Suchergebnisse

This essay responds to arguments made by Roderick P. Hart about how campaigns should be evaluated and argues that the 2016 election was not a fine campaign. It discusses the merits of "republican" criteria for evaluating campaign quality and contends that some of the new criteria proposed by Hart are useful insofar as they serve these republican ideals. The essay ends by arguing that even if scholars were to adopt Hart's proposed standards for evaluating campaign quality, the 2016 campaign fell short of being grand.

Previous studies suggest that vice presidential candidates have little impact on the presidential vote. Using data from the 2008 National Annenberg Election Survey (NAES), the author examines the extent to which the vice presidential selections from the two major parties had an impact on the presidential vote in 2008. The results show that vice presidential nominees' favorability ratings were significantly related to vote preference. In addition, the results show that the contributions of the vice presidential nominee ratings on vote choice varied across the campaign, suggesting that campaign events primed the importance of the vice presidential candidates at different moments. Ultimately, Governor Sarah Palin did not help the Republican ticket.

Emphasis is on knowledge gained during political campaigns with the increase of the electorate's political attention. Campaigns offer voters a chance to make decisions about the public interest, with candidates voicing their positions on the pertinent issues. Explored here is the matter of how questions measuring citizens' knowledge of candidates' issue positions ought to be posed. Findings indicate that researchers can inquire about two candidates within one question rather than seeking separate answers for single candidates. Drawing on survey data from the 2000 US presidential election, two strategies for posing questions are evaluated: the separated format & the combined format. 2 Tables, 1 Figure, 8 References. K. Coddon

Prior research on political knowledge has found repeatedly that women do not perform as well as men on political affairs questions. The present study analyzed survey responses collected between 14 Dec 1999 & 8 Mar 2000 on political knowledge items about the issue positions & backgrounds of candidates Bradley, Gore, & McCain. Even when several sociodemographic variables were controlled for, gender was a significant predictor of political knowledge. Not only were women more likely than men to say they did not know the answer to a question, but they were also more likely to answer incorrectly when giving a substantive response. 4 References. Adapted from the source document.

This study examines how news coverage of terrorist threats affects emotions that then shape support for antiterrorism policies, presidential approval, and attitudes toward Muslims. Using a national sample, news stories were experimentally manipulated to emphasize terrorist threats (high/low) and depictions of U.S. military strength (high/low). Results show that group-based anger-when people thought about themselves as Americans-mediated the relationships between threat coverage and antiterrorism policies, whereas group-based fear did not. On the other hand, group-based fear mediated the relationship between threat coverage and negative attitudes toward Muslims, whereas group-based anger did not. When people thought about themselves as individuals, neither anger nor fear mediated these relationships. ; Open access journal ; This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.

This study examines how news coverage of terrorist threats affects emotions that then shape support for antiterrorism policies, presidential approval, and attitudes toward Muslims. Using a national sample, news stories were experimentally manipulated to emphasize terrorist threats (high/low) and depictions of U.S. military strength (high/low). Results show that group-based anger—when people thought about themselves as Americans—mediated the relationships between threat coverage and antiterrorism policies, whereas group-based fear did not. On the other hand, group-based fear mediated the relationship between threat coverage and negative attitudes toward Muslims, whereas group-based anger did not. When people thought about themselves as individuals, neither anger nor fear mediated these relationships.

In 2004, the vote margin between the major party presidential candidates was slim but wider than in 2000, leading scholars, pundits, and politicians to ask: among which demographic groups did George W. Bush specifically and the Republican party more generally make gains? Using data from the 2000 and 2004 National Annenberg Election Surveys (NAES), we examine the extent to which Bush and the Republicans made gains among an increasingly important group and growing segment of the U.S. population, Hispanic Americans. Results from the NAES demonstrate that Bush made inroads with Hispanics in 2004. While Bush improved his support among Hispanics, Hispanic party identification in 2004 was comparable to identification in 2000.

Objective.This article examines how issue saliency affects the public's perceptions of whether a man or a woman would make a better president when considering the most important problem facing the nation.Method.The study uses telephone survey data of adults in the United States collected by the Annenberg Public Policy Center in September 2003. Multinominial logistic regression models were conducted to parse out the effects of issue saliency on presidential gender preference while taking demographic characteristics and party identification into account.Results.People who said that terrorism, homeland security, and/or U.S. involvement in Iraq was the most important problem facing the nation were more likely to say that a man would do a better job handling the issue as president.Conclusion.This study finds that issue saliency affects presidential gender preference above and beyond demographic and party identification variables.