DOCSLIB.ORG

Georgia Senate Runoff Elections 25 Dec 2020 – 01 Jan 2021

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Georgia Senate Runoff Elections 25 Dec 2020 – 01 Jan 2021 Georgia Senate Runoff Elections 25 Dec 2020 – 01 Jan 2021 © 2021 AtlasIntel All Rights Reserved Methodology & Sample Profile This study was conducted by AtlasIntel, an independent research & data intelligence firm. Random interviews of Georgia adults were conducted online and via live calls to cellphones and landlines between December 25 2020 and January 1 2021. The sample was post-stratified with propensity scores to match the profile of registered voters on the following variables: gender, region, age group, education, family income, and race. Results are reported for 1680 likely voters. The margin of error for likely voters is +/-2% at the 95% confidence level. Some percentages do not add up to 100% due to rounding. More information about AtlasIntel can be obtained by visiting www.atlasintel.org. Gender VotePartisanship in 2016 Presidential(self-reportedElections) Female 50.6% DemocratsHillary Clinton 34.4%44.7% Male 49.4% RepublicansDonald Trump 36.2%43.4% IndependentsOther; doesn’t remember; didn’t vote 29.411.9%% Age Group 18 – 29 15.8% Household income 30 – 44 26.2% Below 50k 38.1%38.0%42.4% 45 – 64 40.7% 50k – 100k 32.5%32.0%30.0% 65+ 17.3% Above 100k 29.5%30.0%27.6% Race Education White 60.9% College degree or higher 34.6%51.8% Black 28.8% All other 65.4%48.2% Hispanic 3.9% Asian 2.9% VoteVote inin 20162020 PresidentialPresidentialElectionsElection DonaldHillary ClintonTrump Other 3.6% 47.0%44.7% JoeDonald Biden Trump 46.0%43.4% Other,; don’tdoesn’trememberremember, didn’t; didn’tvotevote 11.9%7.0% 2 I. Senate Runoff Election 1 Whom will you vote for in the runoff of the United States Senate election in Georgia, to be held on January 5, 2021? Dec-20 David Perdue 47 Jon Ossoff 51 Don’t know 1 Won’t vote 1 Jon Ossoff 51.3 David Perdue 47.0 Won't vote 1.0 Don't know 0.7 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1 Whom will you vote for in the runoff of the United States Senate election in Georgia, to be held on January 5, 2021? [Crosstabs] 2 Whom will you vote for in the runoff of the United States Senate special election in Georgia, to be held on January 5, 2021? Dec-20 Kelly Loeffler 47 Raphael Warnock 51 Don’t know 1 Won’t vote 1 Raphael Warnock 51.1 Kelly Loeffler 46.9 Won't vote 1.3 Don't know 0.7 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 2 Whom will you vote for in the runoff of the United States Senate special election in Georgia, to be held on January 5, 2021? [Crosstabs] 3 If the 2020 Presidential Election was held tomorrow, how would you vote? (regardless of how you voted during the actual election). Dec-20 Donald Trump 47 Joe Biden 49 Other 3 Joe Biden 49.4 Donald Trump 47.4 Other candidate 1.8 Don't know 0.9 Wouldn't vote 0.5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 3 If the 2020 Presidential Election was held tomorrow, how would you vote? (regardless of how you voted during the actual election). [Crosstabs] II. Image of Political Leaders 4 Do you have a positive or negative image of the following politicians? Barack Obama 52 3 45 Jon Ossoff 49 4 47 Raphael Warnock 49 5 46 Joe Biden 48 6 46 Donald Trump 47 2 51 Mike Pence 47 7 46 Stacey Abrams 47 6 47 Kamala Harris 46 5 49 David Perdue 45 5 50 Kelly Loeffler 43 7 50 Nancy Pelosi 34 10 56 Brad Raffensperger 33 25 42 Hillary Clinton 33 9 58 Brian Kemp 25 17 58 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Positive Don't know Negative III. Election Fraud Allegations 5 Do you approve or disapprove of Governor Brian Kemp’s conduct during the 2020 Presidential Election? Dec-20 Approve 37 Disapprove 48 Don't know 15 Approve 37.4 Disapprove 47.8 Don't know 14.8 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 6 Do you approve or disapprove of Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s conduct during the 2020 Presidential Election? Dec-20 Approve 52 Disapprove 45 Don't know 3 Approve 41.3 Disapprove 40 Don't know 18.8 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 7 Do you think Joe Biden won Georgia in the 2020 Presidential Election due to election fraud? Dec-20 Yes 43 No 50 Don't know 6 Yes 43.2 No 50.4 Don't know 6.3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 8 In your opinion, will election fraud affect the results of the January 5 2021 runoff for the Georgia Senate elections? Dec-20 Yes 37 No 46 Don't know 17 Yes 36.6 No 46.5 Don't know 17 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 9 Do you support the introduction of voter ID verification for absentee ballots? Dec-20 Yes 68 No 19 Don't know 13 Yes 67.6 No 19 Don't know 13.4 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 AtlasIntel was the best pollster of the 2020 US presidential election, with an average error of 2.01% in the estimated margin of victory in state and national-level polls. AtlasIntel 2.01 Wick 2.45 Trafalgar Group 2.45 InsiderAdvantage 3.00 Harris Insights & Analytics 3.01 Rasmussen Reports 3.32 RMG Research 3.64 Emerson College 3.93 Data for Progress 4.28 Marist College 4.63 Gravis Marketing 4.63 Change Research 4.70 Swayable 4.74 Morning Consult 4.83 Ipsos 4.87 Research Co. 4.96 SurveyMonkey 5.21 New York Times / Siena College 5.26 YouGov 5.27 Monmouth University 5.41 Civiqs 6.02 ABC News/The Washington Post 6.30 Public Policy Polling 6.40 Redfield & Wilton Strategies 6.49 USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times 6.71 CNN / SSRS 7.05 Quinnipiac University 8.45 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Note: Based on differences between margins of victory in polls vs. final vote count; includes pollsters releasing at least 5 national and battleground state polls in the last 10 days prior to ED (11/3). Data source: https://data.fivethirtyeight.com/ for polling data; https://results.decisiondeskhq.com/ for vote count data. Updated as of 5:30pm EST on 12/07/2020. All AtlasIntel polls in the 2020 US election cycle were able to anticipate the result within the margin of error. The average error was smaller than that of any forecaster or polling average. AtlasIntel polls for the 2020 US democratic primaries had the smallest mean error across all pollsters. AtlasIntel conducted the most accurate polls in New Hampshire, California, and Florida. Performance up to February 12 2020 Performance up to March 15 2020 Source: G. Elliott Morris, The Economist Source: Jack Kersting, JHK Forecasts https://twitter.com/gelliottmorris/status/1227454160813088769 https://projects.jhkforecasts.com/democratic_primary/analysis/ In the 2020 Municipal Elections in Brazil, in each of the five cities polled by AtlasIntel (São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Recife, Fortaleza, and Porto Alegre) no other polls came closer to the final results. AtlasIntel had the best performance in anticipating the results of the 2019 Presidential Elections in Argentina. We conducted the only poll that predicted the results of all candidates within the margin of error. Atlas Tracking PRO High-frequency polling tool based on AtlasIntel’s proprietary methodology for data collection, validation, and stratification. ✓ Currently coverage: North America US States South America Europe ▪ United States ▪ Arizona ▪ Argentina ▪ France ▪ Mexico ▪ Florida ▪ Brazil ▪ Germany ▪ Georgia ▪ Chile ▪ Netherlands ▪ Ohio ▪ Colombia ▪ Italy ▪ Michigan ▪ Ecuador ▪ Spain ▪ North Carolina ▪ Peru ▪ UK ▪ Pennsylvania ▪ Texas Atlas Tracking PRO is accessible in real time to our subscribers Atlas Monitor Atlas Monitor tracks political engagement in social media in real time. We deploy big data tools to transform huge quantities of information into intuitive and useful indicators that reveal the impact of network sentiment on political developments and electoral dynamics. All of our work carefully adheres to the privacy rights of social media users, to platform policies, and to local and international legislation. Atlas Monitor is accessible in real time to our subscribers Media & Client Inquiries: [email protected].
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Approval of George W. Bush: Economic and Media Impacts Gino Tozzi Jr
    Wayne State University Wayne State University Dissertations 1-1-2011 Approval of George W. Bush: Economic and media impacts Gino Tozzi Jr. Wayne State University, Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/oa_dissertations Part of the Mass Communication Commons, and the Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Tozzi Jr., Gino, "Approval of George W. Bush: Economic and media impacts" (2011). Wayne State University Dissertations. Paper 260. This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@WayneState. It has been accepted for inclusion in Wayne State University Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@WayneState. APPROVAL OF GEORGE W. BUSH: ECONOMIC AND MEDIA IMPACTS by GINO J. TOZZI JR. DISSERTATION Submitted to the Graduate School of Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 2011 MAJOR: POLITICAL SCIENCE Approved by: _________________________________ Chair Date _________________________________ _________________________________ _________________________________ © COPYRIGHT BY GINO J. TOZZI JR. 2011 All Rights Reserved DEDICATION To my Father ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I want to thank my committee chair Professor Ewa Golebiowska for the encouragement and persistence on only accepting the best from me in this process. I also owe my committee of Professor Ronald Brown, Professor Jodi Nachtwey, and Professor David Martin a debt of gratitude for their help and advisement in this endeavor. All of them were instrumental in keeping my focus narrowed to produce the best research possible. I also owe appreciation to the commentary, suggestions, and research help from my wonderful wife Courtney Tozzi. This project was definitely more enjoyable with her encouragement and help.
    [Show full text]
  • The Long Red Thread How Democratic Dominance Gave Way to Republican Advantage in Us House of Representatives Elections, 1964
    THE LONG RED THREAD HOW DEMOCRATIC DOMINANCE GAVE WAY TO REPUBLICAN ADVANTAGE IN U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ELECTIONS, 1964-2018 by Kyle Kondik A thesis submitted to Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Baltimore, Maryland September 2019 © 2019 Kyle Kondik All Rights Reserved Abstract This history of U.S. House elections from 1964-2018 examines how Democratic dominance in the House prior to 1994 gave way to a Republican advantage in the years following the GOP takeover. Nationalization, partisan realignment, and the reapportionment and redistricting of House seats all contributed to a House where Republicans do not necessarily always dominate, but in which they have had an edge more often than not. This work explores each House election cycle in the time period covered and also surveys academic and journalistic literature to identify key trends and takeaways from more than a half-century of U.S. House election results in the one person, one vote era. Advisor: Dorothea Wolfson Readers: Douglas Harris, Matt Laslo ii Table of Contents Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………....ii List of Tables……………………………………………………………………………..iv List of Figures……………………………………………………………………………..v Introduction: From Dark Blue to Light Red………………………………………………1 Data, Definitions, and Methodology………………………………………………………9 Chapter One: The Partisan Consequences of the Reapportionment Revolution in the United States House of Representatives, 1964-1974…………………………...…12 Chapter 2: The Roots of the Republican Revolution:
    [Show full text]
  • James.Qxp March Apri
    COBB COUNTY A BUSTLING MARCH/APRIL 2017 PAGE 26 AN INSIDE VIEW INTO GEORGIA’S NEWS, POLITICS & CULTURE THE 2017 MOST INFLUENTIAL GEORGIA LOTTERY CORP. CEO ISSUE DEBBIE ALFORD COLUMNS BY KADE CULLEFER KAREN BREMER MAC McGREW CINDY MORLEY GARY REESE DANA RICKMAN LARRY WALKER The hallmark of the GWCCA Campus is CONNEE CTIVITY DEPARTMENTS Publisher’s Message 4 Floating Boats 6 FEATURES James’ 2017 Most Influential 8 JAMES 18 Saluting the James 2016 “Influentials” P.O. BOX 724787 ATLANTA, GEORGIA 31139 24 678 • 460 • 5410 Georgian of the Year, Debbie Alford Building A Proposed Contiguous Exhibition Facilityc Development on the Rise in Cobb County 26 PUBLISHED BY by Cindy Morley INTERNET NEWS AGENCY LLC 2017 Legislators of the Year 29 Building B CHAIRMAN MATTHEW TOWERY COLUMNS CEO & PUBLISHER PHIL KENT Future Conventtion Hotel [email protected] Language Matters: Building C How We Talk About Georgia Schools 21 CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER LOUIE HUNTER by Dr. Dana Rickman ASSOCIATE EDITOR GARY REESE ADVERTISING OPPORTUNITIES Georgia’s Legal Environment on a PATTI PEACH [email protected] Consistent Downward Trend 23 by Kade Cullefer The connections between Georggia World Congress Center venues, the hotel MARKETING DIRECTOR MELANIE DOBBINS district, and the world’world s busiest aairporirport are key differentiaferentiatorsators in Atlanta’Atlanta’s ability to [email protected] Georgia Restaurants Deliver compete for in-demand conventions and tradeshows. CIRCULATION PATRICK HICKEY [email protected] Significant Economic Impact 31 by Karen Bremer CONTRIBUTING WRITERS A fixed gateway between the exhibit halls in Buildings B & C would solidify KADE CULLEFER 33 Atlanta’s place as the world’s premier convention destination.
    [Show full text]
  • Waiting for a Green Stimulus Green Stimulus
    A view of a protest message, “We need a green new deal,” written in chalk in front of the New York State Capitol and office of Governor Andrew Cuomo. (Getty Images/Rochlin) Waiting for a Green Stimulus By Julian Brave NoiseCat 34 Courier ven before Congress passed the historic $2.2 trillion Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, buzz began to build in Washington, DC, that lawmakers would soon return to the Capitol to hash out another deal. President Donald Trump signed the CARES Act into law on Friday, March 27. ŘļñÕêĔĆĆĔŖõčë¥ÕÑčÕĴѲŘʞAĔŁĴÕĭÕ²ăÕİ]²čËŘ|ÕĆĔĴõ ĭİÕĴõÑÕčļĔêĭĔĆõËŘ²čÑĴļݲļÕëŘʞ²İëŁõčëļñ²ļ"ÕČĔËݲļĴ Ŗ²ĴËõİËŁĆ²ļõčë²ČÕČĔĔŁļĆõčõčë"ÕČĔËݲļõËĭİõĔİõļõÕĴ ĴñĔŁĆÑĴÕļ²ĴõÑÕËĔčËÕİčĴ²ÊĔŁļļñÕč²ļõĔč²ĆÑÕţËõļ²čÑ êĔİĴĭÕčÑõčëĔčõčêݲĴļİŁËļŁİÕʣŁļļñÕČÕČĔŖ²ĴĔŁļ spend big on jobs, infrastructure, and climate. “We should ĔêѲļÕÊŘļñÕčÕŗļČĔİčõčëŖñÕčļñÕ"Õĭ²İļČÕčļĔê ļñõčăĔêËĆõČ²ļÕĭĔĆõËŘ²čѲ;İÕÕč]ÕŖ"Õ²ĆļñÕĴ²ČÕ Labor released new statistics showing more than 6.6 Ŗ²ŘŖÕļñõčăĔêĔļñÕİõčŕÕĴļČÕčļĴʞ²Ĵ²ÑĔŖčʴĭ²ŘČÕčļ ČõĆĆõĔčČÕİõ˲čĴţĆÕÑêĔİŁčÕČĭĆĔŘČÕčļõčĴŁİ²čËÕ on a safe and prosperous future,” we wrote. With interest ļñÕŖÕÕăĭİõĔİʞļĔĭĭõčë²č²ĆĆʴļõČÕİÕËĔİÑļñ²ļñ²ÑÊÕÕč rates at historic lows, such an agenda would be cheaper to ĴÕļļñÕŖÕÕăāŁĴļÊÕêĔİÕļñ²ļʣŘ:İõѲŘʞĭİõĆʀʞČĔİÕ ţč²čËÕļñ²čÕŕÕİʣEļČõëñļţč²ĆĆŘÊÕļõČÕļĔ²ËļĔčËĆõČ²ļÕʣ ļñ²čɾɽČõĆĆõĔčČÕİõ˲čĴŖÕİÕŁčÕČĭĆĔŘÕÑʰİĔŁëñĆŘ ļñÕĭĔĭŁĆ²ļõĔčĔê]ÕŖ§ĔİăõļŘ²čÑñõ˲ëĔËĔČÊõčÕÑʱʣ The coronavirus seemed to be toppling pillars of American The speaker, responding to the news, changed her tune: õÑÕĔĆĔëŘĔčËÕ²ĴţİČ²Ĵ]ÕŖļĔčʿĴĆ²ŖĴʣČõÑļñÕĭ²čʴ
    [Show full text]
  • Four Days in July That Rocked Indiana Pence’S Pursuit of Veep Nod, Holcomb’S Win at GOP Central Committee Were Bold Moves Toward November History by BRIAN A
    V22, N15 Thursday, Nov. 17, 2016 Four days in July that rocked Indiana Pence’s pursuit of veep nod, Holcomb’s win at GOP Central Committee were bold moves toward November history By BRIAN A. HOWEY INDIANAPOLIS – When filing back through time to make sense of the Gov. Mike Pence and Lt. Gov. Eric Holcomb sensational Nov. 8 election that catapulted celebrate their Election Day victories that Gov. Mike Pence were forged by four momentus days in into global power July, including Trump’s visit to Indianapolis and capped Eric and Westfield. Holcomb’s unprec- edented rise in Indi- Republican presidential ticket with ana, it comes down Donald Trump. Except it was not fait to four days in July accompli. That wouldn’t happen until when the historic Friday, July 15. and fateful dramas unfolded. And on Monday July 25, after 22 Indiana Republi- On July 14, we witnessed cable breaking news can Central Committee members migrated back to Indiana reports of Gov. and Mrs. Pence disembarking on a charter from the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, the flight from Indianapolis to Teterboro, N.J., in what most thought was an obvious sign he was about to join the Continued on page 3 2016 winners and losers By MARK SOUDER FORT WAYNE – Every election results in individual and categorical winners and losers that impact the longer- term future of politics. Here are a few of my selections. Indiana winner: The Pence/Coats establishment. “The very worst choice you can It directed the quasi-slating of the victorious state ticket: Todd make is to opt out as a citizen, to Young for Senate, in part by give in to the cynicsm, the moving Eric Holcomb out and into position to become gover- despair and the anger.
    [Show full text]
  • District Policy Group Provides Top-Line Outcomes and Insight, with Emphasis on Health Care Policy and Appropriations, Regarding Tuesday’S Midterm Elections
    District Policy Group provides top-line outcomes and insight, with emphasis on health care policy and appropriations, regarding Tuesday’s midterm elections. Election Outcome and Impact on Outlook for 114th Congress: With the conclusion of Tuesday’s midterm elections, we have officially entered that Lame Duck period of time between the end of one Congress and the start of another. Yesterday’s results brought with them outcomes that were both surprising and those that were long-anticipated. For the next two years, the House and Senate will be controlled by the Republicans. However, regardless of the predictions that pundits made, the votes are in, Members of the 114th Congress (2015-2016) have been determined, and we can now begin to speculate about what these changes will mean for business interests and advocacy organizations. Even though we now have a Republican majority in Congress, for the next two years, President Obama remains resident at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Although President Obama will be a Lame Duck President, he still has issues and priority policies he wishes to pursue. Many other Lame Duck presidents have faced Congresses controlled by the opposite party and how a President responds to the challenge often can determine his legacy. Given the total number of Republican pick-ups in the House and Senate, we anticipate the GOP will feel emboldened to pursue its top policy priorities; as such, we do not suspect that collaboration and bipartisanship will suddenly arrive at the Capitol. We anticipate the Democrats will work hard to try to keep their caucus together, but this may prove challenging for Senate Minority Leader Reid, especially with the moderate Democrats and Independents possibly deciding to ally with the GOP.
    [Show full text]
  • Online Media and the 2016 US Presidential Election
    Partisanship, Propaganda, and Disinformation: Online Media and the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Faris, Robert M., Hal Roberts, Bruce Etling, Nikki Bourassa, Ethan Zuckerman, and Yochai Benkler. 2017. Partisanship, Propaganda, and Disinformation: Online Media and the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society Research Paper. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:33759251 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA AUGUST 2017 PARTISANSHIP, Robert Faris Hal Roberts PROPAGANDA, & Bruce Etling Nikki Bourassa DISINFORMATION Ethan Zuckerman Yochai Benkler Online Media & the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This paper is the result of months of effort and has only come to be as a result of the generous input of many people from the Berkman Klein Center and beyond. Jonas Kaiser and Paola Villarreal expanded our thinking around methods and interpretation. Brendan Roach provided excellent research assistance. Rebekah Heacock Jones helped get this research off the ground, and Justin Clark helped bring it home. We are grateful to Gretchen Weber, David Talbot, and Daniel Dennis Jones for their assistance in the production and publication of this study. This paper has also benefited from contributions of many outside the Berkman Klein community. The entire Media Cloud team at the Center for Civic Media at MIT’s Media Lab has been essential to this research.
    [Show full text]
  • June 19, 2020 Volume 4, No
    This issue brought to you by Georgia Senate: The Road to Redemption By Jacob Rubashkin JUNE 19, 2020 VOLUME 4, NO. 12 Jon Ossoff has been the punchline of an expensive joke for the last three years. But the one-time failed House candidate might get the last laugh in a Senate race that has been out of the spotlight until recently. 2020 Senate Ratings Much of the attention around Georgia has focused on whether it’s a Toss-Up presidential battleground and the special election to fill the seat left by GOP Sen. Johnny Isakson. Collins (R-Maine) Tillis (R-N.C.) Polls consistently show Joe Biden running even with President McSally (R-Ariz.) Donald Trump, and Biden’s emerging coalition of non-white and Tilt Democratic Tilt Republican suburban voters has many Democrats feeling that this is the year they turn Georgia blue. Gardner (R-Colo.) In the race for the state’s other seat, appointed-GOP Sen. Kelly Lean Democratic Lean Republican Loeffler has been engulfed in an insider trading scandal, and though Peters (D-Mich.) KS Open (Roberts, R) the FBI has reportedly closed its investigation, it’s taken a heavy toll on Daines (R-Mont.) her image in the state. While she began unknown, she is now deeply Ernst (R-Iowa) unpopular; her abysmal numbers have both Republican and Democratic opponents thinking they can unseat her. Jones (D-Ala.) All this has meant that GOP Sen. David Perdue has flown under the Likely Democratic Likely Republican radar. But that may be changing now that the general election matchup Cornyn (R-Texas) is set.
    [Show full text]
  • Who Is the Attorney General's Client?
    \\jciprod01\productn\N\NDL\87-3\NDL305.txt unknown Seq: 1 20-APR-12 11:03 WHO IS THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S CLIENT? William R. Dailey, CSC* Two consecutive presidential administrations have been beset with controversies surrounding decision making in the Department of Justice, frequently arising from issues relating to the war on terrorism, but generally giving rise to accusations that the work of the Department is being unduly politicized. Much recent academic commentary has been devoted to analyzing and, typically, defending various more or less robust versions of “independence” in the Department generally and in the Attorney General in particular. This Article builds from the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Co. Accounting Oversight Board, in which the Court set forth key principles relating to the role of the President in seeing to it that the laws are faithfully executed. This Article draws upon these principles to construct a model for understanding the Attorney General’s role. Focusing on the question, “Who is the Attorney General’s client?”, the Article presumes that in the most important sense the American people are the Attorney General’s client. The Article argues, however, that that client relationship is necessarily a mediated one, with the most important mediat- ing force being the elected head of the executive branch, the President. The argument invokes historical considerations, epistemic concerns, and constitutional structure. Against a trend in recent commentary defending a robustly independent model of execu- tive branch lawyering rooted in the putative ability and obligation of executive branch lawyers to alight upon a “best view” of the law thought to have binding force even over plausible alternatives, the Article defends as legitimate and necessary a greater degree of presidential direction in the setting of legal policy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Case of the “Ground Zero Mosque” Controversy 
    A Theoretical Study of Solidarity in American Society: The Case of the “Ground Zero Mosque” Controversy Fatemeh Mohammadi1 * , Hamed Mousavi2 1. PhD Candidate in Anthropology, Carleton University, Canada (Corresponding Author: [email protected]) 2. Assistant Professor, Department of Regional Studies, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran ([email protected]) (Received: 5 Mar. 2017 Accepted: 8 Aug. 2017) Abstract The paper uses the case study of the controversy regarding the construction of a mosque near the site of the 9/11 terrorist attacks in Manhattan, New York, to analyze the different theoretical approaches to the concept of solidarity. It is argued that the presence of affectional solidarity which is based on feelings of caring, friendship and love was very limited in the case under study. Instead the primary form of solidarity present in the ground zero mosque debate was conventional solidarity, which is based primarily on common interests and concerns that are established through shared traditions and values. Nevertheless, conventional solidarity uses membership within a group to advocate for solidarity. In many instances however, people in need of solidarity might fall outside of the boundaries of “we,” and as a result limiting the utility of the approach. This is why the paper advocates for a revised form of Jodi Dean’s reflective solidarity, which is based on mutual responsibility toward each other despite our differences. It is argued that in its current form this approach is a normative universal ideal which holds great potential but is unclear, underspecified and impractical. However, by injecting some “realism” into this theoretical approach, reflective solidarity is superior to affectional and conventional approaches.
    [Show full text]
  • Colorado Survey of 500 Likely Voters Conducted September 14, 2008 by Rasmussen Reports for FOX News
    Colorado Survey of 500 Likely Voters Conducted September 14, 2008 By Rasmussen Reports for FOX News 1* How do you rate the way that George W. Bush is performing his role as President? Excellent, good, fair, or poor? 13% Excellent 20% Good 16% Fair 50% Poor 1% Not sure 2* How do you rate the way that Bill Ritter is performing his role as Governor? Excellent, good, fair, or poor? 14% Excellent 30% Good 30% Fair 24% Poor 1% Not sure 3* If the Presidential Election were held today, would you vote for Republican John McCain, Democrat Barack Obama, Libertarian Bob Barr or Independent Ralph Nader 48% McCain 46% Obama 1% Barr 3% Nader 0% McKinney 2% Not sure 4* Favorable Ratings Obama McCain Very Favorable 37% 26% Somewhat Favorable 15% 29% Somewhat Unfavorable 15% 18% Very Unfavorable 31% 24% Not sure 2% 3% 5* In terms of how you will vote for President, are you primarily interested in National Security issues such as the War with Iraq and the War on Terror, Economic issues such as jobs and economic growth, Domestic Issues like Social Security and Health Care, Cultural issues such as same-sex marriage and abortion, or Fiscal issues such as taxes and government spending? 27% National Security Issues 35% Economic Issues 13% Domestic Issues 7% Cultural Issues 12% Fiscal Issues 6% Not sure 6* Overall, which candidate do you trust more -- Barack Obama or John McCain? 46% Obama 48% McCain 6% Not sure Colorado Survey of 500 Likely Voters continued 7* Regardless of how you would vote, how comfortable would you be with Barack Obama as president? 32%
    [Show full text]
  • Politics in Science 1 Running Head: Politics And
    Politics in Science 1 Running Head: Politics and Science Is research in social psychology politically biased? Systematic empirical tests and a forecasting survey to address the controversy Orly Eitan† INSEAD Domenico Viganola† Stockholm School of Economics Yoel Inbar† University of Toronto Anna Dreber Stockholm School of Economics and University of Innsbruck Magnus Johannesson Stockholm School of Economics Thomas Pfeiffer Massey University Stefan Thau & Eric Luis Uhlmann†* INSEAD †First three and last author contributed equally *Corresponding author: Eric Luis Uhlmann ([email protected]) Politics in Science 2 Abstract The present investigation provides the first systematic empirical tests for the role of politics in academic research. In a large sample of scientific abstracts from the field of social psychology, we find both evaluative differences, such that conservatives are described more negatively than liberals, and explanatory differences, such that conservatism is more likely to be the focus of explanation than liberalism. In light of the ongoing debate about politicized science, a forecasting survey permitted scientists to state a priori empirical predictions about the results, and then change their beliefs in light of the evidence. Participating scientists accurately predicted the direction of both the evaluative and explanatory differences, but at the same time significantly overestimated both effect sizes. Scientists also updated their broader beliefs about political bias in response to the empirical results, providing
    [Show full text]