Suchergebnisse

Does campaign duration affect election outcomes? To date, this question has largely evaded political scientists, but it is reasonable to expect systematic links between campaign length and candidate performance in elections. We hypothesize that longer campaigns would help challengers' electoral fortunes, thereby curbing incumbency advantage and potentially boosting competitiveness in elections. Using two data sources, aggregate data from U.S. House elections between 1994 and 2006 and ANES survey data from the 2002 election cycle, we find little evidence to support contentions that campaign length affects election outcomes or candidate familiarity. The results we report suggest the political consequences, intended or not, to choices about election timing are likely minimal.

Political observers and presidents alike are preoccupied with the notion of presidential legacy. Speculation about how presidential actions will be viewed by future generations weighs heavily on the minds of chief executives as well as historians and analysts who seek to devise standards and techniques by which to measure the concept of legacy. In this article, I examine survey data on retrospective assessments about ex‐presidential performance to examine developments over time. I also develop and empirically test a series of hypotheses to explain level of ex‐presidential approval. I find that the public's retrospective evaluations of former presidential performance in office are linked to presidential approval during their administrations, incumbent presidential approval, whether or not they are deceased, and the length of time former presidents have been out of office.

This article analyzes the evolution of voter preferences in the 2012 presidential election cycle. It also examines the influence of specific events, in order to help explain the dynamics we observe over the course of the campaign. I find considerable evidence of campaign-event effects on aggregate voter preferences in 2012, reinforcing the notion that events help to shape campaign dynamics. Adapted from the source document.

Congressional midterm elections were held in the United States in November 2010. Midterm cycles have historically been unkind to the party of the incumbent president, which has on average lost 24 seats in the U.S. House and 4 seats in the U.S. Senate in midterms during the postwar era. In the 2010 general elections, Democrats, who had enjoyed unified control of the federal government since January 2009, suffered devastating defeats in congressional, gubernatorial, and state legislative races nationwide. Democrats lost a total of 63 seats in the U.S House of Representatives—a loss greater than in any other midterm in the postwar period—relinquishing control to the GOP for the first time since 2007 and ushering in a new era of divided government in Washington. Republicans also made gains in the U.S. Senate, although Democrats ultimately retained control of the chamber by a narrow margin of 51 to 47 (two independents also caucus with the Democrats).

This article examines campaign dynamics and the evolution of voter preferences for congressional candidates during the 2010 midterm election cycle. Using national pre-election polls of registered voters, I show that there was meaningful change in voter preferences over the course of the campaign and that support for Democratic contenders declined considerably between early March and Election Day. The evidence I present also reveals growing support for Republican contenders was linked to developments during the campaign period. Specifically, the erosion in Obama approval, deterioration in national economic conditions and the passage of the health reform legislation appeared to fuel the Democratic downturn.

Citizens participate in elections, at least partly, because they perceive voting as a social norm. Norms induce compliance because individuals prefer to avoid enforcement mechanisms -- including social sanctions -- that can be activated by uncooperative behavior. Public visibility, or surveillance, increases the likelihood of norm-compliant behavior and applies social pressure that impels individuals to act. Some scholars have linked social pressure to community size, advancing the notion that pressure to conform to social norms is heightened in smaller, less populous communities in which citizens interact frequently and where monitoring behavior is less onerous. Others argue that even highly-populated communities can exhibit "small world" properties that cause residents to be sensitive to social pressure. In this paper, I analyze data from a recent field experiment designed to test the impact of social pressure on voting taking interactions with community size into account. The findings I report suggest community size does not moderate the impact of social pressure. [Copyright Elsevier Ltd.]