scholarly journals No evidence for systematic voter fraud: A guide to statistical claims about the 2020 election

2021 ◽  
Vol 118 (45) ◽  
pp. e2103619118
Author(s):  
Andrew C. Eggers ◽  
Haritz Garro ◽  
Justin Grimmer
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Election Result ◽  
Cast Doubt ◽  
Us Presidential Election ◽  
The Common ◽  
Voter Fraud ◽  
Common Logic

After the 2020 US presidential election Donald Trump refused to concede, alleging widespread and unparalleled voter fraud. Trump’s supporters deployed several statistical arguments in an attempt to cast doubt on the result. Reviewing the most prominent of these statistical claims, we conclude that none of them is even remotely convincing. The common logic behind these claims is that, if the election were fairly conducted, some feature of the observed 2020 election result would be unlikely or impossible. In each case, we find that the purportedly anomalous fact is either not a fact or not anomalous.

scholarly journals How did that happen? Making sense of the 2016 US presidential election result through the lens of the ‘leadership moment’

Leadership ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (4) ◽  
pp. 393-412 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donna Ladkin
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
Relational Leadership ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Election Result ◽  
Making Sense ◽  
Leaders And Followers ◽  
Identity Based ◽  
Us Presidential Election ◽  
The Creation

This article analyses the victory of Donald Trump in the 2016 US election through the lens of the ‘leadership moment’. A phenomenologically based framework, the ‘leadership moment’ theorizes leadership as an event which occurs when context, purpose, followers and leaders align. Perception links these four parts of leadership, in particular the perceptions followers have of their context and the relative strengths competing leaders have to respond to that context. By considering how key voters perceived Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump in relation to their circumstances, the ‘leadership moment’ offers a way of making sense of the election result, as well as emphasising the importance of perceptions of context in the achievement of leadership more generally. Importantly, it highlights the economic and identity-based dynamics which attracted voters to Trump, and which remain in play no matter who holds the Presidential office. Theoretically, the argument contributes to the emerging field of relational leadership in two ways: by looking beyond the ‘between space’ of leaders and followers, to include the ‘around space’ in which those relations are embedded, and by emphasizing the role of affective perceptions (rather than discourse) in the creation of those perceptions.

Examining false beliefs about voter fraud in the wake of the 2020 Presidential Election

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gordon Pennycook ◽  
David Gertler Rand
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
False Beliefs ◽  
Wide Spread ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Legal Challenges ◽  
Election Fraud ◽  
Voter Fraud ◽  
Election News

The 2020 U.S. Presidential Election saw an unprecedented number of false claims alleging election fraud and arguing that Donald Trump was the actual winner of the election. Here we report a survey exploring belief in these false claims that was conducted three days after Biden was declared the winner. We find that a majority of Trump voters in our sample – particularly those who were more politically knowl-edgeable and more closely following election news – falsely believed that election fraud was wide-spread and that Trump won the election. Thus, false beliefs about the election are not merely a fringe phenomenon. We also find that Trump conceding or losing his legal challenges would likely lead a ma-jority of Trump voters to accept Biden’s victory as legitimate, although 40% said they would continue to view Biden as illegitimate regardless. Finally, we found that levels of partisan spite and endorsement of violence were equivalent between Trump and Biden voters.

US election lawsuits unlikely to change result

2020 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Election Result ◽  
Run Off ◽  
The Us ◽  
Court Intervention ◽  
Us Senate ◽  
Vote Counting

Significance However, Republican President Donald Trump is alleging that vote tallies are fraudulent and inaccurate. He is seeking recounts and undertaking lawsuits over alleged vote-counting irregularities. Impacts Two run-off elections in Georgia will determine whether the US Senate stays Republican or is tied 50-50 with the Democrats. Given the type of complaints raised by Trump’s campaign, prospects for a Supreme Court intervention look remote. Controversy over the election result will linger, perhaps until the 2024 presidential election.

Perceptions of democracy and the rise of Donald Trump: A framing analysis of Saudi Arabian media

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 159-175 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Isakhan ◽  
Zim Nwokora ◽  
Chengxin Pan
Keyword(s):  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Saudi Arabian ◽  
Democracy Promotion ◽  
Framing Analysis ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Kingdom Of Saudi Arabia ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Presidential Election

The 2016 US presidential election, which brought Donald J. Trump to power, raised concerns that his ascendency could undermine US democracy promotion and enable illiberal regimes to resist calls for reform. This article seeks to hold this argument up to empirical scrutiny via a framing analysis of coverage of the US election in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). To some extent, the analysis supports the claim: throughout the election, the KSA media offered several substantive criticisms of democracy. However, Trump’s campaign also served as a catalyst for a discussion about the merits of democracy, revealing some admiration for its key principles, and an acknowledgement of the challenges it faces in the 21st century.

scholarly journals Analysis of Facebook Meme Groups Used During the 2016 US Presidential Election

2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 205630511880879 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mia Moody-Ramirez ◽  
Andrew B Church
Keyword(s):  
Facial Expressions ◽  
Political Party ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Group Setting ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Political Ideas ◽  
Us Presidential Election ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Facebook Pages

Using content analysis, this study examines how citizens may use memes to share grassroots political ideas in a social media group setting during elections. Specifically, it offers a glimpse at the types of meme-related Facebook pages that emerged during the 2016 presidential election with an emphasis on representations of the two front-runner candidates—Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Generally, Facebook-meme pages and profile photos of both candidates were negative in tone with Trump more likely to be framed in terms of his hairstyle and facial expressions and Clinton in terms of the email scandal and her relationships with people. Political party and gender differences between these two candidates contributed to variations in representations. Study findings are important as they offer a look at grassroots use of memes during a major election and provide a general overview of Facebook user depictions of the two politicians.

Feeling protected: protective masculinity and femininity from Donald Trump and Joe Biden to Jacinda Ardern

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
Positive Emotions ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
Political Leaders ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Electoral Defeat ◽  
Gendered Leadership ◽  
Us Presidential Election ◽  
Negative Feelings

This article emphasises the role that political leaders’ discourse plays in evoking positive emotions among citizens in uncertain times, such as feeling protected, secure and proud in addition to the leaders’ (often interconnected) role of encouraging negative feelings such as fear, resentment and anger. The article argues that such discourse frequently involves performances of gendered leadership. It cites examples from a range of countries to illustrate the points being made, but focuses on the 2020 US presidential election which saw a contest between two forms of protective masculinity: Trump’s exclusionary, macho, hypermasculinity versus Biden’s more socially inclusive, empathetic and softer version. Trump’s protective masculinity failure over managing the COVID-19 pandemic was arguably one of the factors contributing to his electoral defeat, while Biden aimed to make voters feel safer and more protected than under Trump. The article also provides examples of protective femininity, with a particular focus on the discourse of New Zealand’s prime minister, Jacinda Ardern.

Trump, truth and the 25th Amendment: Australian reflections on presidential inability and removal

2021 ◽  
pp. 1037969X2199747
Author(s):  
Jemimah Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
Democratic Institutions ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Constitutional Design ◽  
Parliamentary System ◽  
The Us ◽  
Us Constitution ◽  
Us Presidential Election ◽  
Practical Sense

This article critically assesses a key question raised repeatedly during the tenure of US President Donald Trump – could (or should) the 25th Amendment to the US Constitution have been invoked to suspend him from office? Although moot in a practical sense following the 2020 US presidential election, exploring this question from an Australian perspective provides the opportunity to reflect on fundamental questions of constitutional design and the capacity of our own democratic institutions to respond when tested. The article suggests that the US experience with President Trump highlights some advantages offered by Australia’s parliamentary system.

scholarly journals Fundamentals-Based State-Level Forecasts of the 2020 US Presidential Election

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clemens Nollenberger ◽  
Gina-Maria Unger
Keyword(s):  
Presidential Election ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
National Level ◽  
State Level ◽  
Electoral College ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Improve Accuracy ◽  
Short And Long Term ◽  
Us Presidential Election

Forecasts of US presidential elections have gained considerable attention in recent years. However, as became evident in 2016 with the victory of Donald Trump, most of them consider presidential elections only at the national level, neglecting that these are ultimately decided by the Electoral College. In order to improve accuracy, we believe that forecasts should instead address outcomes at the state-level to determine the eventual Electoral College winner. We develop a political economy model of the incumbent vote share across states based on different short- and long-term predictors, referring up to the end of the second quarter of election years. Testing it against election outcomes since 1980, our model correctly predicts the eventual election winner in 9 out of 10 cases – including 2016 –, with the 2000 election being the exception. For the 2020 election, it expects Trump to lose the Electoral College, as only 6.2 percent of simulated outcomes cross the required threshold of 270 Electoral Votes, with a mean prediction of 106 Electoral Votes.

scholarly journals Candidate Ideology and Vote Choice in the 2020 US Presidential Election

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Broockman ◽  
Joshua Kalla
Keyword(s):  
Young People ◽  
National Survey ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
General Election ◽  
Vote Choice ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Presidential Primary ◽  
General Elections ◽  
Voter Information ◽  
Us Presidential Election

Canonical theories predict that moderate candidates perform better in general elections, but research emphasizing voters’ partisan loyalties challenges these predictions. The 2020 Democratic Presidential primary represented a unique opportunity to speak to these debates due to relatively high voter information about multiple moderate and extreme candidates running in the same election. We conducted a national survey (n = 40,153) that asked how respondents would choose in a general election between one of the Democratic candidates and Republican Donald Trump. Our evidence is consistent with canonical predictions: respondents are more likely to select Trump when he is against an extreme Democrat than against a moderate Democrat. Republican partisans contribute to moderate candidates’ advantage: ≈2% select Trump against a more extreme Democrat but would not against a more moderate Democrat. One of the extreme candidates, Bernie Sanders, ostensibly challenges canonical predictions by receiving as much support as moderate candidates – but only when assuming (1) young people vote at abnormally high rates and (2) young Democrats who claim they will only vote if Sanders is nominated are answering accurately. These patterns are robust to showing attacks against the candidates and in competitive states. Our findings lend further support to canonical predictions about moderate candidates’ electoral advantages.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document