The proposed article analyzes the motives for voter behaviour before and during the election. It is stated that understanding the patterns of their actions greatly mitigates the surprise of the election results. Recently, political scientists, sociologists, and analysts have learned a great deal about how voters actually make decisions that have a final impact on their choices, how important their views are for understanding democratic responsibility and social well-being. However, these studies have provoked more open-ended questions than answers. In the fall of 2014, the United States held by-elections to Congress. Scientists have another chance to test their versions of the American election results, to monitor the electoral behaviour patterns, to predict the results. Of particular interest, in terms of results, there is the behaviour of a voter known as swing voter. The article analyzes the social status of voters in this group, indicates the possible reasons for changing their electoral positions. Our study is based on a descriptive method and a method of systematic analysis of a number of procedures for collecting, primary analysis, and presentation of data and their characteristics. Administratively, we have focused our attention on the North-Eastern states, the findings of the study should be used responsibly to the situation in other regions of the country. The basic methodology is the most popular in the United States theory of retrospective voting. Its essence is that the political results should correspond to the indicators of competence and efficiency of the elected officials.
This Essay seeks to provide a theoretical framework for conceptualizing this relationship and considering reforms. Part I traces the variation of campaign finance regimes across several political eras and several jurisdictional scales. Strikingly, although similar six-figure campaign finance scandals prompted the reforms of each era, federal lawmakers in each era have drawn progressively lower one-size-fits-all contribution limits and disclosure thresholds. Meanwhile, state campaign finance laws have been more carefully calibrated to reflect the electoral and financial circumstances of particular electoral contests. Part II considers the currently permissible means and ends of campaign finance law and how they constrain the calibration of contribution limits and disclosure thresholds. Part III explains how a recalibration of campaign finance laws in some jurisdictions might bring these regulations into alignment with the constitutional justifications for-and policy goals of-our system of campaign finance laws. Recalibration offers an important opportunity for both opponents and proponents of regulation to ensure a better fit between the means and ends of campaign finance law.
This Essay seeks to provide a theoretical framework for conceptualizing this relationship and considering reforms. Part I traces the variation of campaign finance regimes across several political eras and several jurisdictional scales. Strikingly, although similar six-figure campaign finance scandals prompted the reforms of each era, federal lawmakers in each era have drawn progressively lower one-size-fits-all contribution limits and disclosure thresholds. Meanwhile, state campaign finance laws have been more carefully calibrated to reflect the electoral and financial circumstances of particular electoral contests. Part II considers the currently permissible means and ends of campaign finance law and how they constrain the calibration of contribution limits and disclosure thresholds. Part III explains how a recalibration of campaign finance laws in some jurisdictions might bring these regulations into alignment with the constitutional justifications for-and policy goals of-our system of campaign finance laws. Recalibration offers an important opportunity for both opponents and proponents of regulation to ensure a better fit between the means and ends of campaign finance law.
Description based on: 1876. ; "Why the people want a change. The Republican Party reviewed: its sins of commission and omission. A summary of the leading events in our history under Republican administration." ; Mode of access: Internet.
This report discusses congress and its broad interests in human rights issues in china's far western region. It also points out implication for U.S. Policy and Political and Economic Issues.
The importance of branding has been recognized for a long time in the business. During the last decades also other areas have utilized branding. Usually brands are connected to the long-term value, but there are several business situations where brands are used in temporally restricted conditions. Examples of those are single or recurrent branded campaigns. Varied temporal dimensions have been used in the business research. However, there is no much research on branding from the temporality point of view. The aim of this study is to better understand branding in campaigns, which have temporal restrictions. The phenomenon is approached from three directions. At first, there are studied different brand definitions. In this study the brand is understood as social and dynamic interaction process among stakeholders. Through this process, differentiating attributes and added value are associated with the brand. Another aspect is the temporality theory. In addition to standardized and horizontal time, also episodic and vertical time dimensions are concerned. These are merged with the brand definition to provide the theoretical framework. The brand is added to the temporal view as a process containing events, which are points of vertical dimension, brand interaction. The third approach is through the context of this study, health and political campaigns. They are selected because of their different temporal nature. Health campaigns represent usually single, non-recurrent campaigns, while political campaigns are cyclic and periodic. The campaigns are studied conducting the integrative literature research. The systematic process of searching and evaluating articles is followed by the thematic analysis. The analysis is based on themes included to the theoretical framework: brand, interaction among stakeholders and temporality. The findings of this study show that branding in temporally restricted campaigns is done in phases. There are different objectives and forms of the brand interaction in the each phase. The study also provides a classification for stakeholders for describing different interaction in the phases. Different stakeholder groups participate to brand interaction during the pre- and post-campaign periods, while all groups are participating during the campaign period. The campaign related events can be divided to major and minor. The major events define the periods and the phases of the campaigns, while minor events occur during the periods, but are affecting to the brand.
We theorize the membership, target-selection, and timing of transnational advocacy campaigns as a function of longstanding professional networks between NGOs and individual professional campaigners. Unlike previous scholarship that focuses on the role of powerful "gatekeeper" NGOs whose central position within transnational issue-networks allows them to promote or block specific issues at will, we draw on recent work in sociology and organizational studies to bring into focus a wider community of individuals and organizations whose competition for professional growth and "issue-control" (Henriksen and Seabrooke 2016) shape the transnational advocacy agenda. In doing so we elaborate and qualify existing notions of gatekeeping pioneered by Bob (2005, 2010) and Carpenter (2011, 2014). Highly connected and resource-rich NGOs are often less able to "set" or "vet" agendas than previous scholarship suggests. Instead, porous organizational borders and "revolving doors" imply that advocacy agendas are shaped by professional networks that develop between organizations. Efforts by individual professional staff to steer the agenda towards issues that fit their personal expertise and career ambitions—rather than wider political context or longstanding organizational commitments to specific issues—play a crucial role in transnational agenda-setting.
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.
The tobacco industry gave $9,424,612 in soft and PAC money to federal candidates, political parties and other political action committees in the 2001-2002 election cycle (from January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2002)1. So far in the 2003-2004 election cycle, the tobacco industry has given $665,751 in PAC contributions to federal candidates, political parties and other political action committees. As enacted, the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 prohibits national political parties and federal candidates and officeholders from raising soft money. Therefore, this report refers to soft money donations prior to November 6, 2002. On May 2, 2003, a three-judge panel for the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia issued a mixed ruling on key provisions of the campaign finance law. A final decision on the constitutionality of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, including the ban on soft money fundraising by the national parties, will be decided by Tobacco companies, along with tobacco company executives and employees, donated $6,033,226 in soft money to the Democratic and Republican parties in the 2001-2002 election cycle. Eighty (80) percent of these soft money donations ($4,813,166) went to Republican party committees and 20 percent of the soft money contributions ($1,220,060) went to Democratic party committees. Nearly half (45 percent) of these soft money donations from tobacco companies • In the 2001-2002 election cycle, tobacco company PACs donated $2,408,404 directly to federal candidates, with 77 percent ($1,857,094) of the total donations going to Republican candidates. So far in the 2003-2004 election cycle, these PACs have donated $329,500 directly to federal candidates. Sixty-four (64) percent of these contributions went to Republican candidates.
The 2008 campaign for the presidency has provided American citizens with surprises as well as opportunities in terms of choosing a new president. The long primary season that ran from January to June resulted in nominees - - John McCain (R) and Barack Obama (D) - - who were not the likely winners of their respective parties. As far as Democrats were concerned, Hillary Clinton was the front-runner and heir apparent to the Democratic nomination. On the Republican side, John McCain's faltering campaign in the early months of the primary season suggested that Republicans would end up selecting another nominee. All in all, the primary season provided Americans with a host of candidates one of whom might serve as a "first" - - the first African-American (Barack Obama) the first woman (Hillary Clinton), the first Hispanic (Bill Richardson), the first Morman (Mitt Romney) or the oldest nominee (John McCain).Both parties had a variety of candidates vying for the nomination of their party but it was the Democratic party that provided the most interest among citizens and media pundits alike. The primary contest between Obama and Clinton would test the mettle of both candidates as they crisscrossed the country in their respective attempt to capture delegates for the summer convention. In the end, Obama squeaked out a victory in one of the closest contests in party history. Two questions became inevitable at this point - - namely, would Hillary Clinton campaign for Obama and would supporters of Clinton, especially female voters, support Obama. On the Republican side, Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, Ron Paul were pushed aside, one by one, by a resurgent McCain campaign.Both Obama and McCain have supporters and opponents. While targeting traditional Democratic constituencies, Obama has also focused on the youthful cohort, young people 18-29 years old who have traditionally been ignored or neglected by major party candidates. Obama, however, pursued a campaign similar to that of Bill Clinton in 1992 when he too sought the support of young people. As noted in a recent article in Time Magazine (January 31, 2008), Obama is looking forward to a "youthquake" to help him win the White House. What the Clinton campaign of 1992 and the Obama campaign of 2008 have in common is the likelihood of a very close election and therefore the need to attract and recruit all segments of the American electorate. Of course, as has happened in other campaigns, young people have failed to register to vote and/or have failed to turn up on election day. Critics have argued that Obama lacks executive experience in general and in foreign policy in particular. McCain has a following among those who like his "maverick" approach to politics and willingness to buck even his own party when necessary. He was also a POW during the Vietnam War that has given him sympathy among citizens and members of the armed forces. On the other hand, McCain has been in a similar situation as George Bush (the father) - - namely conservatives who idolized Ronald Reagan were not so eager to give their support to Bush (the father) and two decades later, they have had second thoughts about the conservative credentials of McCain.Obama's and McCain's choice of running mate added excitement to the presidential contest. The junior senator from Illinois selected the longtime senator from Delaware, Joe Biden, as his running mate. By choosing Biden, Obama added a senator who had valuable experience in two very important aspects of American Politics - - namely, a legislator who had a clear understanding about the operation of the U.S. Senate and one who had foreign policy experience. In contrast, John McCain, who some thought would choose Romney to shore up his lack of expertise on economic matters, chose instead Sarah Palin, a relatively unknown governor of Alaska as his partner in the presidential contest. By choosing Palin, McCain shook up the race by attempting to bolster his support among conservatives with a very conservative running mate and to appeal to female voters by adding a woman to the Republican ticket for the first time in history. While Biden was well known among politicos and media pundits, Palin was a novelty - - unknown and therefore the likely target of media attention. Where Democrats questioned and criticized McCain's choice of Palin, Republicans, especially conservative Republicans, were very enthusiastic about her which helped to bolster the McCain-Palin ticket in the short term. Inevitably, however, both vice-presidential candidates were scrutinized since both carried "baggage" into the presidential contest. Biden has a history of verbal errors and has been criticized for "plagiarizing" comments used by other public officials. Palin has been accused of heavy-handed politics even by fellow Republicans in Alaska and with less than 50 days left in the run up to the election, she is involved in a troubling scandal involving allegations that she used her power as governor to fire the "top cop" in Alaska because he refused to fire an Alaska state trooper who divorced Palin's sister.One of the fascinating aspects of the 2008 presidential campaign is the involvement of a large number of young people - - the so-called Millenium generation - - who have been mobilized in a way not seen since young people worked to lower the voting age from 21 to 18 in the early 1970s. Although about 55% of young people voted in the 1972 presidential election, voter turnout among members of the youthful cohort has declined over the years (except for a slight upward bump in 1992) dropping to 32% during the 2000 presidential election. However, young people once again began to show interest in the electoral process and their participation increased in the 2004 and 2006 elections to about 42%. What makes this demographic important is that young people 18-29 make up approximately 44 million potential voters - - about 20% of the American electorate. Both issues and technology have played a role in energizing young people. The economy and jobs, along with terrorism and the war in Iraq, constitute the major issues identified by them in recent polls, the same issues of concern to older voters. Where younger and older voters diverge is found in the types of technology used by young voters and employed by the Obama campaign, in particular, to reach out to them. This form of communication includes Facebook and YouTube among others. It is interesting to note that young people are not a solid block with about a third identifying as Democrats, a third identifying as Republicans and a third identifying as Independents. If the youthful cohort is paying more attention to this election and has demonstrated an upward turn in participation as shown by increased turnout in the 2008 primary season, young people have the potential to play an important role in the 2008 presidential election. In fact, three out of four young people, 18-29, feel that the country is headed in the wrong direction, an indicator not good for the legacy of the Bush administration or the prospects of the McCain campaign, at least among this youthful constituency.Eight years ago, the Bush Administration inherited a balanced budget, a budget surplus and a country at peace. However, life in the U.S. changed on 9/11 but more importantly in March 2003 with the invasion of Iraq by the U.S. Moreover, the economy has deteriorated with huge budget and trade deficits, home foreclosures, infrastructure needs and the collapse of financial institutions. Against a backdrop of a very unpopular Republican president, a country at war and economic deterioration, the McCain-Obama presidential contest has taken on added importance making the 2008 presidential election very consequential for the American electorate.As the McCain and Obama campaigns are engaged in the race for the presidency, each candidate will have the opportunity to speak directly to the American people in three debates. It is very likely that the first debate on September 26 in Oxford, Mississippi will draw a large audience tuning in to watch and compare the candidates. Moreover, the one and only debate taking place in St. Louis, Missouri on October 2 between vice presidential candidates, Biden and Palin, will also draw a large audience in an effort to better understand and evaluate the candidates who might be only a heart beat away from becoming president.By September 2008 the race between Obama and McCain is considered very close as reflected by national polls and the electoral college map of states. While national polls are interesting they are not helpful since the U.S. does not select its president by the popular vote. Instead, we need to look at each state and where it falls in terms of its electoral vote allotment. In short, the country is still divided in terms of red and blue states although each campaign is trying to flip some states to their side.By mid-September, according to Cable News Network (CNN), Obama has 223 electoral votes from states that are strongly on his side or leaning toward him while McCain has 200 electoral votes from states that are strongly on his side or leaning toward him. With 538 electoral votes in play, Obama or McCain will need to secure 270 of these votes to win the election.Although there are some states where there is the possibility of reversal from one party to the other, the real focus of attention is on the handful of competitive or "battleground" states that include mid-Atlantic Virginia that hasn't voted Democratic since supporting Lyndon Johnson in 1964 but now finds itself with the McCain and Obama camps currently locked in a tight race. Large electoral states in play include Florida, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Minnesota. Western states that are important to both Obama and McCain are Colorado and Nevada. Small but not to be ignored is New Hampshire in the New England region of the U.S. The important point is that, taken together, these states have 115 electoral votes that are important to winning the White House.As the 2008 presidential campaign unfolds, the results will be important not only for American citizens but also for the international community. Professor of Political Science Old Dominion University Norfolk, Virginia USA
Concerns over financing federal elections have become a seemingly perennial aspect of our political system, long centered on the enduring issues of high campaign costs and reliance on interest groups for needed campaign funds. This report contains a summary of campaign finance, recent developments, the evolution of the current system, campaign finance practices and related issues, perceived loopholes in current law, policy options, legislative actions of the 108th and 109th Congresses, and related materials.
This paper characterizes the optimal advertising strategy of candidates in an election campaign, where groups of heterogeneous voters are targeted through media outlets. We discuss its effects on the implemented policy and relate it to the well-documented increase in polarization. Additionally, we empirically establish that polarization displays electoral cycles. These cycles emerge in the model as candidates find it optimal to cater to different groups of voters and thus to adjust policies. Further, technologies that allow targeting voters more precisely tend to increase polarization. Our prediction is confirmed empirically as an increase in internet penetration leads to higher polarization.
The results of the 2008 election cycle were historic. After all of the votes were tallied, Senator Barack Obama garnered more votes than his principal opponent, Senator John McCain. Although the election brought the first African-American president to Washington, there is a lot more to the story. Congressional campaigns are often overshadowed by the presidential campaign and thereby left out of the post-election discussion. This is a mistake. Campaigns for House and Senate seats are just as important to how the nation will move ahead on serious issues in the coming years. Congress, after all, is responsible for delivering to President Obama the legislation that makes up his agenda. In 2008 congressional Democrats increased their margins in both the House and the Senate and returned the Democratic Party to unified control of government. The articles in this special issue of the American Review of Politics examine six important congressional campaigns and help tell the story of the 2008 election, beyond Barack Obamas historic victory.
The 3rd meeting of the W-STEM ERASMUS + Capacity-building in Higher Education European Project (Ref. 598923-EPP-1-2018-1-ES-EPPKA2-CBHE-JP) had scheduled to be held in Guadalajara (Mexico). The COVID-19 pandemic did not allow us to meet face-to-face, and we decided to organize the meeting online on January 12-14, 2021. The guidelines for making the posters of the attraction campaigns were presented in this meeting. ; W-STEM (Building the future of Latin America: engaging women into STEM) is a project funded under European Union ERASMUS + Capacity-building in Higher Education Programme (598923-EPP-1-2018-1-ES-EPPKA2-CBHE-JP) The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsement of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein
