Suchergebnisse

AbstractDuring the past decade the United States has seen an increase in alternative forms
to Election Day voting, including voting by mail. Voting by mail has spurred a
number of studies concerning the effects it has on voter turnout and other aspects
of voting. However, one important facet of voting by mail has not been examined—when
people decide to send in their vote. Because ballots are mailed out weeks before the
election, voting by mail creates, in effect, a rolling Election Day. This could have
profound effects for campaigns as candidates must determine when to use campaign
resources and campaign to an electorate who might have already voted. Using data
from the 2008 general election in Washington State, this study examines when voters
turned in their ballots and determines if age, partisanship, or other factors play a
role in the timing of turning in a ballot.

A strong disapproval among the electorate of both major party challengers is one common explanation for the periodic emergence of major third party presidential candidates in the United States. Simply put, if neither candidate is acceptable, then another candidate will find support among a large portion of the voters. However, this is not necessarily the case. Because modern third party candidates are political entrepreneurs, these candidates will look for fragmentation in the party coalitions and exploit them. Using data from the American National Elections Study, this article will disaggregate the data on feelings about the two major party candidates and who supports them. In doing so, it finds third party candidates tend to emerge when the incumbent president is politically weak and unpopular among both the nation as a whole and their party in particular, regardless of the standing of the other major party challenger. It also finds the idea that people turn to third party candidates after rejecting the two major party candidates is incorrect. Rather, people turn to a third party candidate only if they are disaffected with their party's nominee. Voters who are unsatisfied with their own party's candidate would rather look for another alternative and support a third party candidate than vote for the opposition party. This indicates partisanship among the electorate has been stronger since 1968 then previously believed.

A strong disapproval among the electorate of both major party challengers is one common explanation for the periodic emergence of major third party presidential candidates in the United States. Simply put, if neither candidate is acceptable, then another candidate will find support among a large portion of the voters. However, this is not necessarily the case. Because modem third party candidates arc political entrepreneurs, these candidates will look for fragmentation in the party coalitions & exploit them. Using data from the American National Elections Study, this article will disaggregate the data on feelings about the two major party candidates & who supports them. In doing so, it finds third party candidates tend to emerge when the incumbent president is politically weak & unpopular among both the nation as a whole & their party in particular, regardless of the standing of the other major party challenger. It also finds the idea that people turn to third party candidates after rejecting the two major party candidates is incorrect. Rather, people turn to a third party candidate only if they are disaffected with their party's nominee. Voters who are unsatisfied with their own party's candidate would rather look for another alternative & support a third party candidate than vote for the opposition party. This indicates partisanship among the electorate has been stronger since I 968 then previously believed. Adapted from the source document.

This research examines the rapid growth in popularity of Iceland’s Pirate Party (Piratur) by analyzing recent election results and public opinion polling (2013-17) on the popularity and ideological placement of the Pirate Party. We find that most respondents viewed the Pirate Party as centrist, and the majority of the respondents were neutral in their view of the party, although negative assessments rose by 2017.

While legislative polarization at the national level has been carefully examined and largely explained, the causes of polarization in state legislatures have been more elusive. Studies examining factors such as gerrymandering and party primaries as possible explanations have found largely undetectable or at best very modest relationships between these variables and levels of polarization. This paper provides an explanation of state legislative polarization based on socio-economic and demographic factors within the states. Economics and demographics have long played a significant role in understanding party choice, vote choice, the decision to abstain or vote, and support for various policies. Because of this we explore if these factors also influence polarization of state legislatures. Utilizing the Shorr-McCarty polarization data for state legislatures, which provides the differences between the mean Democratic and Republican legislator scores, and controlling for important economic and demographic factors, we explain a significant amount of the polarization existing in state legislatures. These findings present a fascinating look into not only the root causes of polarization in state legislatures, but also point to some fundamental differences in politics and ideology at the state and national levels.

Objective. This article analyzes National Election Study data from the 1996 and 2000 elections in order to explain the increased turnout among blacks in recent presidential elections.Methods. A bivariate analysis of registration and voter turnout across the races is conducted, followed by three probit models of voter turnout, including various demographic and attitudinal variables.Results. Our findings show that more blacks were registered to vote, and more registered blacks actually voted in 2000 than in 1996. We also found that political cynicism, or distrust, appears to increase the propensity of blacks to vote, in direct contrast to the behavior of white respondents. Inefficacy has less effect on black turnout, although it depresses turnout among whites.Conclusions. These findings underscore an important difference between racial groups with regard to the effect of attitudinal factors on voter turnout. Political cynicism can serve to mobilize blacks, while feelings of internal and external inefficacy had little effect on black turnout in these elections.

Objective. This article analyzes National Election Study data from the 1996 & 2000 elections in order to explain the increased turnout among blacks in recent presidential elections. Methods. A bivariate analysis of registration & voter turnout across the races is conducted, followed by three probit models of voter turnout, including various demographic & attitudinal variables. Results. Our findings show that more blacks were registered to vote, & more registered blacks actually voted in 2000 than in 1996. We also found that political cynicism, or distrust, appears to increase the propensity of blacks to vote, in direct contrast to the behavior of white respondents. Inefficacy has less effect on black turnout, although it depresses turnout among whites. Conclusions. These findings underscore an important difference between racial groups with regard to the effect of attitudinal factors on voter turnout. Political cynicism can serve to mobilize blacks, while feelings of internal & external inefficacy had little effect on black turnout in these elections. 1 Table, 1 Figure, 33 References. Adapted from the source document.

Objective. This article analyzes National Election Study data from the 1996 and 2000 elections in order to explain the increased turnout among blacks in recent presidential elections. Methods. A bivariate analysis of registration and voter turnout across the races is conducted, followed by three probit models of voter turnout, including various demographic and attitudinal variables. Results. Our findings show that more blacks were registered to vote, and more registered blacks actually voted in 2000 than in 1996. We also found that political cynicism, or distrust, appears to increase the propensity of blacks to vote, in direct contrast to the behavior of white respondents. Inefficacy has less effect on black turnout, although it depresses turnout among whites. Conclusions. These findings underscore an important difference between racial groups with regard to the effect of attitudinal factors on voter turnout. Political cynicism can serve to mobilize blacks, while feelings of internal and external inefficacy had little effect on black turnout in these elections. (Original abstract)

In this volume, scholars from across the United States come together to discuss the most recent wave of redistricting Congress. Emphasizing the state-level factors and processes, the volume ultimately shows how national requirements and state requirements come together to permit states to be largely self-responsible for what they do in terms of drawing districts