DOCSLIB.ORG

Role of Swing States in U.S. Presidential Election

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Role of Swing States in U.S. Presidential Election MASARYK UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF SOCIAL STUDIES ROLE OF SWING STATES IN U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION Bachelor thesis TEREZA VAHANČÍKOVÁ Supervisor: Mgr. Jakub Šedo, Ph.D. Department of Political Science Political Science UČO: 450388 Brno 2018/2019 ROLE OF SWING STATES IN U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION Bibliografický záznam Autor: Tereza Vahančíková Fakulta sociálních studií, Masarykova univerzita Department of Political Science Název práce: Role of Swing States in U.S. Presidential Election Studijní program: Political Science Vedoucí práce: Mgr. Jakub Šedo, Ph.D. Akademický rok: 2018/2019 Počet stran: 56 Klíčová slova: USA, voľby, prezident, Demokratická strana, Republikánska strana, volebný systém, zbor voliteľov, swing state, battleground state, competitive state 1 ROLE OF SWING STATES IN U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION Bibliografic record Author: Tereza Vahančíková Faculty of Social Studies, Masaryk University Department of Political Science Title of Thesis: Role of Swing States in U.S. Presidential Election Degree Programme: Political Science Supervisor: Mgr. Jakub Šedo, Ph.D. Academic Year: 2018/2019 Number of Pages: 56 Keywords: USA, election, president, Democrat, Republican, election system, Electoral College, swing state, battleground state, competitive state 2 ROLE OF SWING STATES IN U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION Anotace Bakalárska práca rozoberá vlastnosti americkej politickej mapy, ktorá sa delí na demokratické a republikánske štáty a tzv. swing states. Komplexný proces voľby prezidenta v USA vytvoril podmienky, v rámci ktorých malé množstvo štátov rozhoduje o výsledku volieb. V tejto práci sa ich snažím identifikovať a analyzovať ich volebné správanie, ale hlavne demonštrovať ich vplyv na voľbu amerického prezidenta v predchádzajúcich voľbách, v posledných voľbách v roku 2016 ale aj vo voľbách budúcich. 3 ROLE OF SWING STATES IN U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION Abstract The bachelor thesis discusses the means of the American political landscape, which has been divided into Democratic and Republican strongholds and swing states. The complex presidential election process has created conditions, in which a small amount of states has the power to determine the outcome of the election. This work aims to identify them and analyze their voting behavior, but mainly to demonstrate their significance in electing the U.S. president in past elections, in the most recent 2016 election and in the future. 4 ROLE OF SWING STATES IN U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION I hereby declare that I wrote my bachelor thesis on the topic of Role of Swing States in U.S. Presidential Election by myself. All sources used are cited and listed in the bibliography. Brno – May 6th, 2019 ....................................... Tereza Vahančíková 5 ROLE OF SWING STATES IN U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION I would like to thank Mgr. Jakub Šedo, Ph.D. for his time and valuable advice, which were crucial for the creation of this thesis. In addition, I would like to thank whoever supported me throughout the writing process. You know who you are and I am incredibly thankful for you. 6 ROLE OF SWING STATES IN U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 9 1. Theoretical Background ............................................................................................ 12 1.1 President in the U.S. Political System ............................................................ 12 1.2 Presidential Election Process ........................................................................... 12 1.3 Electoral College Debate .................................................................................... 16 2. Swing State Phenomenon ......................................................................................... 17 2.1 State of Research ................................................................................................. 17 2.2 Swing States .......................................................................................................... 22 1. Ohio .......................................................................................................................... 22 2. Florida...................................................................................................................... 23 3. North Carolina ....................................................................................................... 24 4. Wisconsin ............................................................................................................... 24 5. New Mexico ............................................................................................................ 25 6. Colorado ................................................................................................................. 25 7. Nevada ..................................................................................................................... 26 8. New Hampshire ..................................................................................................... 26 9. Virginia .................................................................................................................... 27 10. Iowa ......................................................................................................................... 27 Determining Swing States ......................................................................................... 28 2.3 Dividing Swing States ......................................................................................... 28 3. Methodology ................................................................................................................. 30 4. Role of Swing States in U.S. Presidential Elections .......................................... 31 4.1 Swing States and Presidential Elections 1988 – 2012 ................................ 31 1988 ................................................................................................................................. 31 1992 ................................................................................................................................. 31 1996 ................................................................................................................................. 32 2000 ................................................................................................................................. 32 2004 ................................................................................................................................. 33 2008 ................................................................................................................................. 33 2012 ................................................................................................................................. 33 7 ROLE OF SWING STATES IN U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION Summary of the Findings .......................................................................................... 34 4.2 Historical Close Runs ......................................................................................... 35 Table 1 – Presidential Election Results ..................................................................... 36 5. Role of Swing States in the 2016 Presidential Election .................................... 39 5.1 Swing states in 2016 ............................................................................................ 41 5.2 New-found Swing States .................................................................................... 42 11. Michigan .............................................................................................................. 42 12. Pennsylvania ...................................................................................................... 43 4. Wisconsin ........................................................................................................... 44 5.3 Emerging Swing States ...................................................................................... 44 13. Arizona................................................................................................................. 44 14. Maine .................................................................................................................... 45 15. Minnesota ........................................................................................................... 45 5.4 Role of Swing States in Future Elections ...................................................... 46 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 47 Bibliography ......................................................................................................................... 49 Number of Characters: 85 176 8 ROLE OF SWING STATES IN U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION Introduction In September 2015, a former Republican presidential candidate and Governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker, made a memorable note regarding the upcoming election: “The nation as a whole is not going to elect the next president, 12 states are.” (Walker cited in Lovelace 2015). The reality in 2016 turned out to be three states deciding that Donald J. Trump would be elected. Trump won all three of the former Democratic strongholds - Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania by less than a 1% victory margin. Approximately 77,000 voters decided the future of the 323-million nation (U.S. Census
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The State of the Charter School Movement
    The State of the Charter School Movement Please note: A new deck, updated in January 2019, is available on the Bellwether website here: https://bellwethereducation.org/publication/state-charter-sector Sara Mead, Ashley LiBetti Mitchel, and Andrew J. Rotherham September 2015 September 2015 Overview This briefing book reviews the current state of play of the charter school movement, recent accomplishments, and opportunities and challenges going forward. Contents Section 1: Current state and accomplishments a) Growth of the charter sector b) Growth of Charter Management Organizations (CMOs) c) Demographics of charter school students d) Charter school performance e) Trends in charter school authorizing f) Experiences of high-market-share cities Section 2: Future challenges a) Charter growth projections b) Potential barriers to growth 2 Overview September 2015 The charter movement has made significant progress in the past five years Charter Schools Charter Enrollment Annual Growth Rate 7K +6% 6,723 6K 2.9M 5K 7K schools in students # schools 4K 5K the United 3K States 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Charter School # States with National Charter Sector Enrollment Share Charter Laws Performance States Additional days of learning, over traditional public schools * 8 43 (and D.C.) 7 7 6% 5 5 of total public Reading school -1 enrollment Math -3 -2 -6 -6 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 *Washington State’s charter law is currently facing legal challenges and its status is uncertain. Sources: National Alliance for Public Charter Schools (NAPCS),
    [Show full text]
  • OPENING PANDORA's BOX David Cameron's Referendum Gamble On
    OPENING PANDORA’S BOX David Cameron’s Referendum Gamble on EU Membership Credit: The Economist. By Christina Hull Yale University Department of Political Science Adviser: Jolyon Howorth April 21, 2014 Abstract This essay examines the driving factors behind UK Prime Minister David Cameron’s decision to call a referendum if the Conservative Party is re-elected in 2015. It addresses the persistence of Euroskepticism in the United Kingdom and the tendency of Euroskeptics to generate intra-party conflict that often has dire consequences for Prime Ministers. Through an analysis of the relative impact of political strategy, the power of the media, and British public opinion, the essay argues that addressing party management and electoral concerns has been the primary influence on David Cameron’s decision and contends that Cameron has unwittingly unleashed a Pandora’s box that could pave the way for a British exit from the European Union. Acknowledgments First, I would like to thank the Bates Summer Research Fellowship, without which I would not have had the opportunity to complete my research in London. To Professor Peter Swenson and the members of The Senior Colloquium, Gabe Botelho, Josh Kalla, Gabe Levine, Mary Shi, and Joel Sircus, who provided excellent advice and criticism. To Professor David Cameron, without whom I never would have discovered my interest in European politics. To David Fayngor, who flew halfway across the world to keep me company during my summer research. To my mom for her unwavering support and my dad for his careful proofreading. And finally, to my adviser Professor Jolyon Howorth, who worked with me on this project for over a year and a half.
    [Show full text]
  • Tennessee Mayors Growing Civic Engagement
    J A N U A R Y 2 0 2 0 tennessee mayors growing civic engagement H O W L O C A L L E A D E R S C A N L E V E R A G E T H E I R O F F I C E T O E N G A G E V O T E R S introduction For over a decade, Tennessee has consistently trailed most other states in voter registration and turnout. Participation in local elections is particularly low: Voter turnout fell below 25 percent in recent elections in our state's four largest cities. As a state with a proud civic history, Tennessee has an important opportunity to examine practices, from election administration to civic engagement, that may offer room for improvement. Systemic reforms, such as policies that modernize and secure election machines and voter- registration databases, are critical, but so too are efforts that better connect voters to their communities and elected representatives. Although state leaders, election officials, community groups and individual residents all have roles to play, city and county mayors are uniquely suited to promote civic engagement at the community level. This report highlights Tennessee Mayors Growing Civic Engagment (TMGCE), a new cohort of city and county mayors who collectively committed to making civic engagement a priority in their communities. Within these pages, readers will learn why mayors are well-placed to lead civic engagement efforts, be able to review specific examples from the participating Tennessee leaders and have access to tools and templates to build a civic-engagement action plan all their own.
    [Show full text]
  • BIOP #1: Buckeye Battlefield in 2004, the U.S. Presidential Election Hung
    BIOP #1: Buckeye Battlefield In 2004, the U.S. presidential election hung on the outcome of Ohio’s electoral votes. Ohio, much like Florida and Pennsylvania, is one of the perennial battleground states and the winner of Ohio usually has a lock on the White House. Ohio’s place as a bellwether for the nation is not new but it is unique. There are, as we will show, few states that mirror national trends as accurately. The key question is whether this special status will remain in the future or if demographic, economic and cultural shifts lead to a displacement of Ohio as the nation’s premier swing state. In this post, we compare Ohio’s voting in presidential, congressional and gubernatorial elections to the nation as a whole and to some other key battleground states. Ohio’s political history can be usefully divided into four fifty-year periods: the Foundation era, 1803-1852; the Civil War era, 1853-1903; the Industrial era, 1903-1953; and the Postindustrial era, 1953-2003. These categories imply a fifth contemporary era (beginning in 2003), which will be the primary focus of most of Buckeye Battleground. Of course, it is far too early to determine the political characteristics of this new era, especially four decades into the future. Although crude, the four historical periods cover major developments that influence Ohio elections in the contemporary era. Here a geological metaphor is useful, with each of the four previous eras representing a layer of political “sediment” on which subsequent developments rest. Much as layers of sediment eventually harden into layers of rock, time has solidified the earlier political developments in the state.
    [Show full text]
  • Justice Sandra Day O'connor: the World's Most Powerful Jurist?
    JUSTICE SANDRA DAY O'CONNOR: THE WORLD'S MOST POWERFUL JURIST? DIANE LOWENTHAL AND BARBARA PALMER* I. INTRODUCTION Justice Sandra Day O'Connor has been called a "major force on [the] Supreme Court,"' the "real" Chief Justice, 2 and "America's most powerful jurist."' 3 Others have referred to her as "the most 5 powerful woman in America" 4 and even of "the world.", Even compared to women like Eleanor Roosevelt and Hillary Clinton, there is no one "who has had a more profound effect on society than any other American woman... If someone else had been appointed to her position on the court, our nation might now be living under different rules for abortion, affirmative action, race, religion in school and civil rights. We might well have a different president." 6 Former Acting Solicitor General Walter Dellinger noted, "What is most striking is the assurance with which this formerly obscure state court judge effectively decides many hugely important questions for a country of 275 million people.",7 As one journalist put it, "We are all living in * Diane Lowenthal, Ph.D. in Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University and Barbara Palmer, Ph.D. in Political Science, University of Minnesota, are assistant professors in American University's Washington Semester Program. The authors would like to thank their undergraduate research assistants, Amy Bauman, Nick Chapman-Hushek, and Amanda White. This paper was presented at October 28, 2004 Town Hall The Sway of the Swing Vote: Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and Her Influence on Issues of Race, Religion, Gender and Class sponsored by the University of Maryland Law Journal of Race, Religion, Gender and Class and the Women, Leadership and Equality Program.
    [Show full text]
  • Are Swing Voters Instruments of Democracy Or Farmers of Clientelism? Evidence from Ghana
    = = = = = = = = Are Swing Voters Instruments of Democracy or Farmers of Clientelism? Evidence from Ghana Staffan I. Lindberg Keith R. Weghorst = = = = QoG WORKING PAPER SERIES 2010:17= = THE QUALITY OF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTE Department of Political Science University of Gothenburg Box 711 SE 405 30 GÖTEBORG June 2010 ISSN 1653-8919 © 2010 by Staffan I. Lindberg and Keith R. Weghorst. All rights reserved. The authors wishes to acknowledge insightful comments on earlier version from Leonardo Arriola, Dominic Lisanti, Kristin Michelitch, and participants in both the Comparative Politics Colloquium at University of Florida and the Quality of Government workshop at Marstrand 17-19 May, 2010. The survey was carried out in collaboration with research officers at Center for Democratic Development-Ghana and we also wish to recognize the excellent work by the 49 assistants we trained for the field work during summer 2008. The research project was sponsored by the Africa Power and Politics Programme, with funding provided by the UK Department for International Development (DFID). As always, the content, errors, omissions, and flaws of the text is the responsibility of the authors. Are Swing Voters Instruments of Democracy or Farmers of Clientelism? Evidence from Ghana Staffan I. Lindberg Keith R. Weghorst QoG Working Paper Series 2010:17 June 2010 ISSN 1653-8919 Abstract: This paper is one of the first to systematically address the question of whether strength of ethnic identity, political parties’ candidates campaign strategies, poverty, or evaluation of clientelism versus collective/public goods, determines who becomes persuadable voters (swing voters) in new democracies. It brings together three of the major research streams in comparative politics – the literatures on development, democracy, and political clientelism – to properly situate the swing voter as – potentially – the pivotal instrument of democracy and antidote to the public goods deficit in failed developmental states.
    [Show full text]
  • Successful Citizens' Initiatives
    Successful Citizens’ Initiatives A Guide to Winning Local Land-Use Ballot Measure Campaigns 2002 Edition 631 Howard St., Ste. 510, San Francisco, CA 94105 www.greenbelt.org Table of Contents Executive Summary………………………………………………………………4 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 7 Getting Started Deciding to Pursue a Ballot Strategy ....................................................... 7 First Steps................................................................................................. 9 Establishing Timelines ............................................................................. 9 Community Outreach & Building the Leadership Group ...................... 11 Steering Committee................................................................... 11 Coalition.................................................................................... 12 Campaign Structure................................................................................ 12 Campaign Manager ................................................................... 12 Treasurer ................................................................................... 12 Fundraising Chair...................................................................... 13 Outreach Coordinator................................................................ 13 Spokesperson............................................................................. 13 Other Roles...............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Labour's Next Majority Means Winning Over Conservative Voters but They Are Not Likely to Be the Dominant Source of The
    LABOUR’S NEXT MAJORITY THE 40% STRATEGY Marcus Roberts LABOUR’S The 40% There will be voters who go to the polls on 6th May 2015 who weren’t alive strategy when Tony and Cherie Blair posed outside 10 Downing Street on 1st May NEXT 1997. They will have no memory of an event which is a moment of history as distant from them as Margaret Thatcher’s 1979 election victory was for the voters of 1997. If Ed Miliband seeks to emulate what Blair did in 1997, he too must build his own political majority for the era in which he seeks to govern. MAJORITY This report sets out a plausible strategy for Labour’s next majority, one that is secured through winning 40 per cent of the popular vote in May 2015, despite the challenges of a fragmenting electorate. It also challenges the Marcus Roberts party at all levels to recognise that the 40 per cent strategy for a clear majority in 2015 will require a different winning formula to that which served New Labour so well a generation ago, but which is past its sell-by date in a different political and economic era. A FABIAN REPORT ISBN 978 0 7163 7004 8 ABOUT THE FABIAN SOCIETY The Fabian Society is Britain’s oldest political think tank. Since 1884 the society has played a central role in developing political ideas and public policy on the left. It aims to promote greater equality of wealth, power and opportunity; the value of collective public action; a vibrant, tolerant and accountable democracy; citizenship, liberty and human rights; sustainable development; and multilateral international cooperation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Election
    Forecast error: what’s happened to the polls since the 2015 UK election? By Timothy Martyn Hill [originally published at significancemagazine.com] When British Prime Minister Theresa May called a snap election for 8 June 2017, it seemed like a smart move politically. Her Conservative Party was riding high in the opinion polls, with a YouGov poll in the Times giving them 44%, a lead of 21 points over her nearest rivals, the Labour Party[0514a]. Were an election to be held the next day (as surveys often suppose[0514b]) May looked to be on course for a convincing win and an increased majority in the House of Commons. But then came the obvious question: “Can we actually trust the polls?” The media seemed sceptical. Though they had not shied away from reporting poll results in the months since the 2015 general election, they were clearly still sore about the errors made last time, when survey results mostly indicated the country was heading for a hung parliament. So, can we trust the polls this time around? It’s not possible to say until we have election results to compare them to. But what we can do is consider the work that’s been done to try to fix whatever went wrong in 2015. There’s a lot to cover, so I’ve broken the story up by key dates and periods: • The election – 7 May 2015 • The reaction – 8-10 May • The suspects • Early speculation – 11 May-18 June • The Sturgis inquiry meets – 19 June • The investigation focuses – 20 June-31 December • Unrepresentative samples indicted – 1 January-30 March 2016 • The Sturgis inquiry report – 31 March • A heated debate – 1 April-22 June • EU referendum and reaction – 23 June-19 July • US presidential election and reaction – 20 July-31 December • The calm before the storm – 8 December 2016-18 April 2017 • Have the polls been fixed? The election – 7 May 2015 The night before the 2015 General Election, the atmosphere was tense but calm.
    [Show full text]
  • Six Months to Go: Where the Presidential Contest Stands As the General Election Begins
    May 10, 2012 Six Months To Go: Where the Presidential Contest Stands as the General Election Begins William A. Galston Table of Contents Summary 1 Where We Are Now and How We Got There 1 The Mood of the Country 3 The Issues 5 Ideology 7 What Kind of Election Will 2012 Be? 9 Referendum or Choice? 9 Persuasion or Mobilization? 13 It’s the Electoral College, Stupid 16 Conclusion: The Known Unknowns 22 Endnotes 23 SUMMARY arack Obama’s standing with the American people hit bottom in the late Bsummer and early fall of 2011. Since then, the president has recovered the political ground he lost during the debt ceiling fiasco and now enjoys a narrow edge over Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee. The standard political and economic indicators suggest that the 2012 election will be close. And the historic level of partisan polarization ensures that it will be hard-fought and divisive. William A. Galston is the Ezra K. Zilkha Since Vietnam and the Iranian hostage crisis, Republicans have effectively used the Chair in Governance issue of national security against Democrats. Barring unforeseen events, Romney Studies and senior will not be able to do so this year. Nor will a focus on hot-button social issues yield fellow at Brookings. significant gains for the challenger. Instead, to an extent that Americans have not seen for at least two decades, the election of 2012 will revolve around a single defining issue—the condition of the economy. In 2008, Barack Obama defeated John McCain in large measure because the people saw him as more able to manage the economy at a moment of frightening crisis.
    [Show full text]
  • President Trump and America's 2020 Presidential Election
    President Trump And America’s 2020 Presidential Election: An Analytical Framework March 6, 2019 © 2019 Beacon Policy Advisors LLC Trump 2020 Meets Trump 2016 ___________________________________________________________ Trump 2020 Is A Stronger Candidate Than Trump 2016… • Looking purely at Trump’s personal standing in 2016 vs. 2020, he is no worse for wear, with the greatest change in his ratings coming from the consolidation of support among Republicans after two years of providing wins for his GOP base (e.g., deregulation, conservative judges) and currently having a strong economy and jobs market …But Trump 2016 Was A Weak Candidate (Who Happened To Face Another Weak Candidate) • Trump vs. Clinton 2016 matchup had the two most unfavorable candidates in a 60-year span • According to the 2016 exit polls, 18 percent of voters who had an unfavorable view of both Clinton and Trump voted for Trump by a 17- point margin – those margins were even higher in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Florida • Trump was the “change” candidate, winning voters who wanted change by a 68-point margin • Still, Trump only garnered 46.1 percent of the popular vote © 2019 Beacon Policy Advisors LLC 1 Trump’s Base Not Enough To Win ___________________________________________________________ Trump Is A Strong Weak Incumbent Heading Into 2020 Election • Trump’s political base of support – “America First” nationalists, rural farmers, and evangelical Christians – was necessary but insufficient to win in 2016 – will still be insufficient to win in 2020 • Trump’s
    [Show full text]
  • A Bellwether for Jury Selection Jurisprudence Article
    A BELLWETHER FOR JURY SELECTION JURISPRUDENCE Dan ZiebarthI INTRODUCTION The case of Flowers v. Mississippi recently reached a decision in the United States Supreme Court, and has implications for interpretation of both the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution concerning discrimination and fair Jury selection.2 The outcome of this case has the potential to mark a profound shift in future state and federal rulings on intent of bias in Jury selection. Curtis Flowers was tried and convicted of murder in Winona, Mississippi following an armed robbery of a furniture store in 1996.3 Flowers was ultimately sentenced to death following his conviction for the murder of one of the employees of the store.4 Flowers challenged the ruling on the grounds that his right to a fair trial had been violated as a result of evidence presented against him by three of the store employees.5 The decision was reversed and remanded. Five more trials took place after Flowers was again convicted and sentenced to death, but Flowers challenged the subsequent rulings on the basis of racial discrimination in the Jury selection process.6 Flowers’ case was taken up by the United States Supreme Court following his conviction at his sixth trial, with his petition alleging violations of his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The Sixth Amendment provides the accused with the procedural right to a trial by an impartial Jury in all criminal prosecutions.7 It represents an important check, placed in the hands of individual citizens, against arbitrary prosecution by the government.8 The Fourteenth Amendment contains the Equal Protection Clause, which maintains that no state shall deprive any person within its Jurisdiction of equal protection of the laws.9 These amendments hold significant power in the determination of what is considered to be fair concerning jury selection in criminal law proceedings.
    [Show full text]