The Return of the Voter: Voter Turnout in the 2008 Presidential Election

The Forum ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael P. McDonald
2009 ◽  
Vol 73 (5) ◽  
pp. 995-1022 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. S. Philpot ◽  
D. R. Shaw ◽  
E. B. McGowen

2009 ◽  
Vol 86 (3) ◽  
pp. 563-577 ◽  
Author(s):  
James E. Mueller ◽  
Tom Reichert

Given the upturn in young-voter turnout in 2004, this study updates an analysis of the 2000 election to determine if coverage in youth-oriented magazines remained superficial, strategic, and cynical. Quantity of coverage increased 69% over 2000 (coverage in Rolling Stone increased 300%) despite a decrease in women's magazines' coverage. There was no difference in the largely strategic, cynical, and biased coverage between the two elections. Despite a “wartime” election, the magazines rarely published stories focusing on the Iraq war. The study suggests that resurgent interest in politics among young people was not mirrored in popular magazines they read regularly.


2017 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-74
Author(s):  
Charles Prysby

Young voters contributed disproportionately to Barack Obama’s presidential victory in 2012. In fact, if the electorate had been limited to those over 30 years old, Mitt Romney might be in the White House today. Obama captured 60 percent of the vote of those under 30, compared to 49 percent of those over 30, according to the national exit polls (Schier and Box- Steffensmeier 2013, 86). A similar pattern characterized the 2008 presidential election: Obama won 66 percent of the vote among those aged 29 or less, but under one-half of voters older than 45 (Pomper 2010, 53). The tendency for younger voters to be disproportionately Democratic emerged in the 2004 presidential election. Prior to that, Democratic presidential candidates did not consistently do better among younger voters. In 2000, for example, Al Gore did as well among older voters as he did among younger voters, and in 1992, Bill Clinton did his best among older voters, as did Walter Mondale in 1984 and Michael Dukakis in 1988 (Pomper 2001, 138; Pomper 1989, 133). 


Author(s):  
Jan E. Leighley ◽  
Jonathan Nagler

This chapter introduces the theoretical framework that guides the analyses and discussions of the determinants of voter turnout. It adopts a model of turnout that poses an individual's decision to vote as a reflection of the costs and benefits of engaging in such behavior. Then, for each presidential election year since 1972, it estimates turnout as a function of demographic characteristics of interest. These estimates allow us to estimate the impact of one demographic characteristic (such as income) on turnout while holding other demographic characteristics (such as education and race) constant. These estimates are referred to as “conditional” relationships. The findings suggest that the conditional relationships between education and turnout, and income and turnout (i.e., conditional income bias) have been relatively stable (or modestly reduced) since 1972. Important changes in the conditional relationships between age, race, gender, and turnout have also been observed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document