Spatiotemporal database of US congressional elections, 1896–2014

Abstract The 2020 elections brought to an end one of the most divisive and historic campaigns in the modern era. Former Vice President Joe Biden was elected the 46th President of the United States with the largest number of votes ever cast in a presidential election, defeating incumbent President Donald Trump in the process. The record turnout was especially remarkable in light of the ongoing pandemic surrounding COVID-19 and the roughly 236,000 Americans who had died of the virus prior to the election. This article examines the electoral context of the 2020 elections focusing on elections in both the House and Senate. More specifically, this article examines the candidates, electoral conditions, trends, and outcomes in the primaries as well as the general election. In doing so, we provide a comprehensive descriptive analysis of the climate and outcome of the 2020 congressional elections. Finally, the article closes with a discussion of the broader implications of the election outcomes on both the incoming 117th Congress as well as the upcoming 2022 midterm election.

Download Full-text

Is the equalization/normalization lens dead? Social media campaigning in US congressional elections

Online Information Review ◽

10.1108/oir-08-2017-0247 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 42 (5) ◽

pp. 718-731 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Jason Gainous ◽

Andrew Segal ◽

Kevin Wagner

Keyword(s):

Social Media ◽

Design Methodology ◽

Power Structure ◽

Congressional Elections ◽

Campaign Spending ◽

Interactive Effects ◽

Content Type ◽

Electoral Success ◽

The Masses ◽

Practical Implications

Purpose Early information technology scholarship centered on the internet’s potential to be a democratizing force was often framed using an equalization/normalization lens arguing that either the internet was going to be an equalizing force bringing power to the masses, or it was going to be normalized into the existing power structure. The purpose of this paper is to argue that considered over time the equalization/normalization lens still sheds light on our understanding of how social media (SM) strategy can shape electoral success asking if SM are an equalizing force balancing the resource gap between candidates or are being normalized into the modern campaign. Design/methodology/approach SM metrics and electoral data were collected for US congressional candidates in 2012 and 2016. A series of additive and interactive models are employed to test whether the effects of SM reach on electoral success are conditional on levels of campaign spending. Findings The results suggest that those candidates who spend more actually get more utility for their SM campaign than those who spend less in 2012. However, by 2016, spending inversely correlates with SM campaign utility. Research limitations/implications The findings indicate that SM appeared to be normalizing into the modern congressional campaign in 2012. However, with higher rates of penetration and greater levels of usage in 2016, the SM campaign utility was not a result of higher spending. SM may be a greater equalizing force now. Practical implications Campaigns that initially integrate digital and traditional strategies increase the effectiveness of the SM campaign because the non-digital strategy both complements and draws attention to the SM campaign. However, by 2016 the SM campaign was not driven by its relation to traditional campaign spending. Originality/value This is the first large N study to examine the interactive effects of SM reach and campaign spending on electoral success.

Download Full-text

Prior Beliefs and Voter Turnout in the 1986 and 1988 Congressional Elections

Political Research Quarterly ◽

10.1177/106591299705000110 ◽

1997 ◽

Vol 50 (1) ◽

pp. 199-213 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

Stephen P Nicholson ◽

Ross A. Miller

Keyword(s):

Voter Turnout ◽

Congressional Elections ◽

Prior Beliefs

Download Full-text

Issues, Information Costs, and Congressional Elections

American Politics Quarterly ◽

10.1177/1532673x7600400201 ◽

1976 ◽

Vol 4 (2) ◽

pp. 131-152 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Barbara Hinckley

Keyword(s):

Congressional Elections ◽

Information Costs

Download Full-text

Mass Media in U. S. Congressional Elections

Legislative Studies Quarterly ◽

10.2307/439809 ◽

1987 ◽

Vol 12 (3) ◽

pp. 317 ◽

Cited By ~ 19

Author(s):

Edie N. Goldenberg ◽

Michael W. Traugott

Keyword(s):

Mass Media ◽

Congressional Elections

Download Full-text

Political Finance and Participation in Congressional Elections

The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science ◽

10.1177/000271627642500105 ◽

1976 ◽

Vol 425 (1) ◽

pp. 59-73 ◽

Cited By ~ 43

Author(s):

Paul A. Dawson ◽

James E. Zinser

Keyword(s):

Income Inequality ◽

Political Parties ◽

Capita Income ◽

Congressional Elections ◽

Campaign Contributions ◽

Factors Affecting ◽

Political Finance ◽

Per Capita ◽

Registered Voters ◽

Campaign Expenditures

Citizens participate in the electoral process both to enjoy intrinsic benefits and in the hope of future bene fits. Factors affecting the strength of these consumption and investment motives therefore will affect registration and turnout rates, levels of campaign contributions, and electoral margins. To some extent, the strength of these motives is fixed by relatively static factors: levels of district per capita income, the degree of income inequality, the partisan division of registered voters. However, both motives also are affected by factors more apt to vary: for example, statutory arrangements, the activities of political parties, levels and types of campaign expenditures. In particular, statutory arrangements and the activities of parties which reduce costs can increase participation. Moreover, substan tial efforts to alter the partisan division of registered voters can increase campaign contributions. Also, campaign expenditures channel motivations in partisan directions, stim ulate partisan turnout, and affect electoral margins. Results reported here suggest the likelihood of bipartisan support for policies facilitating registration and voting, challenge assumptions about the effects of incumbency on campaign contributions, raise doubts about legislated ceilings on cam paign expenditures, and weaken the case for public financing of congressional elections.

Download Full-text