The electoral strategies of a populist candidate: Does charisma discourage experience and encourage extremism?

I model an election between a populist candidate with little government experience and high charisma and a mainstream candidate with much government experience and low charisma. Taking a step back in time, I also model the career choices of this populist candidate: he must consider how much governing experience to acquire before running for high office, and then he must decide how extremist his campaign platform should be. The model finds two major trade-offs that are unfortunate for the median voter: candidates who are attractive in terms of their high charisma will be unattractive in terms of their low experience and high extremism. The model also finds that popular discontent, coming from an economic or political crisis, makes an inexperienced outsider more likely to win an election with an extremist agenda; this helps explain the recent ‘rise of populism’ identified by several authors around the world. This theory is also able to explain numerous empirical findings: I connect the model to the literature from different academic approaches (behavioral, comparative, and institutional) and different geographical regions (the United States, Latin America, and Europe). Special reference is made to four prominent outsiders: Donald Trump, Hugo Chávez, Alberto Fujimori, and Jean-Marie Le Pen.

Download Full-text

The United States and Regional Security Orders in the Middle East, East Asia, and Europe

10.1093/oso/9780198828945.003.0012 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Marco Overhaus

Keyword(s):

Middle East ◽

East Asia ◽

The United States ◽

Regional Security ◽

Donald Trump ◽

Geographical Regions ◽

The World ◽

American Hegemony ◽

The Usa ◽

Trump Administration

The USA is still the only power with the capability to have a major impact—for better or for worse—on the security orders in all major geographical regions of the world, most notably the Near/Middle East, East Asia, and Europe. A review of the major dynamics in regional orders shows that seven decades of American hegemony have always been short of the liberal ideal-type expectations—well before Donald Trump entered the scene. However, the Trump administration sees the international and regional security orders primarily as arenas for power competition in which economic and military might are the most relevant currencies. While the erosion of regional security orders is not primarily the result of the deeds and omissions in Washington, the missing liberal hegemon will make it much harder to reverse the trend and to rebuild these orders from within and from the outside.

Download Full-text

Spanish foreign policy will concern traditional allies

Emerald Expert Briefings ◽

10.1108/oxan-db250820 ◽

2020 ◽

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Foreign Policy ◽

Prime Minister ◽

The United States ◽

Political Crisis ◽

Donald Trump ◽

Far Right ◽

Content Type ◽

The United Kingdom ◽

The Government

Subject Spanish foreign policy. Significance Spain does not see itself replacing the United Kingdom as one of the ‘Big 3’ in driving EU policymaking and cooperation after Brexit. Instead, the government of Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez will seek to prioritise Spanish interests in the Mediterranean and on Brexit, and will become less preoccupied with EU cooperation and integration. Spain is seeking a more balanced and broader relationship with the United States, but there is tension over the political crisis in Venezuela and trade issues. Impacts Relations with the United States will become more difficult, especially if President Donald Trump is re-elected. Although Spain would like to shift its regional emphasis towards Asia, Venezuela and the coronavirus could nullify that ambition. Immigration is now a priority, as further illegal inflows would fuel support for the far-right Vox party.

Download Full-text

White supremacy, white counter-revolutionary politics, and the rise of Donald Trump

Environment and Planning C Politics and Space ◽

10.1177/2399654418789949 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 37 (4) ◽

pp. 579-596 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Joshua Inwood

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

White Supremacy ◽

Electoral Politics ◽

The United States ◽

Political Crisis ◽

Donald Trump ◽

Revolutionary Change ◽

Working Classes ◽

The Us ◽

Revolutionary Politics

To understand and contextualize Donald Trump's election as President of the United States, we must place his election in the context of a white counter-revolutionary politics that emerging from the specific geographic configurations of the US racial state. While academics and political commentators have correctly located the election of Trump in the context of white supremacy, I argue we need to coordinate our understanding of white supremacy and the electoral politics that fueled Trump's rise in the context of anti-Black racism by examining how the US racial state turns to whiteness to prevent change. Throughout the development of the United States, whiteness has long stood as a bulwark against progressive and revolutionary change so much so that when the US racial state is in economic and political crisis, bourgeoisie capitalism appeals to the white middle and working classes to address that crisis.

Download Full-text

Palestine Unbound

Journal of Palestine Studies ◽

10.1525/jps.2018.47.3.130 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 47 (3) ◽

pp. 130-134

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Human Rights ◽

Task Force ◽

The United States ◽

Donald Trump ◽

Tel Aviv ◽

The Us ◽

Intention To Move ◽

Arab Israeli Conflict ◽

The U.S

This section, updated regularly on the blog Palestine Square, covers popular conversations related to the Palestinians and the Arab-Israeli conflict during the quarter 16 November 2017 to 15 February 2018: #JerusalemIstheCapitalofPalestine went viral after U.S. president Donald Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and announced his intention to move the U.S. embassy there from Tel Aviv. The arrest of Palestinian teenager Ahed Tamimi for slapping an Israeli soldier also prompted a viral campaign under the hashtag #FreeAhed. A smaller campaign protested the exclusion of Palestinian human rights from the agenda of the annual Creating Change conference organized by the US-based National LGBTQ Task Force in Washington. And, UNRWA publicized its emergency funding appeal, following the decision of the United States to slash funding to the organization, with the hashtag #DignityIsPriceless.

Download Full-text

Confluencia geopolítica entre Cárdenas y Roosevelt:

Mexican Studies/Estudios Mexicanos ◽

10.1525/msem.2019.35.2.231 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 35 (2) ◽

pp. 231-254

Author(s):

Andreu Espasa

Keyword(s):

World War Ii ◽

New Deal ◽

Spanish Civil War ◽

The United States ◽

Political Crisis ◽

World War ◽

Military Alliance ◽

Bilateral Relations ◽

The Relationship ◽

The New Deal

De forma un tanto paradójica, a finales de los años treinta, las relaciones entre México y Estados Unidos sufrieron uno de los momentos de máxima tensión, para pasar, a continuación, a experimentar una notable mejoría, alcanzando el cénit en la alianza política y militar sellada durante la Segunda Guerra Mundial. El episodio catalizador de la tensión y posterior reconciliación fue, sin duda, el conflicto diplomático planteado tras la nacionalización petrolera de 1938. De entre los factores que propiciaron la solución pacífica y negociada al conflicto petrolero, el presente artículo se centra en analizar dos fenómenos del momento. En primer lugar, siguiendo un orden de relevancia, se examina el papel que tuvo la Guerra Civil Española. Aunque las posturas de ambos gobiernos ante el conflicto español fueron sustancialmente distintas, las interpretaciones y las lecciones sobre sus posibles consecuencias permitieron un mayor entendimiento entre los dos países vecinos. En segundo lugar, también se analizarán las afinidades ideológicas entre el New Deal y el cardenismo en el contexto de la crisis mundial económica y política de los años treinta, con el fin de entender su papel lubricante en las relaciones bilaterales de la época. Somewhat paradoxically, at the end of the 1930s, the relationship between Mexico and the United States experienced one of its tensest moments, after which it dramatically improved, reaching its zenith in the political and military alliance cemented during World War II. The catalyst for this tension and subsequent reconciliation was, without doubt, the diplomatic conflict that arose after the oil nationalization of 1938. Of the various factors that led to a peaceful negotiated solution to the oil conflict, this article focuses on analyzing two phenomena. Firstly—in order of importance—this article examines the role that the Spanish Civil War played. Although the positions of both governments in relation to the Spanish war were significantly different, the interpretations and lessons concerning potential consequences enabled a greater understanding between the two neighboring countries. Secondly, this article also analyzes the ideological affinities between the New Deal and Cardenismo in the context of the global economic and political crisis of the thirties, seeking to understand their role in facilitating bilateral relations during that period.

Download Full-text

Comparative analysis of the trade policy of Barack Obama and Donald Trump

Mezhdunarodnaja jekonomika (The World Economics) ◽

10.33920/vne-04-2003-06 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 59-71

Author(s):

V. Iordanova ◽

A. Ananev

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Economic Development ◽

Comparative Analysis ◽

Trade Policy ◽

World Economy ◽

The United States ◽

Barack Obama ◽

Scientific Article ◽

Donald Trump ◽

Entire World

The authors of this scientific article conducted a comparative analysis of the trade policy of US presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump. The article states that the tightening of trade policy by the current President is counterproductive and has a serious impact not only on the economic development of the United States, but also on the entire world economy as a whole.

Download Full-text

Winning the Argument and Moving the Fight: The Legacy of a Grassroots Humanitarian

Public Voices ◽

10.22140/pv.24 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 14 (1) ◽

pp. 115

Author(s):

Mary Coleman

Keyword(s):

Higher Education ◽

United States ◽

Winning Strategy ◽

Supreme Court Decision ◽

The United States ◽

Colleges And Universities ◽

Lessons Learned ◽

The Political ◽

Political Actors ◽

Trade Offs

The author of this article argues that the two-decades-long litigation struggle was necessary to push the political actors in Mississippi into a more virtuous than vicious legal/political negotiation. The second and related argument, however, is that neither the 1992 United States Supreme Court decision in Fordice nor the negotiation provided an adequate riposte to plaintiffs’ claims. The author shows that their chief counsel for the first phase of the litigation wanted equality of opportunity for historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs), as did the plaintiffs. In the course of explicating the role of a legal grass-roots humanitarian, Coleman suggests lessons learned and trade-offs from that case/negotiation, describing the tradeoffs as part of the political vestiges of legal racism in black public higher education and the need to move HBCUs to a higher level of opportunity at a critical juncture in the life of tuition-dependent colleges and universities in the United States. Throughout the essay the following questions pose themselves: In thinking about the Road to Fordice and to political settlement, would the Justice Department lawyers and the plaintiffs’ lawyers connect at the point of their shared strength? Would the timing of the settlement benefit the plaintiffs and/or the State? Could plaintiffs’ lawyers hold together for the length of the case and move each piece of the case forward in a winning strategy? Who were plaintiffs’ opponents and what was their strategy? With these questions in mind, the author offers an analysis of how the campaign— political/legal arguments and political/legal remedies to remove the vestiges of de jure segregation in higher education—unfolded in Mississippi, with special emphasis on the initiating lawyer in Ayers v. Waller and Fordice, Isaiah Madison

Download Full-text

The Decline of the Liberal Global Order and the Revival of Nationalism

10.1093/oso/9780190923846.003.0003 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Yale H. Ferguson ◽

Richard W. Mansbach

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

The United States ◽

Global Politics ◽

Global Order ◽

Donald Trump ◽

National Interests ◽

Global Organizations ◽

Obama Administration ◽

Us Hegemony ◽

National Populism

This chapter addresses the erosion of the postwar liberal global order and the accompanying disorder in global politics. It describes the perceptions of declining US hegemony during the Obama administration of American decline and the return of geopolitical and economic rivalries that are undermining the liberal order. The election of President Donald Trump in 2016 in the United States was the most significant manifestation of national populism that has emerged in recent years in Europe and elsewhere. The profile of supporters of national populism are much the same globally. They oppose so-called elites and immigrants (especially minorities) whom they blame for the loss of manufacturing jobs. After defining national populism, the chapter describes how it fosters isolationism and malignant nationalism and focuses on national interests rather than global cooperation. Such policies threaten the movement of goods and people, multinational global organizations, and the postwar order in which globalization thrives.

Download Full-text

Development Channelization, Partisanship, and Populism: Possibilities for Rural Renewal in the Death Throes of Coal

Sociological Perspectives ◽

10.1177/07311214211024677 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 073112142110246

Author(s):

Adam Mayer

Keyword(s):

United States ◽

Political Ideology ◽

Energy System ◽

The United States ◽

Coal Industry ◽

Right Wing ◽

Donald Trump ◽

Partisan Polarization ◽

Rural Economies ◽

Right Wing Populism

In the last few decades, the United States has experienced several related and significant societal trends—the transition of the energy system away from coal, the intensification of partisan polarization, and the rise of a populist right-wing political ideology, perhaps best exemplified by the election of Donald Trump. We build Gramling and Freudenberg’s little-explored concept of “development channelization” to argue that nostalgic right-wing populism, grievances directed toward the federal government, and partisanship converge to potentially thwart efforts to transition and diversify rural economies. Populist nostalgia and blame are associated with support for expanding the collapsing coal industry but do not predict support for other types of development. There are patterns of partisan polarization in support for extractive industries and wind power, but many development options appear to be relatively nonpartisan. We discuss these findings in terms of populism, nostalgia, partisan polarization, and the potential for rural renewal in the United States.

Download Full-text