Suchergebnisse

Over the past decade, much attention has been given to the growing political influence of Latinos in the United States in order to define the so-called ""Latino vote."" But the existence of a coherent Latino political agenda is highly debatable and likely unviable, as electoral and protest politics erase diversity and debate in favor of images of unity. Situated at the intersection of political theory and Latino studies, this book is the first comprehensive critique of civic Latinidad, analyzing the relationship among participatory democracy, public speech, and racial identification.

"This timely, insightful and expert-led volume interprets the 2020 U.S. Presidential election from a geographical standpoint, with a focus on its spatial dimensions. This book is an ideal study companion for faculty and graduate students in fields including geography and political science, sociology, American studies, media studies and urban planning, as well as those with an interest in U.S. politics more generally"--

"From 1789 to 1913, U.S. senators were not directly elected by the people--instead the Constitution mandated that they be chosen by state legislators. This radically changed in 1913, when the Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution was ratified, giving the public a direct vote. Electing the Senate investigates the electoral connections among constituents, state legislators, political parties, and U.S. senators during the age of indirect elections. Wendy Schiller and Charles Stewart find that even though parties controlled the partisan affiliation of the winning candidate for Senate, they had much less control over the universe of candidates who competed for votes in Senate elections and the parties did not always succeed in resolving internal conflict among their rank and file. Party politics, money, and personal ambition dominated the election process, in a system originally designed to insulate the Senate from public pressure. Electing the Senate uses an original data set of all the roll call votes cast by state legislators for U.S. senators from 1871 to 1913 and all state legislators who served during this time. Newspaper and biographical accounts uncover vivid stories of the political maneuvering, corruption, and partisanship--played out by elite political actors, from elected officials, to party machine bosses, to wealthy business owners--that dominated the indirect Senate elections process. Electing the Senate raises important questions about the effectiveness of Constitutional reforms, such as the Seventeenth Amendment, that promised to produce a more responsive and accountable government."--

Why did the political authority of well-respected female reformers diminish after women won the vote? In Battling Miss Bolsheviki Kirsten Marie Delegard argues that they were undercut during the 1920s by women conservatives who spent the first decade of female suffrage linking these reformers to radical revolutions that were raging in other parts of the world. In the decades leading up to the Nineteenth Amendment, women activists had enjoyed great success as reformers, creating a political subculture with settlement houses and women's clubs as its cornerstones. Female volunteers piloted welfare programs as philanthropic ventures and used their organizations to pressure state, local, and national governments to assume responsibility for these programs. These female activists perceived their efforts as selfless missions necessary for the protection of their homes, families, and children. In seeking to fulfill their "maternal" responsibilities, progressive women fundamentally altered the scope of the American state, recasting the welfare of mothers and children as an issue for public policy. At the same time, they carved out a new niche for women in the public sphere, allowing female activists to become respected authorities on questions of social welfare. Yet in the aftermath of the suffrage amendment, the influence of women reformers plummeted and the new social order once envisioned by progressives appeared only more remote. Battling Miss Bolsheviki chronicles the ways women conservatives laid siege to this world of female reform, placing once-respected reformers beyond the pale of political respectability and forcing most women's clubs to jettison advocacy for social welfare measures. Overlooked by historians, these new activists turned the Daughters of the American Revolution and the American Legion Auxiliary into vehicles for conservative political activism. Inspired by their twin desires to fulfill their new duties as voting citizens and prevent North American Bolsheviks from duplicating the success their comrades had enjoyed in Russia, they created a new political subculture for women activists. In a compelling narrative, Delegard reveals how the antiradicalism movement reshaped the terrain of women's politics, analyzing its enduring legacy for all female activists for the rest of the twentieth century and beyond

"William C. 'Willie' Velásquez Jr. founded the Southwest Voter Registration and Education Project (SVREP) and was an influential participant in other leading Latino rights and justice groups, including the Mexican American Youth Organization (MAYO) and the Mexican American Unity Council (MAUC). From the late 1960s until his untimely death in 1988, Velásquez helped Mexican Americans and other Hispanics become active participants in American political life. Though still insufficiently appreciated, Velásquez holds a unique status in the pantheon of modern American civil rights figures. This critical biography features an introduction by Henry Cisneros, former Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Former Rhodes Scholar and Velásquez protégé Juan A. Sepúlveda Jr.'s biography of the man provides a first, definitive glimpse into his life and times. Based on Sepúlveda's close personal relationship and exchanges with Velásquez during the SVREP founder's final years, and over a dozen years of research and writing, the book chronicles Velásquez's influences, his landmark contributions to American civic culture, and his enduring legacy. This is the story of both parts of the man: the public and the private. Velásquez's biography sheds light on the nature and price of public leadership in American politics."--

International audience ; L'exposition sur Les livres de la Liberté proposée par la Fondation Bodmer donne à penser, au premier abord, que certains livres auraient pu jouer un rôle particulièrement important dans le développement d'une certaine conception de la liberté politique et sociale, et des institutions qui la rendent possible. Les objets exposés – depuis l'indépassable Discours sur la servitude volontaire de La Boétie jusqu'aux écrits d'Etienne Dumont, en passant par ceux d'un Hume, d'un Turgot, d'un Say ou d'un Benjamin Constant – nous invitent bien à imaginer les livres comme des contenants servant de véhicules à certaines doctrines, en l'occurrence rassemblées sous la catégorie historico-philosophique du « libéralisme ». Si la définition de la « liberté » reste intrinsèquement contestée – avec ses deux grandes polarités opposant liberté négative vs. liberté positive (Isaiah Berlin), droits abstraits vs. capacités effectives (Karl Marx, Amartya Sen) – la référence au « libéralisme » paraît devoir être aujourd'hui encore plus problématique et piégée.Une telle référence semble en effet entraîner bien davantage de confusions que d'éclaircissements. En donnant à croire que la principale ligne du front de la bataille politique devait être tracée entre « libéraux » (la droite pro-marché) et « anti-libéraux » (la gauche pro-État), cette référence a largement contribué à la désorientation politique actuelle, qui voit d'anciens communistes voter Front National (ou UDC), et d'anciens libertaires persécuter les femmes voilées. Les embarras de traduction sont un bon symptôme de cette confusion mentale : l'insulte vire complètement de bord en traversant l'Atlantique, les « libéraux » étant trop-à-droite (économiquement) en Europe, tandis que les liberals sont trop-à-gauche (politiquement) aux États-Unis. La confusion hante l'intérieur même de la langue française, puisque l'accusation d'être « libéral » désigne aujourd'hui majoritairement une vision du monde basée sur l'intérêt individualiste égoïste et calculateur ...

In addition to their obvious roles in American politics, race and gender also work in hidden ways to profoundly influence the way we think--and vote--about a vast array of issues that don't seem related to either category. As Nicholas Winter reveals in Dangerous Frames, politicians and leaders often frame these seemingly unrelated issues in ways that prime audiences to respond not to the policy at hand but instead to the way its presentation resonates with their deeply held beliefs about race and gender. Winter shows, for example, how official rhetoric about welfare and Social Security has tappe.

The Electoral College has played an important role in presidential politics since our nation?s founding, but surprisingly little information exists about precisely how it affects campaign strategy. Daron R. Shaw, a scholar who also worked as a strategist in both Bush-Cheney campaigns, has written the first book to go inside the past two presidential elections and reveal how the race to 270 was won?and lost. Shaw?s nonpartisan study lays out how both the Democrats and the Republicans developed strategies to win decisive electoral votes by targeting specific states and media markets. Drawing on.

The House and the Senate floors are the only legislative forums where all members of the U.S. Congress participate and each has a vote. Andrew J. Taylor explores why floor power and floor rights in the House are more restricted than in the Senate and how these restrictions affect the legislative process. After tracing the historical development of floor rules, Taylor assesses how well they facilitate a democratic legislative process--that is, how well they facilitate deliberation, transparency, and widespread participation. Taylor not only compares floor proceedings between the Senate and the House in recent decades; he also compares recent congressional proceedings with antebellum proceedings. This unique, systematic analysis reveals that the Senate is generally more democratic than the House--a somewhat surprising result, given that the House is usually considered the more representative and responsive of the two. Taylor concludes with recommendations for practical reforms designed to make floor debates more robust and foster representative democracy

"The eleven ex-Confederate states continue to be thoroughly American and at the same time an exception to the national mainstream. The region's dual personality, how it came into being, and the purposes and interests it served is examined here, as well as its central role in the politics and culture wars flowing from the transformative Civil Rights Movement and the other social justice movements of the 1950s and 1960s. The essays on this theme include a penetrating explication of C. Vann Woodward's masterpiece, Origins of the New South, 1877-1913, which is explicitly informed by the scholarship of the fifty years since the book's original publication. Hackney explores the political transformation of the South and the identity politics that continue to structure national political competition. The bi-racial nature of Southern society lies at the heart of Southern identity in all of its varieties. Understanding that identity is a purpose that underlies all of the chapters. Hackney uses quantitative analysis of hom-icide data to establish beyond doubt for the first time that the South has long been more violent, and that there is a cultural component of that violence that exists beyond the usual social predictors of higher homicide rates in the United States. He muses over the failure of the usual social predictors of votes for the Democratic Party to predict the party's performance in the region. Timely, elegantly written, and wide in intellectual scope, Magnolias without Moonlight will be of interest to a broad readership of historians, cultural studies specialists, political scientists, and sociologists."--Provided by publisher.

This volume focuses on the 2016 Presidential campaign from a communication perspective, with each chapter considering a specific area of political campaign communication and practice. The first section includes chapters on the early candidate nomination campaigns, the nominating conventions, the debates, political advertising and new media technologies. The second section provides studies of critical topics and issues of the campaign to include chapters on candidate persona, issues of gender, wedge issues and scandal. The final section provides an overview of the election with chapters focusing on explaining the vote and impact of new campaign finance laws and regulations in the 2016 election. All the contributors are accomplished scholars in their areas of analysis. Students, scholars and general readers will find the volume offers a comprehensive overview of the historic 2016 presidential campaign.--

"An eye-opening, revelatory account of the future of the Republican party as they unite working-class voters in a multi-racial, cross-generational populist coalition. Donald Trump's victory in the 2016 presidential election shocked the world. Yet his defeat in 2020 may have been even more surprising: he received 12 million more votes in 2020 than 2016 and his unexpectedly diverse coalition included millions of nonwhite voters, a rarity for the modern Republican party. In 2020, Trump defied expectations and few journalists, strategists, or politicians could explain why Trump had nearly won reelection. Patrick Ruffini, a Republican pollster and one of the country's leading experts on political targeting, technology, and demography, has the answers-and the explanation may surprise you. For all his apparent divisiveness, Trump assembled the most diverse Republican presidential coalition in history and rode political trends that will prove significant for decades to come. The shift is profound: seven in ten American voters belong to groups that have shifted right in the last two presidential elections, while under three in ten whites with a college degree belong to groups that are trending left. Together, this super-majority of right-trending voters forms a colorblind, populist coalition, largely united by its working-class roots, moderate to conservative views on policy, strong religious beliefs, and indifference to or outright rejection of the identity politics practiced by the left. Not all these voters are Republican, and in certain corners of the coalition, only a small minority are. But recent elections are pointing us towards a future where party allegiances have been utterly upended. The Party of the People demonstrates this data. Ruffini was as wrong as every pollster in 2016 and spent the intervening years figuring out why and developing better methods of analyzing voters in the digital age. Using robust data, he shifts you away from the complacent, widespread narrative that the Republican party is a party of white, rural voters. It is, but more importantly for its longevity, it's a party of non-college educated voters. And as fewer voters attend college, the Republican party shows no signs of stagnation. With rich data and clear analysis, Party of the People explains the present and future of the Republican party and American elections"--

Depuis les années 1980, les inégalités sont reparties à la hausse dans la plupart des régions du monde, après une période relativement égalitaire dans l'après-guerre. Faut-il y voir la conséquence implacable de la mondialisation et de la technologie, ou bien plutôt un phénomène proprement politique et idéologique ? Pourquoi de nouvelles coalitions électorales unies par d'ambitieux programmes de redistribution des richesses tardent-elles à se développer, et quel est le lien avec la montée de nouveaux conflits identitaires, incarnée par les succès de Trump aux États-Unis, Le Pen en France, Modi en Inde ou encore Bolsonaro au Brésil? - Cet ouvrage collectif offre des pistes de réponses à ces questions en retraçant la transformation des clivages politiques dans 50 pays entre 1948 et 2020. À partir de l'exploitation d'enquêtes électorales couvrant de manière inédite les cinq continents, l'ouvrage étudie le lien entre les comportements de vote et les principales caractéristiques des électeurs telles que le revenu, le diplôme, le genre ou l'identité ethno-religieuse. Cette analyse permet de comprendre comment les mouvements politiques sont amenés à coaliser des intérêts et identités multiples dans les démocraties contemporaines. Une telle perspective historique et mondiale s'avère indispensable pour mieux appréhender l'avenir de la démocratie au XXIe siècle. - Toutes les données rassemblées sont mises à la disposition des personnes intéressées dans le cadre de la World Political Cleavages and Inequality Database (www.wpid.world).

International audience ; Cas des élections présidentielles françaises de 2007 et américaines de 2008 YVES VICTOR MAKAYA, PACTE – SCIENCES PO GRENOBLE Dans les régimes démocratiques, le système politique confère aux citoyens ayant la qualité d'électeur, le pouvoir de choisir au cours d'une élection, les représentants qu'ils jugent capables de les représenter à différents niveaux de l'État. Ainsi, par le vote, les citoyens participent directement au fonctionnement de la démocratie. Or, on assiste depuis quelques décennies à une « désaffection électorale », qui touche notamment la France où la participation électorale décline régulièrement depuis les années 1980 (Bréchon, 2009). Aux États-Unis la participation électorale connait également des fluctuations irrégulières depuis la fin des années 1960 (Wolfinger et Rosenstone, 1980). Cette tendance à la baisse de la participation électorale dont l'explication ne semble pas faire l'unanimité parmi les chercheurs, a tout de même connue une inversion à l'occasion des élections présidentielles françaises de 2007 et américaines de 2008. Considérés comme de véritables moments de « rupture » avec l'abstentionnisme électoral de longue durée, les taux de participation à ces scrutins, avaient alors atteints des niveaux exceptionnellement élevés : 84% au premier tour de l'élection présidentielle française d'avril-mai 2007 (contre 81% en 1981) et 64% à l'élection présidentielle américaine de novembre 2008 (contre 56% en 1972). Dans cette communication, nous comparons la participation électorale aux élections présidentielles françaises de 2007, à celle des élections présidentielles américaines de 2008.

International audience ; Cas des élections présidentielles françaises de 2007 et américaines de 2008 YVES VICTOR MAKAYA, PACTE – SCIENCES PO GRENOBLE Dans les régimes démocratiques, le système politique confère aux citoyens ayant la qualité d'électeur, le pouvoir de choisir au cours d'une élection, les représentants qu'ils jugent capables de les représenter à différents niveaux de l'État. Ainsi, par le vote, les citoyens participent directement au fonctionnement de la démocratie. Or, on assiste depuis quelques décennies à une « désaffection électorale », qui touche notamment la France où la participation électorale décline régulièrement depuis les années 1980 (Bréchon, 2009). Aux États-Unis la participation électorale connait également des fluctuations irrégulières depuis la fin des années 1960 (Wolfinger et Rosenstone, 1980). Cette tendance à la baisse de la participation électorale dont l'explication ne semble pas faire l'unanimité parmi les chercheurs, a tout de même connue une inversion à l'occasion des élections présidentielles françaises de 2007 et américaines de 2008. Considérés comme de véritables moments de « rupture » avec l'abstentionnisme électoral de longue durée, les taux de participation à ces scrutins, avaient alors atteints des niveaux exceptionnellement élevés : 84% au premier tour de l'élection présidentielle française d'avril-mai 2007 (contre 81% en 1981) et 64% à l'élection présidentielle américaine de novembre 2008 (contre 56% en 1972). Dans cette communication, nous comparons la participation électorale aux élections présidentielles françaises de 2007, à celle des élections présidentielles américaines de 2008.