今日推荐

1980

The New American Voter

In this study, Warren E. Miller and J. Merrill Shanks present a comprehensive, authoritative analysis of American voting patterns from 1952 through the early 1990s, with special emphasis on the 1992 election, based on data collected by the National Election Studies. For example, Miller and Shanks reveal that: the loudly trumpeted "dealignment" of the 1970s and 1980s, along with the decline in voter turnout, was in fact an acute "nonalignment" and noninvolvement of new cohorts entering the electorate; the social correlates of the Republican/Democratic divisions on party identification among Southern voters have changed dramatically over a 40-year period; enduring cultural and ideological predispositions play a major role in shaping voters' reactions to election campaigns and their choice for President; personalities of presidential candidates and their poisitions on campaign issues tend to matter far less than is often claimed; and Perot's appeal in 1992 can be attributed to the same factors that distinguished between supporters of Clinton and Bush. In an analysis of individual elections and long-term trends, and of changes within regions, ethnic groups and gender and age categories, "The New American Voter" presents a social and economic picture of partisanship and participation in the American electoral process.

2008 - The Journal of Politics

Is Polarization a Myth?

This article uses data from the American National Election Studies and national exit polls to test Fiorina's assertion that ideological polarization in the American public is a myth. Fiorina argues that twenty-first-century Americans, like the midtwentieth-century Americans described by Converse, “are not very well-informed about politics, do not hold many of their views very strongly, and are not ideological” (2006, 19). However, our evidence indicates that since the 1970s, ideological polarization has increased dramatically among the mass public in the United States as well as among political elites. There are now large differences in outlook between Democrats and Republicans, between red state voters and blue state voters, and between religious voters and secular voters. These divisions are not confined to a small minority of activists—they involve a large segment of the public and the deepest divisions are found among the most interested, informed, and active citizens. Moreover, contrary to Fiorina's suggestion that polarization turns off voters and depresses turnout, our evidence indicates that polarization energizes the electorate and stimulates political participation.

1995 - American Journal of Political Science

Economics, Issues and the Perot Candidacy: Voter Choice in the 1992 Presidential Election

Theory: Theories of presidential elections (economic voting and spatial issue and ideology models), combined with the popular explanation of "angry voting," are used to account for voter choice in the 1992 presidential election. Hypotheses: Voter choice in this three-candidate race is a function of economic perceptions, issue and ideological positions of voters and candidates, or voter anger. Methods: Multinomial probit analysis of 1992 National Election Studies data including individual-specific and alternative-specific variables. Simulations based on counterfactual scenarios of ideological positions of the candidates and of voter perceptions of the economy Results: The economy was the dominant factor in accounting for voter decisions in 1992, and Clinton, not Perot, was the beneficiary of economic discontent. While issues (mainly abortion) and ideology did play some role, Clinton was not perceived by the electorate as a New Democrat. We find little support for the hypothesis of angry voting. Last, Perot took more votes from Bush than from Clinton.

2000

Habit-Formation and Political Behaviour: Evidence of Consuetude in Voter Turnout

The extensive literature on voter turnout has devoted relatively little attention to the hypothesis that casting a ballot in one election increases one's propensity to go to the polls in the future. This hypothesis is supported by voter turnout patterns in the 1972-4-6 and 1992-4-6 American National Election Studies panel surveys as well as published experimental research. The effects of past voter turnout on current voting propensities are sizeable and robust across a wide range of model specifications, including those that take into account the possibility of stable unobserved factors affecting both past and current turnout. We conclude by discussing the implications of consuetude for political and social behavior.