Partisan Self-Interest and Views on the Electoral College: How Electoral Inversions Activate Differences in Support for the System

IF 1.6 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Benjamin T. Toll, Courtney Corona
{"title":"Partisan Self-Interest and Views on the Electoral College: How Electoral Inversions Activate Differences in Support for the System","authors":"Benjamin T. Toll, Courtney Corona","doi":"10.1177/1532673x231220651","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Most Americans have little knowledge about why we elect the president through the Electoral College. This complex system that requires understanding the impact of 51 different elections on the outcome of the presidential election leads many Americans to desire the simple effectiveness of the popular vote method. Previous scholarship highlights a majority of Americans wanting to replace our current system with the popular vote. Political science research lacks a clear understanding of the impact of partisan self-interest on views of changing the presidential election method. In this paper we look at public opinion surveys over the last 45 years and find there was no clear partisan difference in views of changing the system before the electoral inversion of 2000. We argue that partisan self-interest was activated because of this electoral inversion. The inversion of 2016 led to a hardening of opinions on replacing the Electoral College with the popular vote.","PeriodicalId":51482,"journal":{"name":"American Politics Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Politics Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673x231220651","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Most Americans have little knowledge about why we elect the president through the Electoral College. This complex system that requires understanding the impact of 51 different elections on the outcome of the presidential election leads many Americans to desire the simple effectiveness of the popular vote method. Previous scholarship highlights a majority of Americans wanting to replace our current system with the popular vote. Political science research lacks a clear understanding of the impact of partisan self-interest on views of changing the presidential election method. In this paper we look at public opinion surveys over the last 45 years and find there was no clear partisan difference in views of changing the system before the electoral inversion of 2000. We argue that partisan self-interest was activated because of this electoral inversion. The inversion of 2016 led to a hardening of opinions on replacing the Electoral College with the popular vote.
党派自身利益与对选举团的看法:选举倒置如何激活对选举制度支持的差异
大多数美国人对我们为什么通过选举团选举总统知之甚少。这个复杂的系统需要了解51个不同的选举对总统选举结果的影响,这使得许多美国人渴望普选法的简单有效性。以前的研究表明,大多数美国人希望用普选来取代我们目前的制度。政治科学研究对党派自身利益对改变总统选举方法的看法的影响缺乏清晰的认识。在本文中,我们回顾了过去45年的民意调查,发现在2000年选举反转之前,在改变制度的观点上没有明显的党派差异。我们认为,由于这种选举倒置,党派自身利益被激活。2016年的逆转导致人们对用普选取代选举团的观点变得更加强硬。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
American Politics Research
American Politics Research POLITICAL SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
66
期刊介绍: The purpose of Amercian Politics Research is to promote and disseminate high-quality research in all areas of American politics, including local, state, and national. American Politics Research will publish significant studies concerning American political behavior, political parties, public opinion, legislative behavior, courts and the legal process, executive and administrative politics, public policy, and all other topics appropriate to our understanding of American government and politics. Manuscripts from all social science disciplines are welcomed.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信