Suchergebnisse

"Based on an original, comprehensive dataset of every congressional reference to the commander-in-chief clause from the Founding through 1917, this study systematically analyzes the authority that members of Congress ascribe to the president as commander in chief, and the boundaries that they put around that authority. Commander in Chief: Partisanship, Nationalism, and the Reconstruction of Congressional War Powers shows that for more than a century, members of Congress defined the commander in chief's authority narrowly, as similar to that of any high-ranking military officer. But in a wave of nationalism during the Spanish American War, members of Congress began to argue that Congress owed deference to the commander in chief. Members of Congress also tended, throughout the history of the republic, to argue that a copartisan's presidential war powers should be defined broadly, while those of a president in the other party should be defined narrowly. Together, these two dynamics suggest that the conditions for presidentially dominated modern constitutional war powers were set at the turn of the twentieth century, far earlier than is often acknowledged"--

Abstract
Seth Masket's new book, Learning
From
Loss: The Democrats 2016–2020 (Cambridge University Press, 2020) asks how the modern Democratic party absorbed Hillary Clinton's 2016 defeat and responded to it while preparing to nominate its candidate in 2020. Masket makes a persuasive case that the Democratic party managed its coalition and made strategic adaptations to its rules to help it win the 2020 election. In particular, he shows how competing narratives about Hillary Clinton's 2016 loss to Donald Trump played an important role in activists' decision making in the lead-up to 2020.

Research suggests that endorsements should affect outcomes in low-information elections such as primaries, but that hypothesis has not yet been tested empirically. Based on a survey of 2002 congressional campaigns, this article describes the universe of individuals and groups that offer endorsements to primary candidates and analyzes their effects on primary election results. It finds that a primary candidate's share of the partisan endorsements issued in the race significantly affects the candidate's vote share, even controlling for campaign funds and candidate quality. Implications for theories of candidate emergence and success are discussed.

This paper considers whether President Obama won a mandate during the 2008 election, and whether he is experiencing the expected honeymoon with the press, public, and Congress in 2009. It finds that the electorate did instruct him to "fix" the economy, but that given his relatively narrow victory and the electorate's indecisive rejection of conservative principles, the limited mandate he won is not necessarily going to help him govern. This paper also argues that he is experiencing a normal first-year honeymoon with the press and public, while his partisan advantage in Congress overwhelms any Republican reluctance to be deferential to him. Between the limited mandate, high public approval ratings, and large partisan majorities in Congress, prospects for his first year in office look fairly good.

This paper considers whether President Obama won a mandate during the 2008 election, and whether he is experiencing the expected honeymoon with the press, public, and Congress in 2009. It finds that the electorate did instruct him to "fix" the economy, but that given his relatively narrow victory and the electorate's indecisive rejection of conservative principles, the limited mandate he won is not necessarily going to help him govern. This paper also argues that he is experiencing a normal first-year honeymoon with the press and public, while his partisan advantage in Congress overwhelms any Republican reluctance to be deferential to him. Between the limited mandate, high public approval ratings, and large partisan majorities in Congress, prospects for his first year in office look fairly good. Adapted from the source document.

"Based on original analysis from leading experts on presidential elections, Making of the Presidential Candidates 2024 describes all of the systematic aspects of the nomination campaign today: party rules, fundraising, media attention, voter coalitions, prospects for female candidates, and more"--

We analyze affiliation networks of interest groups that endorse the same candidates in primary elections, donate to the same candidates in general elections, and voice support for the same legislative proposals. Patterns of interest group ties resemble two competing party coalitions in elections but not in legislative debate. Campaign endorsement and financial contribution ties among interest groups are consistently correlated but legislative ties do not follow directly from electoral alliances. The results challenge the consensus in the emerging literature on the expanded party organization; interest groups have distinct incentives to join together in a party coalition in elections but also to build bipartisan grand coalitions to pursue legislative goals. We also modify conventional views on party differences. The Democratic coalition is not fractured into many small constituencies. The Democratic campaign and legislative networks are denser than equivalent Republican networks, with a core of labor organizations occupying central positions.

A symposium essay examines the 2000 presidential campaign organizations of George W. Bush, John McCain, Al Gore, & Bill Bradley to argue that parties & coalition building are strong & viable in American politics. Although formal party organizations are officially barred from playing a direct role in the nomination process, emphasis is placed on the importance of an "expanded party" of informal networks consisting of party activists, campaign professionals, consultants, & staff members of elected officials. Since candidates must compete for organizational help from a limited group of activists/political professionals, a strong party network has the ability to change both the nature of the candidacies, & the character of resulting presidencies. Individuals who filled a total of 17 key leadership positions in the Bush, McCain, Gore, & Bradley campaigns were examined to determine both party & candidate loyalty. Preliminary results showed that the two candidates who easily won their respective party's nominations headed party-centered, coalition-style organizations. The implications are discussed. 3 Tables, 15 References. J. Lindroth