John A. Clark

Making Sense of the 2016 Elections


Скачать книгу

ection>

      

Making Sense of the 2016 Elections Image 1

      Making Sense of the 2016 Elections

      A CQ Press Guide

       Brian Schaffner

       University of Massachusetts Amherst

       John A. Clark

       Western Michigan University

SAGE Imprint SAGE logo

      FOR INFORMATION:

      CQ Press

      An Imprint of SAGE Publications, Inc.

      2455 Teller Road

      Thousand Oaks, California 91320

      E-mail: [email protected]

      SAGE Publications Ltd.

      1 Oliver’s Yard

      55 City Road

      London EC1Y 1SP

      United Kingdom

      SAGE Publications India Pvt. Ltd.

      B 1/I 1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area

      Mathura Road, New Delhi 110 044

      India

      SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte. Ltd.

      3 Church Street

      #10-04 Samsung Hub

      Singapore 049483

      Copyright © 2018 by CQ Press, an imprint of SAGE Publications, Inc. CQ Press is a registered trademark of Congressional Quarterly Inc.

      All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.

      Printed in the United States of America

      ISBN 978-1-5063-8418-4

      This book is printed on acid-free paper.

colophon

      Acquisitions Editor: Matthew Byrnie

      Editorial Assistant: Zachary Hoskins

      Production Editor: David C. Felts

      Typesetter: C&M Digitals (P) Ltd.

      Proofreader: Ellen Howard

      Cover Designer: Anupama Krishnan

      Marketing Manager: Amy Whitaker

      Contents

      1 IntroductionThe Electoral Landscape in 2016Choosing the Presidential NomineesThe Invisible PrimaryThe Democratic Party Decides on ClintonThe Republican Party Decides Not to DecideThe General Election CampaignThe Case for Thinking the Campaign MatteredThe Case for Thinking the Campaign Was of Minimal ImportanceCampaigns Are Mostly about MobilizationThe OutcomeAnother Electoral College/Popular Vote SplitWhere the Election Was WonHow Key Groups VotedWhy People Voted for TrumpThe Battle for Control of CongressHow Republicans Kept the Senate RedWhy Republicans Retained Their House MajorityDiversity in CongressThe 2016 Elections in the StatesGovernors and State LegislaturesBallot ProposalsPutting the 2016 Election into ContextNotes

      2  About the Authors

      Introduction

Image 2

      Donald Trump’s electoral college victory took many by surprise, as demonstrated by these shocked—and, in the case of the Daily News, horrified—cover pages from three New York City newspapers the morning after the general election.

      John Moore/Getty Images

      The 2016 election will undoubtedly leave a lasting impression on many Americans. A businessman and reality show star with no political experience whatsoever won the presidency despite losing to his opponent—the first ever female major party nominee for president—by over 2.8 million votes nationally. But it was also an election that will leave a lasting impression on political science. The success of Donald Trump’s candidacy challenged many political science theories about the nature of American campaigns, while it simultaneously helped to highlight other important concepts that have long been well understood. In this volume, we revisit this historic election from the perspective of political science to provide important context about the 2016 election itself, and to consider how this election can inform our broader understanding of American politics.

      The Electoral Landscape in 2016

      Political scientists who study elections in the United States generally focus on a wide array of factors that might influence the outcome. These factors range from the general state of the economy in the months leading up to the election to where the candidates campaigned in the final weeks of the campaign. There are debates among scholars concerning the relative importance of each of these factors.1 Indeed, many believe that the campaign is of minimal importance and that a variety of fundamental factors such as the popularity of the incumbent president and the success of the economy are highly predictive of the eventual outcome of the election.2

      Economic measures are thought to be important for understanding election outcomes because the party that holds the presidency is generally held responsible for economic conditions in the country. When the economy is doing well, voters tend to reward the party in control by reelecting their candidates to office; but when the economy is doing poorly, voters tend to punish the incumbent party. For example, in 2008, Republican candidate John McCain faced a very difficult electoral environment largely because an economic crisis had begun earlier that year while another Republican—George W. Bush—still held office. As economic conditions continued to deteriorate during that election, Republicans largely took the blame, and this made McCain’s pursuit of the White House an uphill battle. He ultimately lost the national popular vote to Barack Obama by 7 points, and Obama carried 365 electoral votes on his way to a landslide victory.

      In 2012, the nature of economic conditions was not quite as clear. While the economy had been steadily improving since Obama’s first year in office, the unemployment rate was still relatively high at the beginning of that year. Nonetheless, Obama received enough credit for the improvements in the economy to help him edge past Republican nominee Mitt Romney by about 4 percentage points.

      By 2016, economic conditions were more clearly improved compared to what they had been in 2012. The unemployment rate had settled around 5 percent, the lowest it had been since early 2008. Other economic measures, such as gross domestic product growth, were also generally strong, if not spectacular. Many in the public also viewed their own economic situations in a favorable light. A Pew Research Center poll conducted in October 2016 found that about half of Americans rated their personal financial situations as either good or excellent.3 This was the highest level of satisfaction with personal finances since early 2008, before the Great Recession began.

      Interestingly, political scientists have found that vote choices are generally more influenced by the direction in which economic conditions are heading rather than by the overall