Search results

Objective We seek to understand how voters respond to being drawn into a new congressional district: specifically, the new Seventh District of South Carolina created in 2012. Methods We employ data from a survey of voters in the new district, and employ descriptive statistics and logistic regression models to identify whether voters are aware of the new district, whether they expect better representation as a result, and to explain their likely vote choice. Results We find limited awareness of the new district among voters, despite a competitive election campaign, but nonetheless a broad public understanding that redistricting may lead to more local influence in Congress. Conclusions Our results suggest that redistricting efforts that ensure the maintenance of communities of interest to preserve voter-representative links, even if that means deviation from a strict 'one person, one vote' standard, may be superior from a representational standpoint. Adapted from the source document.

ObjectiveWe seek to understand how voters respond to being drawn into a new congressional district: specifically, the new Seventh District of South Carolina created in 2012.MethodsWe employ data from a survey of voters in the new district, and employ descriptive statistics and logistic regression models to identify whether voters are aware of the new district, whether they expect better representation as a result, and to explain their likely vote choice.ResultsWe find limited awareness of the new district among voters, despite a competitive election campaign, but nonetheless a broad public understanding that redistricting may lead to more local influence in Congress.ConclusionsOur results suggest that redistricting efforts that ensure the maintenance of communities of interest to preserve voter‐representative links, even if that means deviation from a strict "one person, one vote" standard, may be superior from a representational standpoint.

Using data from an unusual survey, we gauge factors influencing support for a state anti-gay rights referendum. After controlling for other powerful predictors of attitudes, we find personal contact (especially relevant and voluntary contact) has an important impact on public support, although community context does not. These findings support an integrated notion of interactions with 'out' groups, grounded in social categorization theory, that sees community context and interpersonal contact as concentric circles, moving from abstract, detached forms of contact to more pronounced, personal forms. However, even among those with substantial interpersonal contact, support for the referendum was still widespread. Adapted from the source document.

Using data from an unusual survey, we gauge factors influencing support for a state anti—gay rights referendum. After controlling for other powerful predictors of attitudes, we find personal contact (especially relevant and voluntary contact) has an important impact on public support, although community context does not. These findings support an integrated notion of interactions with "out" groups, grounded in social categorization theory, that sees community context and interpersonal contact as concentric circles, moving from abstract, detached forms of contact to more pronounced, personal forms. However, even among those with substantial interpersonal contact, support for the referendum was still widespread.

This article is a case study of the influential South Carolina presidential primary. Starting in 1972, primaries and caucuses became the selection process for nominating the major parti) presidential nominees and in 1980 South Carolina was the first southern state to hold its Republicanprimary. The Palmetto State established itself as "First in the South"for casting votes in Democratic and Republican presidential primaries and its early placement on the primary calendar gives it an outsied role in the selection of eventual nominees. We provide an overview of all the Democratic and Republican contests in South Carolina dating back to 1980 and then illustrate the remarkable demographic changes that have recently occurred within these parties' primary electorates. Next, we examine voter preferences among likely 2016 South Carolina primary voters with survey data from the Winthrop Poll. Fast, we conclude with a synopsis of why South Carolina has been and likely will continue to play a pivotal role in presidential nomination contests.

ABSTRACTIn a time of unprecedented racial polarization in partisan voting, and in a staunchly Republican Deep South state, one black Republican managed to reach the pinnacle of public office. This article examines Tim Scott's rise by analyzing precinct-level data to better understand his 2010 election to the US House and data from the Winthrop Poll to explore his more recent US Senate victory. To better understand support for Scott, we also report results from an embedded-survey experiment to assess respondents' favorability toward Scott when he is characterized by two different frames: (1) "Tea Party favorite," and (2) "first African American Senator from South Carolina since Reconstruction." We found that conservatives, evangelicals, and less-educated individuals respond more positively to Scott when he is described as a "Tea Party favorite." More than an intriguing case study, Scott's rise tells a broader story of the complicated relationships among race, ideology, and partisanship in the contemporary American South.

AbstractHistory has shown that voters tend to support candidates of their own race. This reality has proven particularly challenging for black candidates who have often had difficulty running for office in majority white electorates. However, the vast majority of research on this topic has focused on minority Democrats, not minority Republicans. In this study, we take advantage of a unique set of circumstances in South Carolina's (SC's) 2014 elections where voters had the opportunity to cast ballots for an Indian-American Republican Governor and an African-American Republican Senator. Additionally, the presence of a white Republican Senator seeking reelection provides an important comparison case for determining if there is significant variation in support of these candidates given their different racial profiles, but shared party affiliation. Using unique data from The Winthrop Poll, we find that the determinants of approving of, and voting for, minority Republican candidates, are quite similar to support for the white Republican candidate. It appears that party and ideology are foremost in guiding approval and vote choice decisions among voters in contemporary American politics. Hence, even in SC, support for minority Republicans approximates that given to a white Republican.