scholarly journals Hillary 2016: Will a Second Clinton Era Arise?

2012 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 49-51
Author(s):  
Senior Editorial Staff

Given Hillary Clinton’s role as Secretary of State over the past four years, how electable of a candidate would she be for the presidential election in 2016? The PPR senior editorial staff briefly summarizes the past four years and evaluates her chances at a 2016 bid.

2007 ◽  
Vol 52 (3) ◽  
pp. 371-371

After fulfilling the position since 1987, Marcel van der Linden stepped down as executive editor of the International Review of Social History in July 2007. Over the past two decades the Review has developed into one of the leading journals in the field of international, and increasingly global, social history. For anyone who has kept track of the journal in this period, the contribution Marcel van der Linden has made to the journal's development will be clear. He remains involved with the Review in a different role. From February 2008 onward, he will be the permanent Chair of the journal's Editorial Committee, and as such will continue to be engaged in the development of the journal.


2019 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 32
Author(s):  
Kirsten L. Hebert

Highlights recent activities of the Optometric Historical Society and related events, including information about the Blast from the Past and Annual Business Meeting 2020, Optometry's Meeting, 2020, the National Optometry Hall of Fame 2020, and new faces on the editorial staff of Hindsight and the OHS Committee.


2020 ◽  
Vol 117 (45) ◽  
pp. 27940-27944 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert S. Erikson ◽  
Karl Sigman ◽  
Linan Yao

Donald Trump’s 2016 win despite failing to carry the popular vote has raised concern that 2020 would also see a mismatch between the winner of the popular vote and the winner of the Electoral College. This paper shows how to forecast the electoral vote in 2020 taking into account the unknown popular vote and the configuration of state voting in 2016. We note that 2016 was a statistical outlier. The potential Electoral College bias was slimmer in the past and not always favoring the Republican candidate. We show that in past presidential elections, difference among states in their presidential voting is solely a function of the states’ most recent presidential voting (plus new shocks); earlier history does not matter. Based on thousands of simulations, our research suggests that the bias in 2020 probably will favor Trump again but to a lesser degree than in 2016. The range of possible outcomes is sufficiently wide, however, to even include some possibility that Joseph Biden could win in the Electoral College while barely losing the popular vote.


Organization ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 495-513 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sierk Ybema

Studies interested in the discursive use of ‘the past’ often view history as an organizational resource designed to create a shared origin and a common purpose, promoting a sense of continuity and commitment among organizational stakeholders. In this article, I view ‘history’ instead as a symbolic site for discursive struggles between proponents and opponents of organizational change. It shows how organizational actors use ‘traces’ of a collective past in their version of ‘the’ history to win consent for change and to counter competing views. They do so by creating a sense of discontinuity from the past. The case study presented in this article combines a historian’s account of a newspaper’s history with an ethnographic account of the use of history prevalent among newspaper editors. While the historian’s narrative suggests the continuance of some vigorous traditions alongside identity change, the editors narratively construct or ‘invent’ transitions between periods or episodes while disregarding the organization’s traditions in their everyday talk. Storying the past, present and future in terms of a temporal dichotomy and ‘inventing’ transitions departs from existing studies of rhetorical history that tend to highlight invented traditions which establish or reaffirm continuity with the past. The case analysis shows how the editors selectively and strategically deploy history to accomplish or oppose change as part of ongoing negotiations within the editorial staff.


2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-60
Author(s):  
David Koukal ◽  

Over the past two years, several political commentators have drawn on Plato’s Republic to shed light on our last presidential election. Many of these authors emphasize the features of democracy that make it especially susceptible to demagoguery, which heralds the arrival of tyranny, and then go on to relate this to Donald Trump’s political ascension. The problem with these analyses is that they tend to unquestioningly adopt Plato’s pessimistic view of democracy. While Plato’s criticisms do have the virtue of making us aware of democracy’s weaknesses, we would argue that our present political circumstances did not issue from these flaws. This makes these criticisms irrelevant. Other commentators come closer to the mark when they talk about Plato’s passages addressing the person of the tyrant in Book IX, but what is lacking in these accounts is a context that more fully explains why the tyrant is what he is, in Platonic terms. In this essay we argue that other parts of the Republic, particularly Book IV, can tell us much more about Trump and his presidency. This part of the dialogue deals with Plato’s conception of human nature, which he presents in his discussion of the soul or psyche [ψυχή]. An examination of these passages will grant us insight into the Trump’s actions and utterances and show that the president is not only intellectually but also temperamentally unqualified for his office, which should give citizens good cause for worry.


2009 ◽  
Vol 184 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-12
Author(s):  
Tom Misteli

Change is always ambiguous. There is the enticing prospect of novelty and better times ahead, but at the same time the concern of losing the good of the past. It is with these sentiments that I take over as the Editor-in-Chief from Ira Mellman who for a decade has cleverly and effectively lead the JCB. During this time he directed and oversaw an extensive modernization of the journal and guided it through dramatic changes in the publishing world. Ira lead the journal with unyielding dedication and enthusiasm and we in the cell biology community must thank him profoundly for his service. It is his work, together with the invaluable contribution of the best editorial board and the most dedicated professional editorial staff in the scientific publishing business, that allows me to now take over the stewardship of the JCB with a tremendous sense of excitement and determination to continue and expand the JCB's role as the leading journal in the cell biology community and as a trendsetter in the rapidly changing world of modern cell biology.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meghan Leigh Grosse

Over the past few years, Facebook has found itself mired in out controversy after the next. During the 2016 U.S. presidential election, the company received criticism when it was revealed that Russian groups had created fraudulent social media accounts on their site in order to interfere with the elections – creating anti-Hillary groups, groups stoking fears of minority populations, and materials accusing the Democratic Party of voter fraud in an attempt to discourage voter turn-out. The question is, how did we get to this point; the point where foreign entities are affecting political outcomes in other countries through a website created by a private American corporation on a media platform wherein the lines between the cultures and legal systems of different countries is sometimes difficult to draw? To answer this, I look to the policies written by the U.S. Government in the 1990s on the issue of internet governance. I argue that the focus on including commercial interests in these early governance structures has had a lasting impact on the ways in which the internet operates to this day. In considering recent controversies that stem from the blurring lines of online sovereignty, wherein commercial and governmental interests become interwoven without a clear sense of who bears the responsibility when the system operates against the interests of its users, it becomes essential to consider the historical foundations which may have led to this moment.


Author(s):  
Corwin Smidt

This article examines the role of Catholics within the 2020 presidential election in the United States. Although Catholics were once a crucial and dependable component of the Democratic Party’s electoral coalition, their vote in more recent years has been much more splintered. Nevertheless, Catholics have been deemed to be an important “swing vote” in American politics today, as in recent presidential elections they have aligned with the national popular vote. This article therefore focuses on the part that Catholics played within the 2020 presidential election process. It addresses the level of political change and continuity within the ranks of Catholics over the past several elections, how they voted in the Democratic primaries during the initial stages of the 2020 presidential election, their level of support for different candidates over the course of the campaign, how they ultimately came to cast their ballots in the 2020 election, and the extent to which their voting patterns in 2020 differed from that of 2016.


Author(s):  
Ming-Hsun Cheng ◽  
Minliang Yang ◽  
Yu Wang

As the leader of the largest economy, President of the United States has substantive influence on addressing the global climate change problem. However, presidential election is often dominated by issues other than energy problems. This paper focuses on the on-going 2016 presidential election, examining the energy plans proposed by the leading Democrat and Republican candidates. Our data from the Iowa caucus survey in January 2016 suggests that voters are more concerned about terrorism and economic issues than environmental relative issues. We then compare the Democratic and Republican candidate’s view of American’s energy future, and evaluate their proposed renewable energy targets. We find that the view on renewable energy is polarized between Democratic and Republican candidates, while candidates from both parties agree on the need for energy efficiency. Results from our ordinal least squares regression models suggest that Democratic candidates have moderate to ambitious goals for developing solar and other renewable energy. The Republican candidates favor fossil fuel and they neglect to provide any plan for renewable energy. In addition, this trend of polarization has grown more significant when compared with the past three presidential elections. Our observation suggests that energy issues need to be discussed more to draw broader attention to salient issues of diversifying and decarbonizing the nation’s energy system.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document