Suchergebnisse

"This comprehensive reference covers all aspects of politics and voting--from elections and campaigns, to major political figures and parties, to the role of media and major activist groups. Includes 220 alphabetically arranged entries on American voting and related topics. Features maps and tables that provide insights into American voting trends in the 21st century. Covers the evolution of the legal right to vote. Traces the changing population of the United States and its impact on voting"--

"If we think of votes as 'votes for' candidates, then it would make some sense to declare any candidate who wins only a plurality of votes, but not a majority, as the victor." ~ Donald J. Boudreaux

The level of electoral turnout is arguably the most widely monitored form of electoral participation. Consequently, electoral systems have often been cited as having a significant effect on turnout levels even though scholars do not agree on the effects of these complex institutions. Since most previous studies have relied on categorical or dichotomous electoral system indicators, this study utilizes Carey and Shugart's personal vote index to gain theoretical leverage on other electoral system components. In short, I find that where electoral competition is predicated on party, rather than candidates', reputations, turnout levels rise. The results of a time-series cross-sectional analysis reveal that the personal vote index significantly influences turnout levels even when controlling for a host of other factors. [Copyright Elsevier Ltd.]

Die Autorin untersucht die Unterschiede in der Wahlbeteiligung auf subnationaler Ebene bei allgemeinen Wahlen in Ghana. Sie verwendet einen Fallstudienansatz mit gemischten Methoden, bei dem quantitative und qualitative Daten kombiniert werden, um eingehende Nachweise für drei systematische Wahlkreise mit unterschiedlich hoher Wahlbeteiligung zu erbringen. Die Ergebnisse der Studie stellen die strikte Anwendung der Rational-Choice-Theorie in Frage, um ein umfassendes Verständnis der Gründe für eine unterschiedliche Wahlbeteiligung zu liefern. Das Buch entwickelt hingegen ein Modell für individuellen und kollektiven Nutzen, der das "conceptofutility" erweitert, um Unterschiede in der Wahlbeteiligung zu erklären. Die Schlussfolgerungen aus dem Buch heben die Bedeutung des lokalen Kontexts für die Prägung des Wählerverhaltens hervor und unterstreichen die Vorrangigkeit der lokalen politischen Dynamik.

"This book examines the changing relationship between social class and voting behavior in contemporary America. At the end of the 20th century, working-class white voters were significantly more Democratic than their middle-class counterparts, as they had been since the 1930s. By the second decade of the 21st century, that long-standing relationship had reversed: Republicans now do better among working-class whites. While Trump accentuated this trend, the change began before 2016, something that has not been fully appreciated or understood. Charles Prysby analyzes this development in American politics in a way that is understandable to a wide audience, not just scholars in this field. Drawing on a wealth of survey data, this study describes and explains the root-cause of the change that has taken place over the past two decades, identifying how social class is directly related to partisan choice. Attitudes on race and immigration, on social and moral issues, and on economic and social welfare policies are all part of the explanation of this 21st century development in American political trends. Rich Voter, Poor Voter, Red Voter, Blue Voter: Social Class and Voting Behavior in Contemporary America is essential reading for scholars, students, and all others with an interest in American elections and voting behavior"--

The scholarship regarding vote centers primarily focuses on their impact on voter turnout. Though previous literature suggests modest and conditional increases in voter participation, the mechanism by which vote centers increase participation is less understood. One suggested mechanism is that they provide voters a better experience at the polling place. In this article, we investigate whether voters who cast their ballot at vote centers have a better experience than those who vote at traditional precinct polling places. Utilizing a unique dataset collected from exit polls of Election Day voters before and after the implementation of vote centers in Harris County, Texas, we examine if vote centers improved the voters' experience. Contrary to theoretical expectations, we find that those who voted at a vote center reported having a more negative experience. This negative experience is driven primarily by longer lines and less helpful poll workers.

Results from a new experiment shed light on the effects of voter information on vote buying and incumbent advantage. The treatment provided voters with information about a major spending program and the proposed allocations and promises of mayoral candidates just prior to municipal elections. It left voters more knowledgeable about candidates' proposed policies and increased the salience of spending, but did not affect vote shares and turnout. Treated voters were more likely to be targeted for vote buying. We develop a model of vote buying that accounts for these results. The information raised voter expectations regarding incumbent performance, especially in incumbent strongholds. Incumbents increased vote buying in response. Consistent with this explanation, both knowledge and vote buying impacts were higher in mu-nicipalities with dominant incumbents. Our findings show that, in a political environment where vote buying is the currency of electoral mobilization, incumbent efforts to increase voter welfare may take the form of greater vote buying.