1 / 20

POLI-D-537 Parties and Government in the U.S. 5 ects

POLI-D-537 Parties and Government in the U.S. 5 ects. Emilie van Haute. Week 11. Part II Political Campaigns & Elections in the U.S. Outline I.1. Presidential Elections I.2. Case studies I.3. Congressional Elections I.4. Participation & Voting Behavior I.5. Campaign & Interest Groups

ian-chavez
Download Presentation

POLI-D-537 Parties and Government in the U.S. 5 ects

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. POLI-D-537 Parties and Government in the U.S. 5 ects Emilie van Haute Week 11

  2. Part IIPolitical Campaigns & Elections in the U.S. Outline I.1. Presidential Elections I.2. Case studies I.3. Congressional Elections I.4. Participation & Voting Behavior I.5. Campaign & Interest Groups I.4. Participation & Voting Behavior 1. Voter Turnout 2. Party Identification 3. Parties, Citizens, and Issues 4. Social and Economic Bases of Partisanship and Voting

  3. 1. Voter Turnout (1) • Variations in turnout • Timing of the election & office contested: PE > GE > Mid-Term • State: lower turnout S – SW: political (interparty competition, campaign spending) & socio-demographics (+ income, + SES, + education, middle age, + white, + Catholic/Jewish heritage, + turnout), technical (registration requirements) • Rise of Ineligible voters (2% in 1972; 10% in 2000): non citizens + convicted • Who Votes? • Demographic characteristics: impact of age & education (more interested, better addressed), race, gender, income (link with other factors) • Attitudes: interest in politics, sense of civic duty, party identification, sense of political efficacy • Parties & Turnout • Profile of voters favors Rs >< Ds use get-out-to-vote (GOTV) campaigns more • Methods used to mobilize voters • Provide labels for candidates (PE, GE, Governors) • Provide money for campaigning to give voters information about candidates (threshold) • Explicit GOTV campaigns (registering, early vote, reminders, transport)

  4. 1. Voter Turnout (2) • Debate on turnout • Low turnout = weak democracy? • Measure of turnout (USA: Voting-age population – VAP) • Number of elections • No distortion of the citizen’s will: nonvoters well represented by voters or • Inequalities and impact on public policies; legitimacy

  5. 2. Party identification • Measure of party identification • = Feeling of attachment & sympathy for a party, acquired early through family, stable over time • Scale: 3 (identification) or 7 points (strength) • WWII – today: 65-75% with PI • Characteristics of Party Identifiers • + knowledge of politics, + interest, + activity • Political filter: selection of information/political news, of discussions, of credibility • + PI, + turnout & + loyalty to the party • Evolution of Party Identification • Declining impact on vote choice • Shifts in party identification • ↑ Split-ticket voting

  6. 3. Parties, Citizens, and Issues • Candidate Image • High media coverage of candidates: personalities, style, background, physical appearance, trustworthiness, etc. • Dependent on the level of election (lower level: lesser impact) • Impact of Issues • Dependent on candidates and context: • Voters must be informed & concerned about the issue • Candidates must be distinguishable on the issue • Voters must perceive the relation between their own position & the candidates’ • Generally: voters project their own position on their favorite candidate’s, or adopt their candidate’s position, or have no opinion • Issue voting when threat (international, eco) • Retrospective voting • = Evaluation of past performance (when incumbent running) • Issue ownership • = Parties’ reputation in specific issue areas (Ds: social welfare &security, education; Rs: foreign policy, taxes, crime) • When one issue dominate the agenda: voters vote for the party owning the issue • Parties try to shift voters’ attention to issues they own

  7. 4. Social and Economic Bases of Partisanship & Voting (1) • Economic & Class Differences • + income, education & occupational status, + R >< Ds: very upper & lower levels • But parties attract significant proportion of voters in each category (no “classe gardée”, and ↓ in class-based differences between parties since 1950s except in the South • => No real class cleavage (Lipset, 1977: values of individualism & freedom & equal opportunity; no historical social stratification; mobility; diversity; institutions) • Religious Differences • Since New Deal: Jews & Catholics // Ds; Protestants // Rs, although decline • Today: divide about the importance of religion in one’s life (Church attendance more than belief): + attendance, + Rs • Link with class, but not only: minority status // Ds • Gender Differences • 1920: right to vote for women but no major change in balance of power • Since 1980s: emergence of a gender gap: Rs // men (especially in the South); Ds // women • Link with social status (single parents)

  8. 4. Social and Economic Bases of Partisanship & Voting (2) • Regional Differences • Major impact of civil right issue • Major impact of economic development & in-migration • Distinctive regions: South (Bible belt), Plains (farm belt) & Moutain states, East Coast & West Coast • Racial Differences • Civil War amendments (14th & 15th) but Ds in the South circumvented • Realignment: from Rs to Ds (New Deal, civil rights); Voting Right Act (1965) • Latin American Voters: tendency to be Ds but depend on origin (Mexicans ≠ Cubans); fast growing population, especially South West; low level of participation; party identification unsettled => will be crucial • Socio-demographics of Parties • Significant changes since the 1950s in the party identifiers

More Related