Suchergebnisse

This article reports the results of a randomized field experiment designed to compare directly the mobilization impact of partisan versus nonpartisan messages delivered via commercial phone banks. The experiment, conducted during the November 2005 municipal elections in Albany, New York, incorporates a series of design innovations to improve on extant research and to assuage skepticism about the internal and external validity of previous studies conducted along these lines. The author finds that partisan messages delivered by professional call centers are no more effective than nonpartisan messages in mobilizing voters.

Few aspects of the presidential selection process have changed as dramatically as nominating conventions have over the past half century or so. Once the epicenters of the proverbial smoke-filled rooms that all but decided presidential nominations, some argue that conventions are now mainly superficial, perfunctory and even superfluous affairs. These developments, influenced in large part by the ways in which political parties have adapted to institutional changes and growth in mass media, have essentially transformed the nature and role of conventions in modern campaigns. But conventions remain key political events that motivate and inform voters and that have the capacity to influence the dynamics of presidential campaigns. Conventions still matter and persist as useful political institutions.

Few aspects of the presidential selection process have changed as dramatically as nominating conventions have over the past half century or so. Once the epicenters of the proverbial smoke-filled rooms that all but decided presidential nominations, some argue that conventions are now mainly superficial, perfunctory and even superfluous affairs. These developments, influenced in large part by the ways in which political parties have adapted to institutional changes and growth in mass media, have essentially transformed the nature and role of conventions in modern campaigns. But conventions remain key political events that motivate and inform voters and that have the capacity to influence the dynamics of presidential campaigns. Conventions still matter and persist as useful political institutions. Adapted from the source document.

Are presidential approval and the level of approval of key administration officials linked? Previous findings reveal scant evidence of such a relationship and suggest presidential and subordinate approval are independently derived. This article examines this question further by assessing Americans' attitudes toward the secretaries of state during the George W. Bush presidency. I find no evidence of a causal connection between impressions of presidential performance and approval of the secretary of state or vice versa. Cabinet member approval appears to be driven by media coverage of their activities rather than the macropartisanship or economic performance that influence presidential approval.

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has been characterized simultaneously as a central political figure in the executive branch as well as one of the most controversial and contentious cabinet members of the Bush administration. This article assesses Americans' impressions of Secretary Rumsfeld's job performance and reveals that evaluations of Secretary Rumsfeld's performance have steadily declined since 2001. Over the same period, President Bush's approval ratings have dwindled, although the evidence I present indicates no relationship exists between the two. The broader implications of this research suggest that public evaluations of a president's key subordinates may not necessarily influence levels of presidential approval.

The terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001, fueled widespread concern & speculation about mounting Islamophobic sentiment among Americans in response to the events. To monitor developments in opinions about Muslims & Arabs (both living in the United States & abroad) & attitudes toward the Islamic faith, survey organizations began to assess more regularly Americans' attitudes on these topics. I analyze developments in public sentiment about Arab & Muslim Americans & Islam in the age of the war on terror using available public opinion data. The data analyses in this study suggest that Americans possess lingering resentment & reservations about Arab & Muslim Americans. The evidence also reveals low levels of awareness about basic elements of Islam but growing anxiety about Islam's (especially Islamic fundamentalism's) compatibility with Western values of tolerance, acceptance, & civility. Some of the sharpest movement in opinion dynamics we observe is in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, but opinion levels stabilize shortly thereafter. Monitoring these developments as the war on terror continues is crucial. Appendixes, References. Adapted from the source document.

Discusses rising obesity in America. Appendixes, References.