The purpose of this paper is to document and quantify the primary reasons for the gradual erosion of southern Democratic hegemony in presidential elections during the last twenty-four years. The results confirm and reinforce the findings of the historical study, which indicates the primary reason for changing southern allegiance has been the changing philosophy of the Democratic Party in the civil rights field.

Why did Americans vote for Donald Trump in the 2016 Presidential election? Social scientists have proposed a variety of explanations, including economic dissatisfaction, sexism, racism, Islamophobia, and xenophobia. The current study establishes that, independent of these influences, voting for Trump was, at least for many Americans, a symbolic defense of the United States’ perceived Christian heritage. Data from a national probability sample of Americans surveyed soon after the 2016 election shows that greater adherence to Christian nationalist ideology was a robust predictor of voting for Trump, even after controlling for economic dissatisfaction, sexism, anti-black prejudice, anti-Muslim refugee attitudes, and anti-immigrant sentiment, as well as measures of religion, sociodemographics, and political identity more generally. These findings indicate that Christian nationalist ideology—although correlated with a variety of class-based, sexist, racist, and ethnocentric views—is not synonymous with, reducible to, or strictly epiphenomenal of such views. Rather, Christian nationalism operates as a unique and independent ideology that can influence political actions by calling forth a defense of mythological narratives about America’s distinctively Christian heritage and future.

A great deal of time, money, and effort can be expended on hiring community college presidents without any assurance that they will remain in their new positions a substantial amount of time. Building on decades of literature reporting the continuing decrease of presidential longevity, this study examined the methods most successful in selecting presidents with relatively greater longevity and what relationship exists between the type of presidential search used and the length of tenure. An original 18-question survey was e-mailed to 904 community college and two-year institution presidents to capture information about both current and previous presidencies. Participants returned 224 valid responses for a response rate of 24.8%. Results of a generalized linear model (GLM) yielded a statistically significant result showing a positive relationship between the variable Q7STDT1(type of presidential searches in current position) and length of tenure of selected candidates (F = 3.41, p = .006).No significant relationship was found between the selection process used in the immediately previous presidential positions and selected candidates’ longevity in those positions. Information from this study can be used to decide what types of selection process should be used and to indicate further topics of inquiry in this area.

No description available.

Over the past two decades, a surge of interest in the area of forecasting has produced a number of statistical models available for predicting the winners of U.S. presidential elections. While historically the domain of individuals outside the scholarly community - such as political strategists, pollsters, and journalists - presidential election forecasting has become increasingly mainstream, as a number of prominent political scientists entered the forecasting arena. With the goal of making accurate predictions well in advance of the November election, these forecasters examine several important election "fundamentals" previously shown to impact national election outcomes. In general, most models employ some measure of presidential popularity as well as a variety of indicators assessing the economic conditions prior to the election. Advancing beyond the traditional, non-scientific approaches employed by prognosticators, politicos, and pundits, today's scientific models rely on decades of voting behavior research and sophisticated statistical techniques in making accurate point estimates of the incumbent's or his party's percentage of the popular two-party vote. As the latest evolution in presidential forecasting, these models represent the most accurate and reliable method of predicting elections to date. This thesis provides an assessment of forecasting models' underlying epistemological assumptions, theoretical foundations, and methodological approaches. Additionally, this study addresses forecasting's implications for related bodies of literature, particularly its impact on studies of campaign effects. / Master of Arts

The 2016 U.S. presidential election results surprised many, after several groups many believed to be surefire voters for Democrats based on previous elections voted for Republican Donald Trump (Bump, 2016). Whenever a change takes place in voter patterns, one begins to hear phrases like “critical election” and “political realignment.” A critical election is an election where there is a change of at least 10 percent in partisan alignment, but it does not persist in the next election. A partisan realignment is similar to a critical election, but the change is more durable. This research explores whether the 2016 election can be classified as a critical election and whether and how key groupings of Democratic voters voted in the election compared to their votes in the 2012 election. Using data aggregated at the county level, regression analyses suggest that voters’ education, access to health care, union membership, racial/ethnic diversity, and income level all had statistically significant relationships with votes in both elections and with the change in vote between 2016 and 2012, all were substantively significant or in directions consistent with the presence of a critical election when viewed either from the national or even regional viewpoint. Evidence suggests that 2016 was a critical election. / M.A. / If 2016 proved anything about elections, it is that at times they can be difficult to predict. Predicting voter behavior based on past elections is not straightforward, in part because at times voters can make sharp changes in their party alliance over the course of four years. Sometimes those changes are lasting, but they also can fade by the next election cycle. This study examined whether the 2016 U.S. presidential election constituted such a sharp and sudden change from the 2012 election, an event social scientists term a “critical election.” Conducted at the county level, the study examined whether and how voter groupings (based on education, access to health care, union membership, income, and race/ethnicity) changed notably between 2012 and 2016. What was found was that as expected Democrats experienced a negative change in support among union, white, and impoverished voters. What was not expected was the negative change in Black votes for Democrats between 2012 and 2016. Another unexpected, though smaller, change was a drop in Democratic support by the college educated. No significant change in Democratic support was found among Hispanics or those with access to healthcare. Based on these findings 2016 can be considered to have been a critical election for Blacks.

This thesis tracks the direction of the development of unilateral executive power from Nixon to Clinton. The thirty-two-year process saw a mostly continuous growth of the power of the president to act unilaterally through a variety of mechanisms seizing the ability to act first from the other branches of government and the bureaucracy. The ability to enhance presidential power depends on many factors such as one time shocks (such as Watergate) and congressional support. The minority presidency of Richard Nixon responded to democratic control of Congress by aggressive assertions of presidential power via unilateral decrees. In fights such as impoundment, wage and price controls, and affirmative action plans, Nixon attempted to increase the power of the presidency while also laying groundwork for future regulatory reforms. Nixon’s resignation and Watergate crated stiff headwinds for the development of the unilateral powers of the presidency with Congress passed meaningful attempts to claw back presidential powers that had accumulated over time. Nevertheless, the Ford and Carter presidencies still saw the groundwork laid for the next major expansion of presidential authority. Under Reagan and George Herbert Walker Bush, the “Reagan Revolution” saw the Presidency gain new powers to aggressively combat the growing state. The assault on government saw the creation of modern signing statements, and harsh anti-regulatory actions. Clinton’s presidency saw a continued evolution of executive power albeit shaped by the significantly different ends trying to be achieved than under the two previous Republican presidents while also seeing new innovations in the mix of powers.

This study is a textual analysis of the mainstream media coverage of the 2008 U.S. Presidential election, surveying more than 1,000 news stories featuring Clinton, Palin, Obama, Biden and McCain published between January 1, 2007 and November 11, 2008. The central findings of this study are twofold: first, mainstream news sources continue to use stereotypical and sexist news frames that describe women in ways that are at odds with the criteria we set for being a good president; and second, feminism is characterized in ways that divorce the ideas of the movement from the activism necessary to overcome existing injustices. Chapter 2 discusses how the news frames and double binds-in place for more than 100 years in media coverage and constructions of women-are still being used to describe women candidates today. These frames highlight sexist concerns about how women candidates will balance their public and private lives and deflect the multiple, competing roles women are capable of enacting. Chapter 3 analyses news articles that relate the terms "feminism" and "feminist" to comments about Clinton and Palin to determine the ways in which the movement is being defined by mainstream media. The chapter argues that this coverage offered a limited vision of feminism that ignored race, class, and issues presented in the third wave. It also divorces the feminist movement from the activist work that has and will continue to make change possible in our country by equating feminism with postfeminist ideas. Chapter 4 highlights the associations made between the male candidates and the women's movement. The coverage of the male candidates in the campaign posits a vision of women's experiences that are defined through the media by male candidates. These definitions highlight women as caregivers and separate the issues important to women from the feminist activism necessary to work toward changing the situation women in the United States face. Finally, the conclusion offers suggestions for how to intervene in the 135-year cycle that perpetuates limited and damaging views of women candidates and of the feminist movement. Through these types of interventions, feminist-minded men and women can continue to work toward more positive and fair representations of women candidates and that changes in representations of women candidates will lead to the election of the first woman president of the United States.

Regarding presidential responsiveness and leadership, this study addresses two questions: Does the president respond to the public? Does the president lead the public? Unlike prior research, this study tries to answer these questions by focusing on the news media intervening in the relationship between the president and the public. Rather than positing a direct relationship between them, this study points out that information flows between the president and the public through the news media, which affect the president and the public. The public receives daily political information including presidential messages from the news media. Also, presidents recognize public sentiments from news stories. Accordingly, this study examines the potentially multidirectional relationships between the three actors from 1958 to 2004 in the United States. This study estimates the reciprocal relationships between the three actors by using Vector Autoregression (VAR) and Moving Average Response (MAR) simulations. Analyzing the three actors' issue stances, this study reveals that the news media significantly influence the public and the president. However, the direct relationship between the president and the public is negligible. Furthermore, the empirical findings demonstrate that presidential responsiveness is more likely to be observed when the news media report news stories consonant with past public opinion changes.

The direct election of the president is political, politological and also constitutional-legal topic which has already accompanied for many years. It appears always in connection with the presidential elections, but also as a part of the parliamentary election campaign. February 2012 interrupted the regularity and direct presidential election was approved. The first direct presidential election was held in January 2013. This term preceded by a long election campaign of candidates, persuading voters and several lawsuits. The first direct presidential election won one of the most probable winners - Miloš Zeman.