it focuses on determining the unobserved true opinion that lies beneath superficial polls. It argues that public opinion is decisive in American politics and identifies the citizens who produce influential change as a relatively small subset of the American electorate.
208 pages, Paperback
First published July 15, 2004
7 people are currently reading
121 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
January 24, 2026
The book I read is over two decades old now, so obviously politics look a lot different now than it did in the post-9/11 George W. Bush ecosystem this book is operating under. It would be interesting to see this book updated and incorporated for the post-Trump world. A lot of the information still renders true today and in fact helps to show why the political world can look so foreign in the past compared to today.
At its core, this book shows how the public opinion that controls democracy operates. It is like a rubber band, stretching towards whatever feels the need required of them. Stimson just lays out the very bare-bones data and says “See, public opinion operates as a reaction to the events which occur.” Which yes, Stimson, water makes things wet.
Fitting with the rubber band analogy, this book reminds me how flimsy our democracy can be, given how common people will change their mind. Reading this book, I can see why we see “democratic backsliding” in previously democratic (or democratic adjacent) nations who become more authoritarian over time. As with this current age in politics, I get this sense that much like when Rome transitioned from a Republic to an Empire, the U.S. might soon face a similar fate. While a democratic republic has allowed for more freedom towards its people and has helped keep corruption fairly in check (as much as really could be), it also has allowed massively toxic infighting, which seems to now only be getting worse, and in the U.S. has already led to a Civil War. With that being said, it still is the best style of government we have, with its biggest weakness being the ease of which it can quickly turn away from itself. We see leaders become ever more comfortable with expanding their own power.
We need to be reminded that even as a large dataset, we are finicky creatures, susceptible to bias and especially misplaced blame. This is true in the present and in the future when looking at the past. Perception always plays a role — 5 years, 50 years, 500 years all the same, with the resulting tale being told in different ways. Where in the present time, a leader may commonly be called the worst of all time, fate will ultimately decide long after we are gone what is the truth. This is why in recent years I have developed a rather Taoist stance of understanding the extreme limitations of my own judgement.
This book, while written academically and thus might be stale for some, still made for an informative and enjoyable read. While the data wasn’t the most up to date, I often don’t let it bother me because I can still find it interesting how things were perceived in different times. Remember what I said earlier, time can also play a factor into our perception of public figures. There was once a time where Woodrow Wilson was commonly thought of as one of the best U.S. Presidents. Fast forward to today, and he is commonly placed much closer towards the bottom of people’s lists. This book, however, despite definitely indicating its age, still holds up and I thought it made for an interesting read.
At its core, this book shows how the public opinion that controls democracy operates. It is like a rubber band, stretching towards whatever feels the need required of them. Stimson just lays out the very bare-bones data and says “See, public opinion operates as a reaction to the events which occur.” Which yes, Stimson, water makes things wet.
Fitting with the rubber band analogy, this book reminds me how flimsy our democracy can be, given how common people will change their mind. Reading this book, I can see why we see “democratic backsliding” in previously democratic (or democratic adjacent) nations who become more authoritarian over time. As with this current age in politics, I get this sense that much like when Rome transitioned from a Republic to an Empire, the U.S. might soon face a similar fate. While a democratic republic has allowed for more freedom towards its people and has helped keep corruption fairly in check (as much as really could be), it also has allowed massively toxic infighting, which seems to now only be getting worse, and in the U.S. has already led to a Civil War. With that being said, it still is the best style of government we have, with its biggest weakness being the ease of which it can quickly turn away from itself. We see leaders become ever more comfortable with expanding their own power.
We need to be reminded that even as a large dataset, we are finicky creatures, susceptible to bias and especially misplaced blame. This is true in the present and in the future when looking at the past. Perception always plays a role — 5 years, 50 years, 500 years all the same, with the resulting tale being told in different ways. Where in the present time, a leader may commonly be called the worst of all time, fate will ultimately decide long after we are gone what is the truth. This is why in recent years I have developed a rather Taoist stance of understanding the extreme limitations of my own judgement.
This book, while written academically and thus might be stale for some, still made for an informative and enjoyable read. While the data wasn’t the most up to date, I often don’t let it bother me because I can still find it interesting how things were perceived in different times. Remember what I said earlier, time can also play a factor into our perception of public figures. There was once a time where Woodrow Wilson was commonly thought of as one of the best U.S. Presidents. Fast forward to today, and he is commonly placed much closer towards the bottom of people’s lists. This book, however, despite definitely indicating its age, still holds up and I thought it made for an interesting read.
April 22, 2011
This is a well written book, accessible to the well read layperson. Stimson does a fine job of laying out the thesis that he has elaborated upon in more academic research. On page xvi, he lays out the central theme of this work: "Tracing movements and showing conseuences is the central theme of this book. It claims that change over time is what moves politics. Its design is to look at change over time in many different facets of public preferences, behavior, and response." One disclosure that I probably ought to make: Jim Stimson was one of my professors in graduate school at the State University of New York at Buffalo (as it was then called), and his work and passion for the study of politics is something that has stuck with me over time.
In some senses, the culminatuion of this volume begins in chapter 3. Here, Stimson notes the evolution of policy preferences over time. His data analysis clearly suggests oscillations in Americans' political preferences (liberal to conservative as one of the examples) over time (from 1960 to 2000). In Chapter 4, he examines a sampling of presidential elections and asks what they meant (if anything). He also inquires into the effects of presidential debates. Chapter 5 looks at public opinion regarding government between elections. Much data are presented in an accessible and illuminating manner.
In the end, he contends (page 171), ". . .citzens--in the aggregate and at the margin--do succeed in communicating their preferences to government." This should be considered in terms of a conclusion that he and colleagues made in another work, "The Macro Polity," that government in the United States does respond to public opinion. All in all, a good work for well informed laypersons. . . .
In some senses, the culminatuion of this volume begins in chapter 3. Here, Stimson notes the evolution of policy preferences over time. His data analysis clearly suggests oscillations in Americans' political preferences (liberal to conservative as one of the examples) over time (from 1960 to 2000). In Chapter 4, he examines a sampling of presidential elections and asks what they meant (if anything). He also inquires into the effects of presidential debates. Chapter 5 looks at public opinion regarding government between elections. Much data are presented in an accessible and illuminating manner.
In the end, he contends (page 171), ". . .citzens--in the aggregate and at the margin--do succeed in communicating their preferences to government." This should be considered in terms of a conclusion that he and colleagues made in another work, "The Macro Polity," that government in the United States does respond to public opinion. All in all, a good work for well informed laypersons. . . .
February 6, 2013
In bringing together elements of his earlier work in this book, Jim Stimson demonstrates why he is one of the best in his field. Analytically rigorous yet eminently readable, the result is a cogent examination of the relationship between mass public and government. Key in all of this is his measure of ‘policy mood’ which is one of the most elegant and aesthetically pleasing contributions to the modelling of opinion change over time.
August 2, 2013
Very informative but dry. Read it for a class.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews