Are Americans Stuck in Uncompetitive Enclaves? An Appraisal of U.S. Electoral Competition

IF 1.5 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Quarterly Journal of Political Science Pub Date : 2018-05-23 DOI:10.1561/100.00017161
Bernard L. Fraga, Eitan Hersh
{"title":"Are Americans Stuck in Uncompetitive Enclaves? An Appraisal of U.S. Electoral Competition","authors":"Bernard L. Fraga, Eitan Hersh","doi":"10.1561/100.00017161","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Most elections in the United States are not close, which has raised concerns among social scientists and reform advocates about the vibrancy of American democracy. In this paper, we demonstrate that while individual elections are often uncompetitive, hierarchical, temporal, and geographic variation in the locus of competition results in most of the country regularly experiencing close elections. In the four-cycle period between 2006 and 2012, 89% of Americans were in a highly competitive jurisdiction for at least one office. Since 1914, about half the states have never gone more than four election cycles without a close statewide contest. More Americans witness competition than citizens of Canada or the UK, other nations with SMSP-based systems. The dispersed competition we find also results in nearly all Americans being represented by both political parties for different offices.","PeriodicalId":51622,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Political Science","volume":"13 1","pages":"291-311"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2018-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1561/100.00017161","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Political Science","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1561/100.00017161","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: 9

Abstract

Most elections in the United States are not close, which has raised concerns among social scientists and reform advocates about the vibrancy of American democracy. In this paper, we demonstrate that while individual elections are often uncompetitive, hierarchical, temporal, and geographic variation in the locus of competition results in most of the country regularly experiencing close elections. In the four-cycle period between 2006 and 2012, 89% of Americans were in a highly competitive jurisdiction for at least one office. Since 1914, about half the states have never gone more than four election cycles without a close statewide contest. More Americans witness competition than citizens of Canada or the UK, other nations with SMSP-based systems. The dispersed competition we find also results in nearly all Americans being represented by both political parties for different offices.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国人被困在没有竞争力的包围圈里了吗?美国选举竞争评价
美国的大多数选举结果并不接近,这引起了社会科学家和改革倡导者对美国民主活力的担忧。在本文中,我们证明,虽然个人选举通常是非竞争性的,但竞争地点的等级、时间和地理差异导致该国大部分地区经常经历势均力敌的选举。在2006年至2012年的四个周期内,89%的美国人在竞争激烈的司法管辖区至少有一个办公室。自1914年以来,大约有一半的州从未进行过超过四个选举周期而没有全州范围内的激烈竞争。与加拿大或英国等其他拥有smsp系统的国家相比,更多的美国人目睹了竞争。我们发现,分散的竞争也导致几乎所有美国人都由两个政党代表竞选不同的职位。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
18
期刊介绍: In the last half-century, social scientists have engaged in a methodologically focused and substantively far-reaching mission to make the study of politics scientific. The mutually reinforcing components in this pursuit are the development of positive theories and the testing of their empirical implications. Although this paradigm has been associated with many advances in the understanding of politics, no leading journal of political science is dedicated primarily to the publication of positive political science.
期刊最新文献
The Reputation Politics of the Filibuster A Letter from the Editors-in-Chief Social Conflict and the Predatory State Overreacting and Posturing: How Accountability and Ideology Shape Executive Policies A Gap in Our Understanding? Reconsidering the Evidence for Partisan Knowledge Gaps
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1