Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
2,227,846
result(s) for
"PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS"
Sort by:
United States
Growing racial, ideological, and cultural polarization within the American electorate contributed to the shocking victory of Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election. Using data from American National Election Studies surveys, we show that Trump’s unusually explicit appeals to racial and ethnic resentment attracted strong support from white working-class voters while repelling many college-educated whites along with the overwhelming majority of nonwhite voters. However, Trump’s campaign exploited divisions that have been growing within the electorate for decades because of demographic and cultural changes in American society. The 2016 presidential campaign also reinforced another longstanding trend in American electoral politics: the rise of negative partisanship, that is voting based on hostility toward the opposing party and its leaders. We conclude with a discussion of the consequences of deepening partisan and affective polarization for American democracy and the perceptions by both experts and the public of an erosion in its quality.
Journal Article
Voting contagion: Modeling and analysis of a century of U.S. presidential elections
Social influence plays an important role in human behavior and decisions. Sources of influence can be divided as external, which are independent of social context, or as originating from peers, such as family and friends. An important question is how to disentangle the social contagion by peers from external influences. While a variety of experimental and observational studies provided insight into this problem, identifying the extent of contagion based on large-scale observational data with an unknown network structure remains largely unexplored. By bridging the gap between the large-scale complex systems perspective of collective human dynamics and the detailed approach of social sciences, we present a parsimonious model of social influence, and apply it to a central topic in political science-elections and voting behavior. We provide an analytical expression of the county vote-share distribution, which is in excellent agreement with almost a century of observed U.S. presidential election data. Analyzing the social influence topography over this period reveals an abrupt phase transition from low to high levels of social contagion, and robust differences among regions. These results suggest that social contagion effects are becoming more instrumental in shaping large-scale collective political behavior, with implications on democratic electoral processes and policies.
Journal Article
Make America Christian Again
Why did Americans vote for Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential election? Social scientists have proposed a variety of explanations, including economic dissatisfaction, sexism, racism, Islamophobia, and xenophobia. The current study establishes that, independent of these influences, voting for Trump was, at least for many Americans, a symbolic defense of the United States’ perceived Christian heritage. Data from a national probability sample of Americans surveyed soon after the 2016 election shows that greater adherence to Christian nationalist ideology was a robust predictor of voting for Trump, even after controlling for economic dissatisfaction, sexism, anti-black prejudice, anti-Muslim refugee attitudes, and anti-immigrant sentiment, as well as measures of religion, sociodemographics, and political identity more generally. These findings indicate that Christian nationalist ideology—although correlated with a variety of class-based, sexist, racist, and ethnocentric views—is not synonymous with, reducible to, or strictly epiphenomenal of such views. Rather, Christian nationalism operates as a unique and independent ideology that can influence political actions by calling forth a defense of mythological narratives about America’s distinctively Christian heritage and future.
Journal Article
How to beat Trump : America's top political strategists on what it will take
\"Mark Halperin interviewed the nation's most experienced political strategists to discover what they think the Democratic nominee needs to do to win the 270 electoral votes required for victory. Drawing on first-hand experience, tactical savvy, and war stories from presidential campaigns past, America's top operatives explain how to meet the daunting challenge of defeating President Trump.\"--Publisher's description.
Book
Religion or class? Measuring voting clustering on religious and socioeconomic lines in US presidential elections
Electoral behavior in the United States is shaped by more than geography and economics as it is deeply intertwined with cultural identity. Here, we quantify how voting patterns in the 2016, 2020 and 2024 presidential elections cluster not only across neighboring counties but also along shared religious and socioeconomic lines. By computing Moran’s I, a standard measure of spatial autocorrelation, under four distinct “neighborhood” definitions (physical borders, dominant religion, income bracket and urbanization level), we show that counties sharing a majority faith vote in strikingly similar ways, second only to contiguous geography. In contrast, grouping by household income or urban status yields markedly weaker clustering. These findings reveal that cultural networks, embodied by religious affiliation, exert a stronger influence on aggregate voting behavior than class differences or the urban–rural divide. Our approach highlights the power of simple network models grounded in social traits to illuminate the dynamics of political polarization and suggests new pathways for understanding how cultural identity shapes large scale electoral outcomes.
Journal Article
In it to win : electing Madam President
\"When will the United States elect its first woman president? Many political observers believed that Hillary Clinton would win the White House in 2008, and many still believe she is a strong contender for 2016. Yet, while many believe that electing the first woman president is not a question of if, but who and when, media speculation on the topic has yet to move it from an interesting talking point to political reality. The question remains: Just how close are we to breaking this final political glass ceiling? By merging the two literatures of women and politics (especially women as candidates) and presidential campaigns and elections, a winning strategy for women candidates can emerge by analyzing what political science research tells us from past campaigns and what we can expect in the future\"-- Provided by publisher.
Book
Voter Beliefs and Strategic Voting in Two-Round Elections
How widespread is strategic voting in two-round electoral systems, and which types of voters are most likely to engage in such behavior? While runoff elections are common in presidential systems around the world, research on strategic voting in these settings remains limited. This paper explores four different types of strategic behavior that are possible in two-round systems, including some types, such as \"strong-to-weak\" strategic voting, which are not possible in single-shot elections. We use a nationwide survey to assess the incidence and correlates of strategic voting in Brazil's 2018 presidential election, where thirteen candidates competed in the first round. W e find evidence of \"weakto-strong\" strategic voting at a similar rate to that documented in single-round elections in other countries. We find little evidence of other types of strategic voting. Furthermore, we show that voters' confidence in their predictions of the likely electoral outcome and their ideological preferences strongly predict strategic voting. These results point to the importance of accounting for voter beliefs and attitudes in addition to objective voter characteristics to explain strategic voting.
Journal Article