Legal, Political Science and Economics Approaches to Measuring Malapportionment: The U.S. House, the Senate and the Electoral College 1790–2010

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan R. Cervas ◽  
Bernard Grofman
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Electoral College ◽  
The U.S

The Third Troll Prerequisite, Part 1

Cyberwar ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 91-104
Author(s):  
Kathleen Hall Jamieson
Keyword(s):  
Electoral College ◽  
The Third ◽  
Evangelical Protestants ◽  
The U.S

Chapter 5 examines the third prerequisite for Russian stolen or generated content to influence the U.S. election: did it address the interests of vital constituencies whose mobilization or demobilization was critical to a Trump Electoral College victory? The chapter details how troll messaging and the release of hacked content aimed to influence two key traditional Republican voting blocs that Trump needed in order to win: white Christians and veterans. Jamieson explores the trolls’ appeals to evangelical Protestants and conservative Catholics, including the use of a hacked exchange involving a Clinton communications director. In a similar fashion, the chapter shows how the trolls worked to mobilize veterans by attacking Clinton’s record on military affairs.

Shirking in the Contemporary Congress: A Reappraisal

2004 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 176-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamie L. Carson ◽  
Michael H. Crespin ◽  
Jeffery A. Jenkins ◽  
Ryan J. Vander Wielen
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Research Design ◽  
House Of Representatives ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Electoral Connection ◽  
New Research ◽  
The U.S

This paper replicates the findings that appeared in the article “Severing the Electoral Connection: Shirking in the Contemporary Congress,” published in theAmerican Journal of Political Science(44:316–325), in which Lawrence Rothenberg and Mitchell Sanders incorporated a new research design and, contrary to all previous studies, found evidence of ideological shirking in the U.S. House of Representatives. We investigate the robustness of their results by reestimating their model with Congress-specific fixed effects and find that their results no longer hold.

Voters’ Perceptions of Trust in 2016 Presidential Candidates, Clinton and Trump: Exploring the Election’s Outcome

2017 ◽  
Vol 63 (7) ◽  
pp. 856-887 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pamela S. Shockley-Zalabak ◽  
Sherwyn P. Morreale ◽  
Carmen Stavrositu
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
Electoral College ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Popular Vote ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Presidential Candidates ◽  
The Third ◽  
General Trust ◽  
Registered Voters ◽  
The U.S

This study explored voters’ perceptions of Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump regarding their general trust in the two 2016 presidential candidates, voters’ demographics, five underlying drivers of trust, and important campaign issues. The study also examined how perceptions of trust on issues were evidenced in the popular vote and in key swing states and the Electoral College. The study used two online census-representative surveys to examine registered voters’ perceptions: one survey of 1,500 respondents conducted immediately before the first presidential debate (September 7-15, 2016) and a second survey of a different sample of 1,500 immediately after the third debate (October 20-31), 2016. Analysis of the results confirmed relatively low-trust levels for both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump and an electorate divided demographically about their trust in the two candidates. The five trust drivers yielded statistically significant differences between the candidates. Clinton was evaluated as more competent, concerned, and reliable, and a person with whom participants identified. With the second survey, Trump statistically surpassed Clinton for openness and honesty. Regarding the three issues of most importance in the campaign, Clinton and Trump had equivalent trust evaluations for dealing with the U.S. economy/jobs, but Trump was more trusted regarding terrorism/national security and Clinton was more trusted regarding health care. The overall trust evaluations for Clinton, coupled with intentions to vote, contribute to understanding Clinton’s popular vote victory. However, the importance of terrorism/national security in swing states and Trump’s trust advantage on that issue contributes to understanding the Electoral College vote by comparison with the popular vote.

scholarly journals Washington Hotline

2019 ◽  
Vol 80 (2) ◽  
pp. 116
Author(s):  
Gavin Baker
Keyword(s):  
Academic Libraries ◽  
Federal Funding ◽  
Electoral College ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Public ◽  
State And Local ◽  
The U.S

Libraries can ensure everyone counts in 2020 CensusThe upcoming 2020 Census will have repercussions for communities across the country. Academic libraries can play important roles in promoting a fair and accurate count.Census data is key to the allocation of billions of dollars in federal funding to states and localities, such as education and healthcare programs. The decennial count of all residents is required by the U.S. Constitution to determine representation in Congress and the Electoral College, and is the basis for drawing districts for federal, state, and local offices. In addition, data resulting from the census is widely used by the public and private sectors for research and planning, including many social scientists.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document