Suchergebnisse

Over four decades of research show that presidential debates make it possible for viewers to learn about the issues and form opinions about the character of the candidates running for office, but whether this long-lived finding would hold true in 2016 was open to doubt. In this article, we draw on panel survey data gathered from viewers of the first and third 2016 general election presidential debates to document across time changes in knowledge of issue positions, beliefs about candidate qualifications and character, and perceptions that, if elected, a candidate would or would not pose a threat to the well-being of the nation. We find that viewers of postdebate coverage of the 2016 general election debates exhibited increased knowledge, but viewing the debates or the postdebate coverage had little effect on assessment of either candidate qualifications or perceptions of whether candidates would threaten the nation's well-being, if elected.

Data from the National Annenberg Election Survey (NAES) show that during the 2004 presidential election campaign, party affiliation was not entirely stable. The gap between Democrats and Republicans narrowed, continuing a pattern evident in the 2000 NAES. However, the Democrats retained their edge in party identification. Demographically, Republican party identification grew most among white evangelical Protestants. Slight gains were made among men and women. An analysis of party breakdown by state shows Republicans made significant gains in southern states but also grew in Maine and Oregon. The Democratic party made gains in a handful of states around the country.

Data from the National Annenberg Election Survey (NAES) show that during the 2004 presidential election campaign, party affiliation was not entirely stable. The gap between Democrats & Republicans narrowed, continuing a pattern evident in the 2000 NAES. However, the Democrats retained their edge in party identification. Demographically, Republican party identification grew most among white evangelical Protestants. Slight gains were made among men & women. An analysis of party breakdown by state shows Republicans made significant gains in southern states but also grew in Maine & Oregon. The Democratic party made gains in a handful of states around the country. 5 Tables, 1 Figure, 1 Appendix, 10 References. Adapted from the source document.

Long before the political conventions of 2004, the Kerry and Bush campaigns and their surrogates were laying the groundwork for the fall campaign with heavy ad buys. Some of the assertions made on each side were misleading. Here we explore three misleading claims made on each side in the weeks following the effective end of the 2004 primary season and ask, Did they work? If so, with whom? Results from the National Annenberg Election Survey show that some of these misleading claims about George W. Bush and John Kerry were believed by a majority of citizens. Democrats were more likely to believe deceptive claims about Bush, whereas Republicans were more likely to embrace deceptive claims about Kerry. The claim that "George W. Bush favors sending American jobs overseas" gained traction in battleground states, even when demographic variables and party identification were taken into consideration.

ObjectiveOne explanation for why voters' preferences are privileged by policymakers is that voters are likely to communicate their preferences through additional avenues as well. We examine this "communication hypothesis" by comparing the policy preferences of different types of political participators.MethodsWe analyze the National Annenberg Election Survey (2008) using latent class analysis to identify different types of political participators and multinomial logistic regression to compare the policy preferences of these participator types.ResultsVoters who also engage in additional online and/or offline political acts have policy preferences that differ in a number of meaningful ways from those who "only" vote.ConclusionThe findings indicate that prior research has overlooked important evidence on the connection between citizen participation and political outcomes due to a primary focus on the act of voting. This study suggests how future research can assess the impact of citizens' broader patterns of political participation.

In 2000, 2004, and 2008 the Annenberg Public Policy Center (APPC) utilized the rolling cross‐section National Annenberg Election Survey (NAES) to analyze changes in self‐identified party affiliation across the course of the campaigns. Using APPC's Institutions of Democracy 2012 Political Knowledge 6‐wave telephone survey, conducted during the final two months of the campaign and immediately following the election, we compared shifts in party affiliation to comparable periods in those prior three elections. The analysis of the relatively shortened periods, examined as cross‐sections, show a more fixed affiliation. Nonetheless, there is variability from election to election especially among self‐identified Independents.

To examine the effects of the 2008 Obama campaign's targeted media effort aimed at Latino voters, we married 2008 campaign media data from multiple sources to survey data on registered Latino voters in Nevada and Arizona to examine the specific impact of advertisement buys on that population. In the presence of controls, Obama's media spending advantage over McCain had a significant and positive relationship with an Obama vote. When looking at local broadcast, cable and radio specifically, we find a significant relationship between spending differentials on local broadcast advertising and vote intention but not between spending differentials on radio and cable buys.