Ray Fair: The Effect Of Economic Events On Votes For President

What factors are most accurate in predicting the outcome of a presidential election? In the book The Gamble, by John Sides and Lynn Vavreck, the factors of choice and chance answer this question through analysis of the 2012 presidential election. The term choice refers to the factors that the candidate has no control over, such as what the media chooses to cover and what the campaign chooses to make stances on. Adversely, chance is what the candidate has no control over, such as the state of the economy and partisanship. Sides and Vavreck refer to chance factors as fundamentals. I will argue that the economy plays the greatest role in deciding presidential elections. Campaigns and media are secondary to the economy and underlying voter partisanship, due to their inconsequential effect on voters. I will argue that chance is more important than choice from the evidence provided in the The Gamble, by John Sides and Lynn Vavreck, and Partisan Biases in Economic Accountability, by Larry Bartels. Political scientists evaluate and debate the role of choice versus the role of chance in predicting presidential elections. The economy and partisanship are superior at predicting presidential elections because the fleeting effects of media, the tug-of-war campaigns, strong voter partisanship, and myopic voters.

The article " How Did Race, Gender, Class, and Education Influence the Election?" represents the sociological perspective on how race, gender, class, and education had an affect on who voted for Trump and who voted for Hilary. Unsurprisingly, given the heated gender politics of the battle between Trump and Clinton had exit poll data showing that the majority of men voted for Trump at 53%, while the majority of women voted for Clinton at 54%. The gender gap in the presidential vote preference is among the widest in exit polls in decades. More white, male voters with a college degree or higher chose Trump. On the other hand more white, female voters with a college degree or more voted for Clinton.

In a 1980 debate against Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan touched upon a core concern of the American electorate by asking one question: “Are you better off than you were four years ago?” (Healey and Lenz 2014). Political scientists have long debated what sways voters in presidential elections, and whether a candidate’s campaign and personality can transcend the economic fundamentals that face the nation. Although a slew of statistical studies and literature argue on both sides of this debate, a historical analysis demonstrates that economic fundamentals drive general election results. A range of studies show that the electorate responds to economic performance, although voters’ measures of economic well-being tend not to be simple summary figures like GDP growth over four years. The economy impacts the election in a more nuanced fashion. Firstly, voters tend to place a notable amount of weight upon the election year, with other periods playing less of a role in their decision making. Secondly, the metric used to evaluate economic prosperity should be a broad sweep of the voter’s perceptions, rather than a particular macroeconomic statistic. In order to match these theories with examples, we see historical incidences of incumbent parties with the odds

In the 2000 election, Bush and running mate Dick Cheney (1941-), a former congressman and U.S. defense secretary under George H.W. Bush, defeated Vice President Al Gore (1948-) and his running mate, U.S. Senator Joe Lieberman (1942-) of Connecticut, by a margin of 271-266 electoral votes, though Gore won the popular vote by 48.4 percent to Bush’s 47.9 percent. The 2000 election was the fourth election in U.S. history in which the winner of the electoral votes did not carry the popular vote.

There is an observational equivalence problem, we don’t know if individuals within a certain group vote for candidates because they benefit that group as a whole or because they benefit the individual who happens to be a member of that group.

The United States presidential election in the year 2000 between George W. Bush and Al Gore was one of the closest finishes in our country’s history. In addition to the election being so tightly contested, the election also provided an in depth look at the inner workings of our political process. There are 538 electors in the United States Electoral College, thus to win the presidency a candidate must receive the majority vote of at least 271 electoral votes. In the case of the presidential election of 2000, George W. Bush received 271 electoral votes and Al Gore received 266, thus George W. Bush achieved the majority and was eventually sworn in as the 43rd president of the United States. However, there were some unusual occurrences in the

In the 2000 United State’s Presidential Elections, it was the incumbent Governor George W. Bush of Texas who represented the Republicans and incumbent Vice President Al Gore who depicted the Democrats. While the elections ended with a recount in Florida, Governor Bush was soon declared the president as he gained the majority of the electoral votes with 271. However, controversial uproar soon filled American voters when further polls proved Gore lost the elections while successfully winning the popular vote by more than 500,000 votes. Discouraged with the concept that a presidential candidate could win the popular vote but still lose the presidential elections, many American voters have turned their appeal to the National Popular Vote bill because

George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, Ronald Reagan, and Franklin Roosevelt are consistently ranked high in rankings of presidential success, yet most political scholars would agree that presidential success is one of the most difficult topics to define. The same issues that make the topic of presidential success interesting and open to debate also make it difficult to determine.

Throughout American history, many minority groups have encountered significant barriers to the right to vote. Traditionally, specific populations concerned with protecting their power over others have maintained tight control over this privilege. In doing so, violations of basic human rights have occurred; state and federal governments established voting restrictions based on race. Fortunately, several methods were taken for overcoming these limitations that resulted in the voting practices used today. These recent legislations that government enacted have been to benefit voters. This research paper will go in depth with the main restrictions, laid out by either the states or the government, placed on different races in America, look at

The 1980 presidential election of the United States featured three primary candidates, Republican Ronald Reagan, Democrat Jimmy Carter and liberal Republican John Anderson. Ronald Reagan was the governor of California before he decided to run for the presidency. John Anderson was a representative in Illinois and Carter was the incumbent. The lengthy Iran hostage crisis sharpened public opinions by the beginning of the election season. In the 1970s, the United States were experiencing a straining episode of low economic growth, high price increases and interest rates and an irregular energy crisis. The sense of discomfort in both domestic and foreign affairs in the nation were heading downward, this added to the downward spiral that was already going on. Between Carter, Anderson and Reagan, the general election campaign of the 1980s seemed more concerned with shadowboxing around political issues rather than a serious discussion of the issues that concerned voters.

Back in 2000, the presidential election was decided by 537 votes in Florida. According to the New York Times, there were 620,000 Floridians barred from voting that were convicted of a felony, regardless of the crime committed. That’s a large poll of Floridians that didn’t get to exercise their right to vote. Had those 620,000 Floridians voted, the 2000 presidential elections may have had a different outcome. It is very important that all Americans exercise their right to vote to ensure we the people select the right representatives in office. There are certain felony crimes that should absolutely ban those said individuals their right to vote, but there are other crimes that are not as serious that should not impact those said individuals their right to vote. The 2000 elections were just and example of how

The United States of America is one of the few countries that give its citizens a unique opportunity and that is to vote. Many other countries give its citizens the right to vote, however America is different due to the fact that its citizens vote for everything, from their local government to their president. With power this great, it gives more reason to become and informed voter. Each state has congressional districts that are made by the population. Each district has around 711,000 people. Each district gets one representative in the House of Representatives. For example, Portland Connecticut is part of the 1st congressional district in Connecticut. Their representative is John Larson. The 1st congressional district of Connecticut spans over multiple counties including multiple major cities, and example would be East and West Hartford, Hartford being the capital of Connecticut. Other cities include Middletown and Manchester, all which are highly populated and the towns have large impacts on Connecticut’s economy.

After Donald Trump was elected president, the US citizens thought that their vote did not make a difference. After the Electoral College shut down the opinion of the public and voted out of their own opinion on who should be the leader, made the voters think that they are not living in a democracy. I believe that the voters were even more upset at the fact that the popular vote was leaning completely to one side and and the candidate that was victorious could not compare to the same amount of voters. Some of the voters felt betrayed, upset, furious, and just shocked at the news that Donald Trump will be called “Mr.President”. People all through the United States protested long and hard for the result to be recounted, but it was not successful.

Every four years, the citizens of the United States of America cast their vote for whom they want to lead our country. What might not be so obvious is how important of a role the economy plays in affecting which party will come out on top. Not everyone has kids and cares about education and not everyone is well versed enough about foreign policy to care about either immigration or the conflicts in the middle east. However, everyone cares about his or her money and the stability of the financial markets that they invest their money in as well as security of their own jobs.

Many political science researchers study the forces that drive the vote. One of the earliest, and most well known, books about election studies is The American Voter. Written in 1960, the book tries to explain a model that describes what drives Americans to vote the way they do. The model suggests that social factors determine ones party identification, which determines one's issue positions and evaluation of candidate's characteristics. These forces all work together to determine how one will vote. This model may or may not still hold true today, as political researchers are not in agreement as to what exactly drives the vote. One thing that does remain true, however, is that factors such as social groups, party identification, issues,