Search

The victory of Barack Obama over John McCain in the 2008 presidential election marked a historic and pivotal moment in American politics. Many observers interpreted the election as heralding a new 'post racial' politics. However, others noted that even though short-term forces were overwhelmingly pro-Democratic in 2008, Obama's overall vote among white voters barely increased on the share received by John Kerry in 2004. This study uses data from the American National Election Study to examine the effect of the racial attitudes--specifically racial resentment--of whites on vote choice in the 2008 presidential election. Findings show that racial resentment exerted a large influence on vote choice, one that was only exceeded by party identification. Furthermore, the effect of racial resentment was greater than in any prior election for which data on racial resentment is available. Keywords: Race and Ethnicity, Voting Behavior, Public Opinion, Parties, Elections, and Voting. La victoria de Barack Obama sobre John McCain en las elecciones presidenciales del2008 marco un momento historico y sustancial en la politica americana. Muchos observadores interpretaron el resultado de la eleccion como el inicio de una nueva etapa 'post-racial' en la politica. Sin embargo, hay quienes senalan que aunque hubo fuerzas a favor de los democratas durante el 2008, la popularidad de Obama entre los votantes blancos aumento ligeramente con respecto a la proporcion recibida por John Kerry en el 2004. Este articulo usa datos tomados del American National Election Study para examinar los efectos de la actitud racial-especificamente el resentimiento racial- de votantes blancos en la eleccion presidencial del 2008. Los resultados muestran que el resentimiento racial ejercio un efecto significativo en la eleccion electoral, siendo superado solo por la afiliacion partidaria. Ademas, el impacto del resentimiento racial fue mayor que cualquier otra eleccion para la cual se tiene informacion al respecto., The victory of Barack Obama over John McCain in the 2008 presidential election marked a historic and pivotal moment in American politics. Moreover, in electing Obama as the 44th president, [...]

In 2007, Bobby Jindal became the first nonwhite governor to be elected in Louisiana, and only the second nonwhite governor of a southern state. Jindal's election is interesting in that Louisiana has been afflicted by what many observers describe as racial backlash voting. Indeed, some have argued that such racial backlash explained Jindal's defeat in the 2003 gubernatorial election. This article utilizes aggregate-level data to examine whether racial backlash cost Jindal the 2003 election, and if so whether Jindal's victory in 2007 was attributable to the absence of such racial backlash. The findings suggest that racial backlash exerted a significant effect on Jindal's parish-by-parish vote in both the 2003 and 2007 gubernatorial contests. However, the findings also indicate that racial backlash alone was neither a sufficient explanation for Jindal's defeat in 2003 nor enough to deny him victory in 2007. Keywords: Voting Behavior, Race/Ethnicity, Southern Politics, Louisiana Politics. En 2007, Bobby Jindal se convirtio en el primer gobernador no-blanco en ser elegido en Louisiana, y solo el segundo gobernador no-blanco en un estado sureno. La eleccion de Jindal es interesante ya que Louisiana ha sido aquejada por lo que muchos observadores denominan voto racial reactivo. En efecto, algunos han arguido que dicha reaccion violenta explico la derrota de Jindal en la eleccion para gobernador de 2003. Este articulo utiliza datos a nivel agregado (aggregate-level data) para examinar si acaso voto racial reactivo influyo en la derrota Jindal en 2003 y si acaso la ausencia del mismo contribuyo a su victoria en 2007. Las conclusiones apuntan a que el voto racial reactivo ejercio un efecto significativo en el voto distrito-por-distrito tanto en las elecciones para gobernador de 2003 como en las de 2007. Sin embargo, se destaca que aun asi el voto racial reactivo por si mismo resulta insuficiente tanto para causarle la derrota en 2003 como para impedirle la victoria en 2007., The outcome of the 2007 Louisiana gubernatorial election was notable for several reasons. Bobby Jindal, the victorious Republican candidate, became only the third elected GOP governor of the state since [...]

This article focuses on partisan change in a region that has become a Democratic stronghold: the Northeast. Using data from the American National Election Studies, the article conceptualizes realignment as changes in the social group composition and ideological and issue bases of party support. Findings suggest that an ideological realignment has transformed the party coalitions in the Northeast in a way that suggests a widespread and durable Democratic advantage. Furthermore, this realignment was produced by both party conversion and generational replacement of the electorate. The article finds little signs that a competitive Republican electoral coalition can be forged, and that a solid Democratic Northeast will likely be a feature of American politics and a regional pillar of any emerging national Democratic majority. Keywords: Party Realignment, Party Identification, Northeastern U.S. Politics. Este articulo se enfoca en el cambio partidista en una region que se ha convertido en un bastion Democrata: el Noreste. Utilizando informacion de los Estudios Americanos Nacionales de Elecciones (ANES, por sus siglas en ingles), este articulo conceptualiza la realineacion como cambios en la composicion de los grupos sociales y sus bases ideologicas y de las bases de apoyo partidista por asunto. Los resultados sugieren que una realineacion ideologica ha transformado las coaliciones partidistas en el Noreste de una forma que sugiere una ventaja Democrata extendida y durable. Ademas, esta realineacion fue producida tanto por la transformacion del partido como por un remplazo generacional del electorado. El articulo encuentra pocas senales que una coalicion electoral competitiva Republicana pueda ser forjada, y que un solido Noreste Democrata sera probablemente un rasgo de la politica Americana y un pilar regional emergente de cualquier mayoria nacional Democrata., Scholars have long noted the importance of subnational analyses of political behavior and attitudes. Such an approach has been especially important when examining partisan change (Bullock 1988; Burnham, Clubb, and [...]

This article examines the effect of cultural values on voting behavior in elections below the presidential level. Using data from the American National Election Studies, the article examines the effect of moral traditionalism on individual-level vote choice in U.S. House elections. Findings indicate that a new front has been opened in the culture war, with moral traditionalism exerting an indirect effect on vote choice through party identification and, most importantly, a direct effect since the mid- to late 1990s, one that was hitherto not evident. This suggests that a greater emphasis placed on cultural issues by candidates and other political elites, or possibly changes in the images held by the electorate of both parties, has resulted in a moral traditionalism cleavage being driven down to voting behavior at the congressional level. Overall, these findings suggest a widening and deepening of a cultural values-based realignment of the American electorate. Keywords: political ideology; U.S. House of Representatives; elections; voting; culture war

The emergence of authoritarianism as a core political value has been emphasized by recent scholarship on the political behavior of the American electorate. This paper adds to this literature by examining the effect of authoritarianism in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Given the campaign style of Trump and the issues that he made salient in his campaign, it is hypothesized that authoritarianism should have a substantial effect on vote choice of whites. Using data from the American National Election Studies (ANES), logistic regression models of presidential vote choice of white respondents are estimated to ascertain the effect of authoritarianism in presidential elections from 1992 to 2016, controlling for party identification, ideology and several standard demographic control variables. Findings indicate that authoritarianism had the largest effect on white vote choice in 2016 than in any prior election that was analyzed. The candidacy of Trump appears to have been the triggering mechanism given that authoritarianism was a less salient predictor of U.S. House vote choice in 2016. Moreover, this relationship was true for both college and non-college educated whites. Authoritarianism also seems to have been primed by Trump appealing to racial animus, anti-immigration sentiment, nativism, and anti-Muslim prejudice. Authoritarianism is likely to remain a salient determinant of vote choice during the Trump era. Indeed, a widening and deepening of this cleavage means its effects are likely to be apparent in elections below the presidency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This article examines the effect of both modern and traditional sexism on vote choice in the 2016 presidential election, and posits that they played a major role in explaining Hillary Clinton's defeat to Donald Trump. Methods: Data from the 2016 American National Election Study are analyzed using a logistic regression model. Results: Both modern and traditional sexism exerted a statistically significant effect on presidential vote choice in 2016. Indeed, its effect rivaled that of racial resentment and was only exceeded by partisanship. Conclusion: While a variety of factors may have cost Hillary Clinton the presidency in 2016, sexism needs to be addressed as one of those factors. More broadly, the findings of this article suggest that women candidates continue to face obstacles and are evaluated differently than men, especially when running for the most visible offices in American politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This article examines the determinants of perceptions of the United States and of President Obama among global citizens. Methods: The 2013 Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes surveys covering countries from Asia, Europe, the Middle East, the Americas, and Africa with diverse socioeconomic and religious backgrounds are analyzed by using multilevel estimates. Results: Findings reveal that attitudes toward homosexuality systematically shape opinions toward the United States and toward Obama's handling of foreign affairs. We also find the significant impact of religious and economic variables on perceptions of the United States and of Obama above and beyond other explanatory variables. Conclusion: This research demonstrates the relevance of cleavages regarding social values. It also contributes to larger debates about sources of anti‐Americanism, and, more generally, about the role of ideology and social values in international relations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Partisan change outside of the South has not been studied as extensively as in the 11 states of the Old Confederacy. Given the partisan advantage that the Democratic Party enjoys outside of the South, understanding the dynamics of party support among non-southerners appears to be important to study in its own right – not just as a point of contrast to that of the South. The goal of this article is to update and expand on one of the few pieces of scholarship to probe the reasons for the survival of the Democratic Party outside of the South. Using data from the American National Election Studies, the article concurs with these findings, that the Democratic Party has been successful in maintaining support among low income whites outside the South. However, a class-based explanation offers a partial explanation for the Democratic advantage in party identification. Ideological realignment has also expanded the Democratic base among middle and high income liberals and moderates. Overall, the findings of the article suggest that the electoral prospects of the Democratic Party outside of the South should be favourable for some time to come. The Democratic Party has not just survived outside of the South, it has prospered, and this provides a decided advantage for the party in national elections. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The literature on partisan change in the American electorate has devoted considerable attention to explaining Republican gains in the South. Less time has been devoted to examining changes outside of the South, where a Democratic majority has persisted--and indeed grown--over the past two decades. This article examines whether the realignment toward the Republican Party in the South has resulted in a move toward the Democratic Party outside the South. Specifically, it is posited that the growing influence of the South within the Republican Party has resulted in a backlash against the GOP. Using data from the American National Election Studies, this article examines affect toward southerners as a determinant of the political behavior of non-southerners. Findings indicate that even after controlling for other explanatory variables, affect toward southerners is a significant predictor of how non-southerners evaluate the political parties, as well as vote choice in the 2008 presidential election. While partisanship and ideology remain the best predictors of vote choice among non-southerners, anti-southern backlash should not be discounted for the GOP's "Northern problem" in recent elections. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]