Interpersonal Relationships, Bipartisanship, and January 6th

Of the 12 presidential elections held in the period from 1932 through 1976, the Democrats had won 8, the Republicans just 4. Of the 6 presidents elected during this period, only 2 of them were Republicans— Dwight Eisenhower and Richard Nixon—and Nixon had been forced to resign in disgrace. In the 1982 ranking of presidents, all 4 Democrats of this period were in the Great, Near Great, or Above Average categories: Roosevelt at number two; Truman eighth; Kennedy thirteenth; and Johnson tenth. True, Eisenhower was ranked eleventh and Above Average, but Nixon was two from the bottom at thirty-fourth—a Failure.1 In only 3 of these 12 elections had the Republican candidate won more than 50 percent of the popular vote—Eisenhower in 1952 and 1956, and Nixon in 1972. In contrast, the Democrats had averaged 50 percent of the popular vote and 302 electoral votes; the Republicans averaged just 47 percent of the popular vote and a mere 222 electoral votes. This was the background against which our period opens. It was not a promising platform for the Grand Old Party (GOP). But their fortunes were about to change. In the 5 elections that we shall study in the period from 1980 through 1996, the Republicans won 3, averaging 48 percent of the popular vote and 353 electoral votes. The Democrats would win only 2, averaging less than 44 percent of the popular vote and just 184 electoral votes. During these 5 elections, the Republicans received over 50 percent of the vote in 120 state contests; the Democrats in just 30.2 KeywordsPresidential ElectionVoter TurnoutElection CyclePresidential CandidateElectoral CollegeThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This study examines voter turnout in U.S. presidential elections from 1960-2008. Specifically, this study contributes to the literature by using a panel spatial econometric model to investigate whether, on the margin, voters behave rationally (increased voter turnout) when the probability of their vote being decisive is greater. The empirical results are mixed regarding whether probability matters to voters. Neither the margin of victory in an election, nor voter weight in the election (ratio of electoral votes to number of voters within a state) played a significant role in determining voter turnout. However, when states switch away from a winner-take-all system to a congressional district system of allocating their electoral votes, voter turnout increased.

In this paper we extend the research program on the seats-votes relationship to the U.S. electoral college. Borrowing liberally from the work of King and Browning (1987), we develop measures of representational form and partisan bias in the relationship between popular vote proportions and electoral vote proportions for each presidential election from 1872 to 1988. Two major findings emerge from our analysis: (1) the electoral college is dominated by a majoritarian representational form, with popular vote winners usually capturing a substantially higher proportion of the electoral vote than would be suggested by their popular vote proportion; and (2) contrary to the conventional wisdom of a Republican bias, the electoral college has a Democratic partisan bias for most of the years under study, particularly in the years since the end of World War II.

R UM, Republicanism, Rampton, and Reform, concisely characterizes the 1968 election in Utah. Voters were agitated by the campaign to adopt a popular initiative permitting the sale of wines and spirits by the drink. Republicans swept most of the important state and national offices, with the most striking exception of the governorship (where incumbent Democrat Calvin Rampton polled an unprecedented plurality). And four state constitutional amendments passed by comfortable margins. There were few surprises in the presidential election. Nixon carried the state with 54.8 percent of the vote in 1960 and, even with Wallace running, improved his total by 1.7 percentage points in 1968. Twice Utah's four electoral votes have been cast for Richard M. Nixon.

Both a President and a Vice President are elected either by the Electoral College or by Congress, and only electoral votes received by presidential and vice presidential candidates from all presidential electors matter. Yet, since the 1824 election, the national popular vote count has been conducted in every election. Despite the fact that the national popular vote does not have any constitutional status, it is widely believed that the popular vote winner receives a mandate from the nation to govern. So whenever the electoral vote outcome and the popular vote outcome are different, the nation turns to election rules, and calls emerge to abolish the Electoral College and to replace it with direct popular elections.

As teachers and teacher educators in the United States, we offer this editorial based on our lived experiences with the political, social, and environmental precarities where we live. Among these precarities are our looming U.S. presidential election after the last one included a plot by bad actors to abscond with our State’s electoral votes, our constant struggle for water in a desert state, and our weak overall internet connectivity. We call our wonderings about how we are living in and somehow surviving these times, <i>radical uncertainties</i>. In this editorial, we canvas radical uncertainties related to e-learning about digital literacies, generative text, datafication, and the camera gaze. Alongside these uncertainties, we offer alternative avenues for collective thinking based on Chicana Feminist epistemologies. We intend for readers to consider how local knowing can and should inform e-learning planning and practice.

Long a battleground state in presidential elections, Ohio trended toward the GOP in both 2016 and 2020. Despite losing the national popular vote, Trump secured the state’s electoral votes by comfortable margins in both elections, sparking the question of what explains this shift? We ground this question broadly in the realignment literature, testing two slightly overlapping theoretical viewpoints: geo-cultural and socioeconomic/cosmopolitanism. The geo-cultural viewpoint emphasizes the urban-rural divide in American politics, arguing that the culture is completely different on opposite ends of the urban-rural continuum, resulting in disparate election results. The socioeconomic/cosmopolitan viewpoint acknowledges that culture and social issues play a role in elections, but that the global economy of the 21st century drives results. To test these viewpoints, we use data on Ohio’s communities from the American Community Survey. Running spatial regressions, we find that there is evidence for both viewpoints present in Ohio over the past 20 years. Specifically, both Democrats and Republicans made gains in their geographic strongholds, but Democrats have made larger inroads in more cosmopolitan communities. However, Republicans made huge gains along the cultural dimension, giving them a strong advantage throughout the state. These results have implications for not only future presidential campaigns and how they target Ohio’s persuadable voters, but also for down ballot races in both the primary and general elections.

We predicted the victory of Giscard d’Estaing in the presidential elections and we were wrong. We underestimated the capacity of Chirac to withhold gaullist votes from the president on the second ballot. We overestimated the advantages of the incumbency. Finally while we had thought that communist defections would insure the victory of Giscard in a tight race, it was on the contrary the weakness of the Communist Party as revealed on the first ballot — it lost a quarter of its electoral vote as compared to 1978 — that lifted many of the scruples of centrist electors tempted to vote for that magical panacea “change”: it was safe to vote for a left coalition where the communists appeared for the first time in a position of weakness.

While it is too soon to predict the 2012 presidential winner, it is not too early to know that the general election is likely to be a fiercely competitive contest that will, assuming no major unexpected events occur (e.g., another recession), come down to a few thousand votes in a few swing states, most probably including Ohio. When a presidential election is this close, there exists the possibility that the popular vote winner and the electoral vote winner will differ, which has happened four times before (1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000), but continues to be controversial. More ominously, there is also a small, but real chance of an electoral vote tie between the candidates, which would then place the selection of the president in the House of Representatives and the vice president in the Senate. Even though congressional selection is the constitutionally prescribed remedy and has historical precedents (1800, 1824), it seems unlikely that the Electoral College would long survive what would surely be a spirited public debate over who should choose the president. Thus, the 2012 election results may be too close to sustain the legitimacy of the presidential selection method.

Disappearing Democracy: How Bush v. Gore Undermined the Federal Right to Vote for Presidential Electors

During the Bush-Kerry presidential election of 2004, both candidates sought and received endorsements from retired high-ranking military officers. At the Democratic National Convention, Senator John Kerry surrounded himself not only with former Navy colleagues but also with retired military brass. Retired Army (and former candidate) Wesley spoke at the convention, describing Kerry as leader, a fighter, and he will make a great commander-in-chief. (1) Twelve retired generals and admirals endorsed Kerry, including such notables as Admiral William Crowe, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Merrill McPeak, former Air Force Chief of Staff. McPeak subsequently appeared in television advertisements defending Kerry and his service in Vietnam in response to critical television advertisements from the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Retired Army Tommy Franks, the architect of the successful invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, publicly endorsed President George W. Bush and later spoke in support of the President before a national audience at the Republican National Convention. Similarly, during the 2008 Obama-McCain presidential campaign, retired military leaders actively endorsed and campaigned for candidates. One of America's most respected retired officers, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, crossed party lines and endorsed candidate Barack Obama on national television. E-mails from General Wesley Clark sought campaign contributions for then-candidate Obama. (2) This was followed by Clark's devaluation on national television of Senator John McCain's war record in Vietnam, prompting then-Senator Obama to disavow Clark's criticisms. (3) In reporting the event, one article referred to as a prominent Democratic general. (4) The public endorsement of presidential candidates by retired general officers reflects a disturbing trend toward the politicization of the American military, and concomitantly, a gradual departure from the nonpartisan professional military ethic. This modern trend began subtly with the candidacy of Dwight D. Eisenhower but has taken a very disturbing and public turn as retired officers began to endorse candidates. What was once considered inappropriate behavior has now become commonplace. This article will review the history of the development, and gradual erosion, of a professional military ethic of political neutrality. Further, the article will examine the current state of permissible military participation in the political process. Finally, the authors posit that active and public participation of retired military officers in partisan politics, in their capacity as retired military officers, should be discouraged as potentially damaging to the US armed forces in both material and philosophical ways. If the military of a democracy is politically partisan, it is, in effect, damaging to democracy itself in that the military does not serve in the fullest, most impartial manner. The Development of a Politically Neutral Military Although the historical tradition of an apolitical military is generally accepted among most Americans, many might feel uncomfortable when contemplating the rather large number of men who have parlayed military achievements into political success. Prior to the Civil War, George Washington, Andrew Jackson, William Henry Harrison, and Zachary Taylor all ascended to the presidency after successful military careers. Lieutenant Winfield Scott more frequently, if less prosperously, attempted to secure the presidency, while simultaneously serving as Commanding of the Army. Scott's political ambitions date at least to the 1840 presidential campaign, which Harrison, a former general, won. In 1852, Commanding Scott ran unsuccessfully for President as the Whig Party candidate, garnering more than 40 percent of the popular vote but losing heavily in the electoral vote. …

In recent years, mainstream media coverage has integrated mobile social networking and micro-blogging tools such as Facebook and Twitter. These interactive communication channels have transformed our interpersonal relationships as well as our links with organizations and content including news and entertainment. In particular, our experience of the news has become mediated through these platforms. These tools have transformed one-way transmission channels into two-way interactive media. While there has been significant discussion of the role of online forums, listservs and blogs as arenas for democratic participation and citizen journalism, there has been less analysis of how micro-blogging social networking tools are transforming the social practices around news and information. Drawing on James Carey’s ritual view of communications, this chapter will analyze the role of these tools in the experience of our daily lives as well as our consumption of news and participation in significant media events of our time. First, this chapter will describe the changing habits of individual users in their daily news rituals. Second, this chapter will describe the ways in which news is represented on Facebook and Twitter as well as how these channels are reintegrated with mainstream media broadcasts. Third, this chapter will describe the use of CNN’s Facebook plug-in during political media events such as the 2008 Presidential election and the Obama inauguration in 2009. Finally, this chapter will recommend future directions for the use of mobile social networking in mainstream media coverage.

We are not the same: Latent profiles of political engagement among LGB young adults during the 2024 presidential campaign

HE POLITICAL ROLE of Negro citizens in northern industrial cities has been described and discussed in numerous reports and commentaries on Negro political behavior, particularly in reference to presidential and gubernatorial elections.' In presidential elections, for example, the best available data indicate that Negro voters have been supporting the Democratic party since 1936, by contrast to a history of strong allegiance to the Republican party in the seventeen elections from Reconstruction through 1932.2 Moreover, it is evident that the northward migration of southern Negroes, plus the accelerated migration to California,3 has served to enlarge the numerical force of the Negro body politic. In the single decade from 1940 to 1950, for example, Negro migrants accounted for more than 50 per cent of the increase in potential Negro voters in various northern cities (Table I). In several outstanding cases, Negro migrants accounted for no less than 80 per cent of the increment.4 As a consequence of such increments, Negro voters in northern and western industrial cities have achieved a balance-of-power position in local, state and national elections. On the national level, this position was notably effective in contributing to Mr. Truman's dramatic victory in the presidential election of 1948. When one recalls that his victory would not have been possible without the electoral votes of California, Illinois, and Ohio, and that he managed to

Since 1996, Florida has become the most important state in presidential elections. It has the most electoral votes of any battleground state and the third most among all states. It actually swings between the major parties, has supported the overall winner six campaigns in a row (one of only two states to do so), and its margin of victory for the winner over that period is the smallest of any state. In addition, pre-election polls consistently predict the Sunshine State will be very close, and presidential candidates act strategically by visiting frequently and by spending larger sums on campaign advertising in Florida than in any other state.