The article argues that immigration attitudes reshaped the strategic environment for parties and leaders in many advanced democracies. Using comparative survey evidence from spring 2015, it shows that immigration views had already driven a wedge between mainstream parties and their partisans, opening space for new movements and producing measurable electoral consequences.

📊 Comparative Survey Evidence (YouGov, Spring 2015)

• Evidence comes from a YouGov comparative study conducted in spring 2015.
• "Mainstream parties" are defined as parties that regularly play a role in government.
• The analysis compares party positions on immigration with the attitudes of their supporters to identify gaps in representation.

🔍 Key Findings

• An "immigration gap" had emerged by spring 2015: mainstream parties were frequently out of step with their own partisans on immigration attitudes.
• That gap created substantial space for new political movements to form, either inside existing parties or outside them (including populist entrants and hostile takeovers).
• The representation gap on immigration is a relevant predictor of vote choice: parties are particularly likely to lose votes when they are more distant from their supporters on immigration issues.

⚖️ Why It Matters

• Immigration attitudes can powerfully alter the strategic environment of parties and leaders.
• A mismatch between party positions and partisan views helps explain the rise of challenger movements and disruptions to traditional party systems.
• The electoral consequence is clear: distance on immigration translates into lost votes for mainstream parties.