The “timeline” method of studying electoral dynamics

[1]  R. Lall.  How Multiple Imputation Makes a Difference , 2016, Political Analysis.

[2]  Mario Callegaro,et al.  Report of the Inquiry into the 2015 British general election opinion polls , 2016 .

[3]  Lena Osterhagen,et al.  Multiple Imputation For Nonresponse In Surveys , 2016 .

[4]  Christopher Wlezien,et al.  The Timeline of Elections: A Comparative Perspective , 2016 .

[5]  Miroslav Dudík,et al.  A comparison of forecasting methods: fundamentals, polling, prediction markets, and experts , 2015 .

[6]  David Rothschild,et al.  Combining forecasts for elections: Accurate, relevant, and timely , 2015 .

[7]  A. Graefe.  German Election Forecasting: Comparing and Combining Methods for 2013 , 2015 .

[8]  Fotios Petropoulos,et al.  Golden Rule of Forecasting : Be Conservative , 2015 .

[9]  Michael S. Lewis-Beck,et al.  US Presidential Election Forecasting , 2014, PS: Political Science & Politics.

[10]  Helmut Norpoth,et al.  The Timeline of Presidential Elections: How Campaigns Do (and Do Not) Matter , 2014 .

[11]  Christopher Wlezien,et al.  Polls and the Vote in Britain , 2013 .

[12]  Andreas Graefe,et al.  Combining Forecasts: An Application to Elections , 2013 .

[13]  L. V. Williams,et al.  Prediction Markets , 2003 .

[14]  G. King,et al.  What to Do about Missing Values in Time‐Series Cross‐Section Data , 2010 .

[15]  Richard Johnston,et al.  Campaign trial heats as electoral information: Evidence from the 2004 and 2006 Canadian federal elections , 2007 .

[16]  Robert S. Erikson,et al.  The Timeline of Presidential Election Campaigns , 2002, The Journal of Politics.

[17]  Campaign Effects in Theory and Practice , 2001 .

[18]  G. King,et al.  Analyzing Incomplete Political Science Data: An Alternative Algorithm for Multiple Imputation , 2001, American Political Science Review.

[19]  James E. Campbell.  The American Campaign: U.S. Presidential Campaigns and the National Vote , 2000 .