Chapter 12: Elections

Made by : All rights reserved

Chapter 12: Elections

Questions to Consider
1. Why has U.S. voting turnout risen recently?
2. What went wrong with the U.S. system in 2000?
3. Should we view U.S. nonvoting with alarm?
4. How does party ID help decide elections?
5. Why is there a gender gap in U.S. voting?
6. Does income predict how a person votes?
7. Are we seeing electoral realignment, dealignment, or neither?
8. How does the economy influence elections?

WHY DO PEOPLE VOTE?

-

Americans committed to democracy and participation, but less voter turnout

Peak at 63 percent in 1960 (presidential election)
In nonpresidential election seldom exceeds 40 percent

Why is the voter turnout so small?

more than half of voters they are uninterested, dissatisfied with candidates
many feel their vote makes no difference
two large parties does not provide uninteresting clear cut choice both centrist

U.S. nonvoting as brought major debate among political scientists

Some worry America is losing legitimacy
Some unworried low voter turnout = many Americans are satisfied with the system, or no
sufficiently dissatisfied to vote

Countries with high voter turnouts may have a sort of political fever
United States in 2008 interesting personalities and divided electorate brought more voters

Difference between European and American turnout?

European registration automatic, U.S. register personally
U.S. elections held on Tuesdays, European mostly held on Sundays
U.S. long ballot with many local, state, and national, European just a choice of party

WHO VOTES?
-

Voters in democracies
Tend to be middle aged, better educated with white-collar jobs, more urban
Identify a political party
Non voters
Young, lacks education, blue-collar jobs or no jobs

Income and Education

-

High-income, well-educated people tend to vote more than the less affluent and less educated
Two characteristics (good education and good income) come together and reinforce each other

Factory workers in small towns may see little difference between candidates
Executive and professionals see direct relationship between election and personal fortunes
Blue-Collar workers are also affected by elections, but they are less likely to know it

Education on voting
- Well educated people have broader interest in elections beyond personal economic stakes
Wealthy or not, college educated person are more interest, better informed, more likely to
participate in elections
Education is the strongest determinant of who votes
- However, there is a puzzle
Educational levels have climbed, but U.S. turnout has declined
according to theory young people in college and college educated citizens should be very
participatory and eager to vote
1

Chapter 12: Elections

Race
-

Made by : All rights reserved

Explanations for this

1) Education may not mean what it used to
These days college degree is same as getting a job (high school diploma before WWII)
Many majors and career-related do not awaken curiosity of knowledge to the world
2) Voting may not mean what it used to be
Well educated citizens may not see a great choice between parties and candidates
Potential voters turned down by voter negative campaigning
3) Post-materialism
All industrialized nations have moved away from manufacturing and into knowledge and
information industries
With it brought a shift of values: society -> individual Post materialism: theory that
modern culture has moved beyond
getting and spending
African Americans voting rates lower than white voting rates
Gap is slowly closing back as black income and education level rises
1965 Voting Rights Act overcame barriers of black registration
Since then, blacks have become more politically conscious
Before-racist white politicians now have become more respectful towards their black constituents

CLASSIC WORKS DOWNS THEORY OF VOTING

- Anthony Down , An Economic Theory of Democracy (1957) (contributor of rational choice theory)
People vote if the returns outweigh the cost

Age
-

Young people under 25 feel less politically motivated and vote less
Little income and property feel economically uninvolved with election outcomes
When start paying taxes, their interest grows

1971 26th amendment lowered voting age from 21 to 18

However, their new franchise didnt raise the turnout rate
Young people did not vote as much as their elders did

Franchise: the right to vote

Gender
-

Traditionally, men are more likely to vote than women

With recent women suffrage women have voted more than men
Reflection of womens higher education levels

Suffrage: the right to vote

Place of Residence
-

Cities have higher turnouts than rural areas

Urban people on average have higher education levels
People living in a same place for a longer time
Feel more involved in local affairs, more likely to participate in groups
Voter turnout in U.S South is lighter than North and West
Reflection of lower living standards, lack of party competition
Recently Souths turnout is approaching that of other areas

WHO VOTES HOW?

-

Factors who votes how divided into long-term and short-term variables
Long-term variable loyalty to party (party identification) can affect persons vote for life
Short-term variable may cause person to vote for another

Party Identification
-

Party identification (Party ID) attachment many feel toward one party for a long time
Strong party identifiers: habitually vote for one party
Weak party identifiers: swayed to vote for another party
No Party ID:
Party Id is something that people carry in heads, what something parties have
2

Chapter 12: Elections

Made by : All rights reserved

Party ID heavily influenced by parents early In life

Also easier to vote along party lines
Party ID is a standing decision on how to vote
Strong identifiers feel good about their partys candidates, others with suspicion

Party ID is important to electoral stability

People who stick largely to one party allows politicians to anticipate and want to deliver it
Weak party ID great volatility in voting
Declining party OD is the United States omen for weak democracy

Party ID is fading in countries characterized by consistently split between their largest parties
(Britain, Sweden, Japan, Germany, etc.)
Swing from one major party to another is 1~5%

Decline of class voting and rise of post-materialism -> volatility is increasing

French voters less likely to have Party ID
(Because of) French parties merging, splitting
French voting is and always has been volatile

Social categories of public opinion

political scientists describe categories to identify different parties
but, no social category votes 100% for given party
A group with tendency to vote regularly voting bloc
Candidates strategy have enough voting bloc to win
However, the concept of voting bloc is ; no solid voting bloc exists

Class Voting
-

Social Class one determinant of party identification

United States- class distinction is blurred
Still, wage workers tend to register and vote Democratic (families in which breadwinners are
union members)

European countries class voting is stronger

Unions are stronger they are often connected to social-democratic labor parties
Swedish and German unions vote for Social Democrats
Better-off Britons, French, Germans, Swedes vote for conservative

Two things muddy class voting

1) some working-class people because they consider themselves middle class, family traditions
and individual convictions
Vote for conservative
2) some middle-class and upper class because they have a family tradition, or have liberal views
vote liberal

Regional Voting
-

Some regions identify strongly with certain parties

These areas often conquered and subjugated, some inhabitants till resent (historical reasons)
Economic and cultural resentments at rule by distant capita center-periphery tension
Scotland and Alberta do not like sharing revenues with London

Religious Blocs
- U.S. voting Religious VS Secular = strongest predictor of voting
2008 McCain (Republican) 3/4 by white Protestant evangelicals
Obama (Democrat) 3/4 of Jews
France: Catholics conservative, secular mostly left
Italy Popular party linked to Roman Catholic Church
Germany: Catholic areas vote more democrat than protestant areas
3

Chapter 12: Elections

Made by : All rights reserved

Age Groups
-

Political Generations young people tend to catch the tide that is flowing within their youths
Ex) young people in Depression tends to vote Democrat (liberal) all their lives
Ex) Enthusiasm for Reagan 1980s enthusiasm for Republican

Age groups react to economic situation

2008 2/3 of twenties voted for Obama worried about economic downturn

Gender Gap
-

Traditionally women used to be more conservative than men

Now reversed women now vote more Democrat than men
like Democrats because of their welfare measures and abortion rights

Marriage Gap
-

Unmarried people more Democrat than unmarried

Married people more conservative and Republican due to family values

Race
-

Blacks more loyal Democrats

More than80% blacks generally vote for Democrats, 95% in 2008
Hispanics Democrat
Affinities of racial minorities of Democrats cost the white votes
Whites, racial fear and resentment of minorities put white to Republicans

Urban Voting
-

Big cities tend to vote liberal/left

Working class (mostly liberal) concentrated in cities
Cities are also center for education -> intellectuals, and educated (tend to be liberals)

Country, suburban dwellers tend to embrace conservative values and parties

COMPARING IS THE U.S. ELECTORAL SYSTEM DEFECTIVE?

- No electoral system is fair and simple
Fair (proportional) not simple
Simple (single district) is not fair
-

Electoral College: U.S. system of

2000 U.S. Presidential election problems
weighting popular presidential
1) United States Electoral College System defect
vote to favor smaller states
Popular vote winner lost to electoral college
2) defective ballots
Difference of voting technologies
butterfly ballots in Florida
Anachronism: something out of the past
ana

Electoral College is widely thought as anachronism

But it cannot be reformed due to 17 small states

ELECTORAL REALIGNMENT
-

Political scientists have debated about critical and realigning elections

Voters retain their party IDs, but according to this theory, party loyalties of many voters are
dissolved, they create new durable party IDs
Critical election: showing a realignment
Realignment: major, long-term shift in party ID

Between critical elections party IDs are stable, people vote to them
normal vote, maintaining elections
Votes that temporarily shifts party ID and goes back to their long-term ID
deviating elections

Chapter 12: Elections

Made by : All rights reserved

A New Realignment?
-

1980 and 1984 Republican alignment due to Reagan

Party registration for Republican rose and declined for Democrats
Trend for welfare were less and cutting taxes, deregulation were the trend
Before Reagan even Republicans went for a welfare state, expansion of welfare programs
After Reagan even Democrats demanded for fiscal reasonability
Clinton: The era of big government is over
2008 Democratic realignment to Obama
Liberal electorate: due to economic and downturn, racial breakthrough
Many political scientists argue: there is no realignment, voters are reacting to current situations

It is difficult to spot critical election

Rather than a single critical election, it occurred over many years
Instead of a national realignment, it is a regional alignment

Problems with Realignment theory

Some people vote for president out of sync with president
Ex) vote for divided government different parties of legislative and executive branches

Instead of realignment, people say they were going through dealignment

Since mid 1960s number of voters committed to neither of parties increased
Voters who call themselves independents have increased
Independent tends to be young and educated

Process of during bad and good economic times coincided with three trends
(1) declining voter turnout, (2) declining party ID (3), declining trust towards Washington

Some researchers doubt about any dealignment and independent voting

KEY CONCEPTS PARTISAN POLARIZATION

- Reasons for growing polarization in American politics
- 1) Under Reagan the Republicans became more consistently conservative, Democrats tended to
become more consistently liberal
- 2) Elites articulated more strongly ideological agendas than previously
- 3) The Supreme Courts 1972 one person, one vote rule
Requires to make their congressional district more equal in population
Computers gerrymander with greater accuracy, so congressional districts now contain likeminded voters who consistently return to incumbents
- 4) Mobile Americans move to areas that culturally suit them makes country purer ideological
South conservative, Northeast liberal
- 5) American culture wars religiosity

WHAT WINS ELECTIONS?

-

In theory: election enables citizens to choose and guide their government

Reality: rational choice heavily manipulated by mass media and personality

Most parties showcase their leaders personalities

Ideologies seldom emphasized
TVs and Ads feature leaders images, sometimes without mentioning their parties
Leader is presented as charismatic and decisive, but calm and caring
Ex) Ronald Reagan, Barack Obama
Pattern: Keep it general, keep it happy, dont mention parties
5

Chapter 12: Elections

Made by : All rights reserved

U.S. Presidential Elections candidates who present the most up image of America almost wins
Pessimistic candidates tend to lose
Leaders personalities are sold through television (where candidates image is controlled)
Use Photo opportunities instead of question and answer session
PO: seemingly shows spontaneous candidate activity
PO is wordless, and sees the image as personal handlers
This is happening world wide = television very largely is the campaign
France journalist complained about hypermediatisation of French politics
Everything is professionally controlled, to make a more perfect drama
Television also blankets Europe
French call it le clip politique three types
(1) jingle clip: simple attention getting device
(2) allegoral clip hero candidate in epic
(3) ideological clip sets an idea in images
Elections won by the candidate with the sunniest personality
More money wins for television is terribly expensive

Retrospective Voting
-

When voting, voters form an overall evaluation of performance of an incumbent president

See if they have done a good job or a poor one in the economy
Morris P. Fiorina called this retrospective voting : it views 4 years of performance
When people think the current government doing a good job in general, the current
government is rewarded Johnson, Nixon, Reagan, Clinton, etc.
When doing a poor job they punish the incumbents party Bush 41, McCain, etc.
When people feel good about the economy, they generally vote for incumbents party

Retrospective voting is colored naturally by party identification

Weak party ID and independents look at the overall performances
Strong retrospective view could turn into party ID

Retrospective voting: voters

choosing based on overall
incumbent performance

Candidate Strategies and Voter Groups

-

Campaign strategies have two goals

: (1) not alienating the normal party supporters (2) win votes of the undecided and from opposition
Presidential candidates focus on states with more electoral votes and close to 50-50 voting
battlegrounds such as Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida
States concentrated to one party are considered not in play
Most campaigns are designed to fit the opinions and candidates constituency
Candidates must be conscious about partys strengths and what various groups are thinking about

KEY CONCEPTS CHANGING POSITIONS

- Candidates are opportunistic constantly change their positions to win most votes
Regarded as slippery or unprincipled
However, this is just democracy in action
Elected officials who is discredited is voted out