Suchergebnisse

This article analyzes voter identification laws in the United States and their effects on voter turnout. Theoretically, there are plausible reasons to hypothesize turnout lowering effects, though there are also reasons to hypothesize those effects might be minimal. Methodologically, there are research design hurdles to clear in order to produce effect estimates that may be attributed to voter identification laws. Empirically, a small number of studies have employed suitable research designs and generally find modest, if any, turnout effects of voter identification laws. This may indicate that voter identification laws have only minor effects on turnout, or it may be due to the fact that the type of voter identification law that may have the most significant effects—a strict photo identification law—is a relatively recent phenomenon. Future elections and the related additional data may make it possible to adjudicate among these possibilities.

The pervasive influence of partisanship on political evaluations is well known and understood. Whether citizens rely on their policy attitudes has received less attention, especially in the context of how people update and revise their evaluations. This paper focuses on presidential assessments and uses panel data covering three presidencies to model the determinants of opinion change. The results indicate that policy preferences (like partisanship) exert a regular and substantial influence on how citizens update their presidential evaluations. Adapted from the source document.

This paper analyzes variation in presidential outcomes across the American states from 1972 through 2012. The findings show that differences in cultural policy preferences across the states are more important than economic preferences for explaining state outcomes in 2012. This result fits a long-term trend of the growing importance of cultural issues -- absolutely and relative to economic issues -- for sorting the states, which has had the effect of rotating the "party cleavage" line that divides the Democratic and Republican parties in presidential elections. Adapted from the source document.

Failure to take into account 'strategic retirement' leads to inflated estimates of the incumbent electoral advantage. The one attempt to address this issue in the context of US House elections implies that much of the supposed incumbency advantage and most of its presumed increase over time are illusory (Cox and Katz, 2002). This paper identifies possible problems with the Cox and Katz (2002) method and develops a new approach based on simulating the counterfactual condition of incumbents standing for re-election rather than retiring. The results show that when the bias induced by strategic retirement is removed, much of the apparent incumbency advantage and its increase over time remain evident.

Failure to take into account 'strategic retirement' leads to inflated estimates of the incumbent electoral advantage. The one attempt to address this issue in the context of US House elections implies that much of the supposed incumbency advantage and most of its presumed increase over time are illusory (Cox and Katz, 2002). This paper identifies possible problems with the Cox and Katz (2002) method and develops a new approach based on simulating the counterfactual condition of incumbents standing for re-election rather than retiring. The results show that when the bias induced by strategic retirement is removed, much of the apparent incumbency advantage and its increase over time remain evident. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Ltd., copyright holder.]

AbstractThis article demonstrates that racial prejudice was strongly related
to the state-level nonblack vote in the 2008 presidential election,
which featured the first African American candidate from a major
party, Barack Obama. Additional tests show that while prejudice also
explains shifts in the nonblack vote between 2004 and 2008, its
influence on voting in the 2000 and 2004 elections was modest at
best. Furthermore, there is no relationship between racial attitudes
and state-level presidential approval of George Bush in 2008. Taken
together, the findings suggest that prejudice does not have a
pervasive influence on political behavior and opinion. Instead, the
effect appears to have been triggered by the presence of Barack
Obama on the ballot. Had there been less prejudice among the
American voting public, Obama would likely have won an electoral
vote landslide.

This paper analyzes the influence of the two most commonly examined causes of presidential vote choice, policy preferences and party identification. The focus is on change across elections in order to assess how the effects of issues and partisanship respond to the larger political context in which voters make their decisions. In contrast to party centric views of politics, I find little direct responsiveness to party issue contrast and substantial influence of candidate issue contrast. Further, I find that leading hypotheses for the "resurgence in partisanship" are not consistent with some important facts suggesting that the explanation remains elusive.