Firepower

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Lacombe
Keyword(s):  
Interest Groups ◽  
Republican Party ◽  
Public Support ◽  
The Political ◽  
National Politics ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Mass Shootings ◽  
National Rifle Association ◽  
Powerful Interest ◽  
Active Base

The National Rifle Association (NRA) is one of the most powerful interest groups in America, and has consistently managed to defeat or weaken proposed gun regulations — even despite widespread public support for stricter laws and the prevalence of mass shootings and gun-related deaths. This book provides an unprecedented look at how this controversial organization built its political power and deploys it on behalf of its pro-gun agenda. Taking readers from the 1930s to the age of Donald Trump, the book traces how the NRA's immense influence on national politics arises from its ability to shape the political outlooks and actions of its followers. The book draws on nearly a century of archival records and surveys to show how the organization has fashioned a distinct worldview around gun ownership and has used it to mobilize its supporters. It reveals how the NRA's cultivation of a large, unified, and active base has enabled it to build a resilient alliance with the Republican Party, and examines why the NRA and its members formed an important constituency that helped fuel Trump's unlikely political rise. The book sheds vital new light on how the NRA has grown powerful by mobilizing average Americans, and how it uses its GOP alliance to advance its objectives and shape the national agenda.

Donald Trump’s rhetoric

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-208
Author(s):  
Orly Kayam
Keyword(s):  
Public Support ◽  
The Political ◽  
Rhetorical Strategies ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Rhetorical Strategy ◽  
Presidential Primary ◽  
Political Realm

Abstract The paper explores the rhetorical strategies Donald Trump employed during the 2016 U.S. presidential primary campaign. The study shows that Trump aimed at garnering public support by defining himself as an anti-politician or anti-political establishment candidate. His rhetorical strategies were aimed at building the depiction of his character as a successful businessman who came from outside the political realm to save America and restore it to its former greatness. He denounced the traditional rules of politics, avoided calculated, logical and politically correct utterances, and modeled himself as the only candidate who was fit for the presidency. The analysis reveals Trump’s prominent rhetorical strategies, and shows how each one of them fulfilled what I refer to as the ultimate “Anti-Political Rhetorical Strategy”, from an anti-politically correct strategy, which is by nature anti-political, to more common strategies such as negativity, simplicity, repetition and hyperbole.

Interest Group Innovation

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Epstein
Keyword(s):  
Interest Groups ◽  
Political Communication ◽  
The Political ◽  
Case Study Approach ◽  
National Rifle Association ◽  
Study Approach ◽  
Communication Goals ◽  
Choice Phase ◽  
History Of

This chapter uses a case study approach to explore the political choice phase of the political communication cycle (PCC) over time. Focusing on interest groups and detailing the long history of these organizations in America, the chapter primarily examines innovations made by four of the largest interest groups in American history: AARP, the Sierra Club, the National Rifle Association (NRA), and MoveOn.org. These four interest groups have spanned multiple political communication orders (PCOs) and their overall lack of innovativeness until recent years is tied to the distinct nature of their shared political communication goals. These goals are far narrower than campaigns or social movements and therefore are much less likely to motivate innovative efforts. These trends have started to change in the internet-based era as new organizational and communication strategies have opened up interest groups to greater innovation along the lines of MoveOn.org.

Conclusion

2021 ◽  
pp. 219-238
Author(s):  
Matthew J. Lacombe
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Republican Party ◽  
Political Influence ◽  
Gun Control ◽  
American Democracy ◽  
Advocacy Organizations ◽  
National Rifle Association ◽  
Close Relationship ◽  
Gun Debate

This chapter looks toward the future of both the National Rifle Association (NRA) and the gun debate more broadly. It discusses potential threats to the NRA's political influence, including its own internal struggles, the rise of more effective gun control advocacy organizations, and the potential downsides of its close relationship with the Republican Party. The chapter also talks about the potential generalizability of the book's findings to other groups and policy areas. It considers the lessons that other groups might learn from the NRA in terms of cultivating and using ideational power. Ultimately, the chapter notes its implications for our understanding of interest groups and political parties, and reflects on the NRA's place in American democracy.

Party Animals of the 2016 Presidential Primaries: Political Cartoon Representations of the Republican and Democratic Parties

2017 ◽  
Vol 61 (6) ◽  
pp. 600-610
Author(s):  
Joan L. Conners
Keyword(s):  
Political Parties ◽  
Republican Party ◽  
Democratic Party ◽  
Electoral Politics ◽  
The Political ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Presidential Primaries ◽  
Animal Representations ◽  
Democratic Parties ◽  
Political Success

This analysis of political cartoon coverage of the 2016 presidential primaries found considerable attention given to the political parties themselves, as well as issues, and controversies the parties were facing. In political cartoons, the Republican and Democratic parties were usually reflected in animal representations of the elephant and donkey. A qualitative textual analysis of cartoon images from U.S. newspapers found a number of themes emerged in 2016 with regard to the party animals: Both parties were portrayed expressing reluctance or hesitancy in their party’s nominee, the Republican Party in particular was represented as helpless to stop the political success that Donald Trump saw in the primaries, and the Democratic Party was portrayed as divided between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. These themes found in political cartoon images suggest how the two dominant political parties operate in electoral politics today.

Prospects for US politics in 2017

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Learning Process ◽  
Republican Party ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
The Political ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Content Type ◽  
President Elect ◽  
Commander In Chief ◽  
Ability To Drive ◽  
Insight Into

Subject Prospects for US politics in 2017. Significance The upset victory of President-elect Donald Trump and Republican control of Congress means that uncertainty about the new administration's priorities and actual ability to drive substantive shifts in government activity will persist for some time, with appointments offering some insight into ideological leanings and policy preferences. However, divisions within the Republican Party, the independent priorities of legislators, the complex machinery of policy-making and the political demands of a restive electorate will shape Trump's learning process as commander-in-chief once in office.

The problem of Donald Trump and the Static Spectrum Fallacy

2019 ◽  
pp. 135406881987167
Author(s):  
Verlan Lewis
Keyword(s):  
Political Science ◽  
Republican Party ◽  
Spatial Spectrum ◽  
The Political ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Time Period ◽  
Left And Right ◽  
Party Ideology ◽  
The Right ◽  
Over Time

Donald Trump’s transformation of Republican Party ideology has helped reveal major problems in the political science discipline’s conceptualization and measurement of ideology. Most scholarship is dominated by the mistaken view that party ideology changes can best be described by parties moving “left” or “right” on a static, ideological, spatial spectrum. In reality, the meaning and content of “left” and “right” (“liberal” and “conservative”) constantly evolve along with the issue positions of the two major parties. Thus, it makes no sense to describe parties as moving to the “left” or “right” over time when the very meanings of “liberalism” and “conservatism” change during the same time period. By understanding the dynamic character of ideology, we can reconcile the paradox of how Trump’s Republican Party can change its ideology even while continuing to be identified with “conservatism” and the “Right.”

scholarly journals The crisis of American traditional political establishment and Donald Trump phenomenon

2020 ◽  
pp. 17-34
Author(s):  
Sergii Tolstov ◽  
Alona Godliuk
Keyword(s):  
Social Stratification ◽  
Republican Party ◽  
Democratic Party ◽  
Political System ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Elites ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Political Processes ◽  
The U.S

Over the past decade the political processes in the U.S. and a number of European states have shown ambiguous changes which reflected ideological transformations and regroupings of political elites. Developments within the U.S. political system have witnessed a deep split along ideological lines which was characterized by the revival of various right-wing and conservative currents within the Republican party and the increasing influence of left-liberal groups inside the Democratic party. Taking into account the latest trends, the purpose of this article lays in the structural political analysis of political contradictions and regrouping processes within the U.S. political elites in the 2010s that prevailed during the presidencies of Barack Obama and Donald Trump. The authors emphasise that the crisis of traditional elites has not lead to the destruction of the bipartisan system, which remains the most important political institutional mechanism and ensures election of the executive branch, representative bodies and self-government at all levels. At the same time the recent trends within the political system demonstrated the destruction of such a specific phenomenon as a relative bipartisan consensus, which for a long time ensured the stability of power and the balance of interests among different groups of influence despite the regular change of the Republican and Democratic administrations. As an intermediate result reflecting the transformation of the American traditional political establishment the authors note both the overall polarization of the attitudes of the Republican and Democratic parties, and the strengthening of ‘internal’ pluralism inside the Republicans and the Democrats as a result of growing divergence and exacerbation of contradictions between supporters of various ideological groupings and platforms. This was approved by an obvious increase of influence of center-left groups among the Democrats and the right-wingers among the Republicans. These differences caused a tough political confrontation between different groups of elites in such important areas as social policy, taxes and health care. Similar fundamental discrepancies manifest the vision of international affairs especially on foreign trade and principles of interaction with the traditional allies. The exacerbation of political collisions ultimately led to an imbalance in the American political system and the loss of ability to achieve compromises between the leadership of the Republicans and Democrats. The authors conclude that the atomization of political elites is a projection of social stratification and polarization within the American society. These processes are not directly related to the personality of Donald Trump. Given the severity and critical aggravation of political contradictions, the US Presidential and Congressional elections on November 3, 2020 will not resolve the ongoing inter-elite conflict.

Facing the Challenge of Democracy

2011 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Political Participation ◽  
Interest Groups ◽  
Political Knowledge ◽  
The Political ◽  
Political Thinking ◽  
Democratic Representation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Party Polarization

Citizens are political simpletons—that is only a modest exaggeration of a common characterization of voters. Certainly, there is no shortage of evidence of citizens' limited political knowledge, even about matters of the highest importance, along with inconsistencies in their thinking, some glaring by any standard. But this picture of citizens all too often approaches caricature. This book brings together leading political scientists who offer new insights into the political thinking of the public, the causes of party polarization, the motivations for political participation, and the paradoxical relationship between turnout and democratic representation. These studies propel a foundational argument about democracy. Voters can only do as well as the alternatives on offer. These alternatives are constrained by third players, in particular activists, interest groups, and financial contributors. The result: voters often appear to be shortsighted, extreme, and inconsistent because the alternatives they must choose between are shortsighted, extreme, and inconsistent.

Making Americans Feel Great Again? Personal Significance Predicts Political Intentions of Losers and Winners of the 2016 US Election

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Jasko ◽  
Joanna Grzymala-Moszczynska ◽  
Marta Maj ◽  
Marta Szastok ◽  
Arie W. Kruglanski
Keyword(s):  
Political System ◽  
Presidential Elections ◽  
The Political ◽  
Power Transition ◽  
Hillary Clinton ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Electoral Success ◽  
Personal Significance ◽  
Before And After ◽  
The Times

Reactions of losers and winners of political elections have important consequences for the political system during the times of power transition. In four studies conducted immediately before and after the 2016 US presidential elections we investigated how personal significance induced by success or failure of one’s candidate is related to hostile vs. benevolent intentions toward political adversaries. We found that the less significant supporters of Hillary Clinton and supporters of Donald Trump felt after an imagined (Study 1A) or actual (Study 2) electoral failure the more they were willing to engage in peaceful actions against the elected president and the less they were willing to accept the results of the elections. However, while significance gain due to an imagined or actual electoral success was related to more benevolent intentions among Clinton supporters (Study 1B), it was related to more hostile intentions among Trump supporters (Studies 1B, 2, and 3).

Referendum konstytucyjne we Włoszech. Jak głosowanie ludowe wpływa na system polityczny państwa?

2017 ◽  
pp. 110-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elżbieta Kużelewska
Keyword(s):  
Political System ◽  
Public Support ◽  
The Political ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Impact

This article analyses the impact of constitutional referendums on the political system in Italy. There were three constitutional referendums conducted in 2001, 2006 and 2016. All of them have been organised by the ruling parties, however, only the first one was successful. In the subsequent referendums, the proposals for amending the constitution have been rejected by voters. The article finds that lack of public support for the government resulted in voting „no” in the referendum.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document