Download Free Lost In Space Shortcuts And Spatial Voting In Low Information Elections Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Lost In Space Shortcuts And Spatial Voting In Low Information Elections and write the review.

While Quebec is well known for its provincial-level party politics and thriving nationalism, voting behaviour and electoral campaigning at the municipal level have failed to gain much attention to date. Voting in Quebec Municipal Elections seeks to transform the state of municipal elections research in Quebec through a systematic study of the 2017 Montreal and Quebec City elections. Drawing upon data from the Canadian Municipal Election Study, the authors demonstrate not only the importance of Quebec municipal politics, but the many ways that municipal elections research can inform our broader understanding of voting behaviour in the province. This volume considers the features particular to the Quebec local context, such as the importance of language and nationalism, the effects of local party labels for down-ballot races, and the role of ideology. Voting in Quebec Municipal Elections represents the largest-ever collection of work on local elections in the province’s history, making a significant contribution to our understanding of the municipal voter in Quebec.
Offers comprehensive analysis of electoral politics in America's municipalities. Arguing that explanations of voting behavior are ill suited for local contests, the author puts forward a theory that the differences between local, state, and national democracies.
From Kosovo to Kabul, the last decade witnessed growing interest in ?electoral engineering?. Reformers have sought to achieve either greater government accountability through majoritarian arrangements or wider parliamentary diversity through proportional formula. Underlying the normative debates are important claims about the impact and consequences of electoral reform for political representation and voting behavior. The study compares and evaluates two broad schools of thought, each offering contracting expectations. One popular approach claims that formal rules define electoral incentives facing parties, politicians and citizens. By changing these rules, rational choice institutionalism claims that we have the capacity to shape political behavior. Alternative cultural modernization theories differ in their emphasis on the primary motors driving human behavior, their expectations about the pace of change, and also their assumptions about the ability of formal institutional rules to alter, rather than adapt to, deeply embedded and habitual social norms and patterns of human behavior.
Candidates and Voters extends our understanding of vote choice and representation, showing empirically that elections work better than is normally assumed through extensive analysis of US House races. The book will be of interest to political observers, political scientists, and others interested in elections and democratic representation.
DIVExamines how voters use the information given by candidates and make their decisions about presidential candidates. Updated to include the 1996 election /div
"By Popular Demand tackles two important issues--increasing political participation and restoring trust in government--that are critical to the future of American democracy. John Gastil's careful research makes a solid contribution to the recent literature on the growing divide between the public, elections, and policy decisions. His solutions are worthy of our careful consideration."—Mark Baldassare, author of When Government Fails: The Orange County Bankruptcy (California 1998) and California in the New Millennium: The Changing Social and Political Landscape (California 2000). "In an era of political cynicism, a new movement of citizen empowerment is afoot. Encouraging active involvement through community dialogue and deliberation, advocates of strong democracy are designing innovative processes in which ordinary citizens can work through difficult public issues by constructive and respectful talk. John Gastil's new book By Popular Demand: Revitalizing Representative Democracy by Deliberative Elections is a new landmark work in the literature of politics and communication and should be read by everyone interested in the revitalization of democracy."—Stephen W. Littlejohn, President Public Dialogue Consortium "By Popular Demand is a persuasively argued account of the deficiencies of the U.S. electoral system. Gastil provides a wealth of insights into the frequent disconnect between politicians and their constituents. His solution for the ails of popular representation--including on voters' ballots the correspondence between legislators' positions and those of citizen panels--should provoke spirited debate among scholars, journalists, and policymakers alike."—Mark A. Smith, University of Washington John Gastil makes a compelling case for a more deliberative approach to electing officials in the United States. He understands the potential for public deliberation and the barriers to it. Anyone interested in improving the representativeness of the electoral process should take note of this book and its provocative proposal. As Gastil masterfully demonstrates, a deliberative citizenry provides both the knowledge and will required to legitimate democratic governance."—David Mathews, President, Kettering Foundation "Hallelujah for John Gastil! He's right on target that citizens must regain their place in our politics and public life. His call to create more places for citizens to talk deeply about their concerns and hopes is one we must all heed."—Richard C. Harwood, Founder and President of The Harwood Institute for Public Innovation
The growing ideological gulf between Democrats and Republicans is one of the biggest issues in American politics today. Our legislatures, composed of members from two sharply disagreeing parties, are struggling to function as the founders intended them to. If we want to reduce the ideological gulf in our legislatures, we must first understand what has caused it to widen so much over the past forty years. Andrew B. Hall argues that we have missed one of the most important reasons for this ideological gulf: the increasing reluctance of moderate citizens to run for office. While political scientists, journalists, and pundits have largely focused on voters, worried that they may be too partisan, too uninformed to vote for moderate candidates, or simply too extreme in their own political views, Hall argues that our political system discourages moderate candidates from seeking office in the first place. Running for office has rarely been harder than it is in America today, and the costs dissuade moderates more than extremists. Candidates have to wage ceaseless campaigns, dialing for dollars for most of their waking hours while enduring relentless news and social media coverage. When moderate candidates are unwilling to run, voters do not even have the opportunity to send them to office. To understand what is wrong with our legislatures, then, we need to ask ourselves the question: who wants to run? If we want more moderate legislators, we need to make them a better job offer.
The Law of Democracy offers a systematic exploration of the legal construction of American democracy. The book brings together a cluster of issues in law regulating the design of democratic institutions, and the book employs a variety of methods - historical, comparative, theoretical, doctrinal - to explore foundational questions in the theory and practice of democracy. Covered issues include the historical development of the individual right to vote; current struggles over racial gerrymandering; the relationship of the state to political parties; the constitutional and policy issues surrounding campaign-finance reform; and the tension between majority rule and fair representation of minorities in democratic bodies.
An illuminating look at how national political parties nominate presidential candidates This innovative study blends sophisticated statistical analyses, campaign anecdotes, and penetrating political insight to produce a fascinating exploration of one of America's most controversial political institutions—the process by which our major parties nominate candidates for the presidency. Larry Bartels focuses on the nature and impact of "momentum" in the contemporary nominating system. He describes the complex interconnections among primary election results, expectations, and subsequent primary results that have made it possible for candidates like Jimmy Carter, George Bush, and Gary Hart to emerge from relative obscurity into political prominence in nominating campaigns. In the course of his analysis, he addresses questions central to any understanding—or evaluation—of the modern nominating process. How do fundamental political predispositions influence the behavior of primary voters? How quickly does the public learn about new candidates? Under what circumstances will primary success itself generate subsequent primary success? And what are the psychological processes underlying this dynamic tendency? Bartels examines the likely consequences of some proposed alternatives to the nominating process, including a regional primary system and a one-day national primary. Thus the work will be of interest to political activists, would-be reformers, and interested observers of the American political scene, as well as to students of public opinion, voting behavior, the news media, campaigns, and electoral institutions.
Why do some ethnic parties succeed in attracting the support of their target ethnic group while others fail? In a world in which ethnic parties flourish in both established and emerging democracies alike, understanding the conditions under which such parties rise and fall is of critical importance to both political scientists and policy makers. Drawing on a study of variation in the performance of ethnic parties in India, this book builds a theory of ethnic party performance in 'patronage democracies'. Chandra shows why individual voters and political entrepreneurs in such democracies condition their strategies not on party ideologies or policy platforms, but on a headcount of co-ethnics and others across party personnel and among the electorate.