Introduction

Citizen Now ◽  
2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth C. Matto
Keyword(s):  
Young Adults ◽  
Voter Turnout ◽  
Political Interest ◽  
2016 Election ◽  
2008 Election ◽  
Percent Decline

“Will they turn out to vote this year?” With every election, it seems that this is the question most commonly asked about young adults. Unfortunately, the answer isn’t always clear. After years of steady decline, the 2008 election marked an uptick in youth voter turnout rates and, seemingly, in political interest and enthusiasm as well. Then came a 6 percent decline in rates in 2012, followed by record low rates of registration and turnout in 2014. As the 2016 election loomed on the horizon, yet again, there were signs of hope. Youth voter turnout rates throughout the primaries and caucuses broke records....

scholarly journals Young Voters after the 2008 Election: A Disappearing Act?

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Priscilla Southwell
Keyword(s):  
Voter Turnout ◽  
Barack Obama ◽  
National Election ◽  
Young Voters ◽  
2016 Election ◽  
2008 Election ◽  
Election Studies

<p>This study examines the decline in voter turnout among young voters between the 2008 and 2012 elections. Our findings suggest that those young voters who dropped out of the electorate in 2012 were more likely to express feelings of alienation, as measured by the American National Election Studies indices of trust and efficacy. Such “dropout” voters were also more likely to have voted for Barack Obama in the 2008 election. These findings are crucial, as the level of alienation in the 2016 election appears to be even higher, and may influence the outcome of the election.</p>

More Engaged but Still Uninformed? 2004 Presidential Election Coverage in Consumer Magazines Popular with Young Adults

2009 ◽  
Vol 86 (3) ◽  
pp. 563-577 ◽  
Author(s):  
James E. Mueller ◽  
Tom Reichert
Keyword(s):  
Young Adults ◽  
Young People ◽  
Voter Turnout ◽  
Presidential Election ◽  
Iraq War ◽  
Women's Magazines ◽  
Rolling Stone ◽  
Election Coverage ◽  
Popular Magazines ◽  
2000 Election

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.

Candidate Preference, State Context, and Voter Turnout: Comparing Non-Voters and Voters in the 2016 Presidential Election

The Forum ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-227
Author(s):  
Vladimir E. Medenica ◽  
Matthew Fowler
Keyword(s):  
Voter Turnout ◽  
Electoral Behavior ◽  
Donald Trump ◽  
Contextual Variation ◽  
Candidate Preference ◽  
2016 Election ◽  
And Behavior ◽  
Attitudes And Behavior ◽  
Future Work ◽  
State Context

Abstract While much attention has been paid to understanding the drivers of support for Donald Trump, less focus has been placed on understanding the factors that led individuals to turn out and vote or stay home. This paper compares non-voters and voters in the 2016 election and explores how self-reported candidate preference prior to the election predicted turnout across three different state contexts: (1) all states, (2) closely contested states won by Trump, and (3) closely contested states won by Clinton. We find that preference for both candidates predicted turnout in the aggregate (all states) and in closely contested states won by Clinton, but only preference for Trump predicted turnout in the closely contested states won by Trump. Moreover, we find that political interest is negatively associated with preference for Clinton when examining candidate preferences among non-voters. Our analysis suggests that non-voters in the 2016 election held meaningful candidate preferences that impacted voter turnout but that state context played an important role in this relationship. This study sheds light on an understudied component of the 2016 election, the attitudes and behavior of non-voters, as well as points to the importance of incorporating contextual variation in future work on electoral behavior and voter turnout.

The Conditional Effects of Health on Voter Turnout

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory Lyon
Keyword(s):  
Low Income ◽  
Voter Turnout ◽  
High Income ◽  
Poor Health ◽  
Conditional Effects ◽  
2016 Election ◽  
Excellent Health ◽  
Reported Health ◽  
Election Studies ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract Context: Voting is the central instrument of democracy, yet there are a number of impediments that affect citizens' ability to turn out to vote. Health is one such impediment. Methods: This study draws on 2012 and 2016 election data from the Cooperative Congressional Election Study and the American National Election Studies and uses objective validated measures of voter turnout as well as postelection data on respondents' reasons for nonvoting to examine the relationship between self-reported health and voter turnout. Findings: The results indicate poor health depresses turnout among low-income voters but not high-income voters. A low-income citizen in poor health is 7 points less likely to turn out to vote than a low-income citizen in excellent health is. In contrast, a high-income citizen in poor health is just as likely to vote as a high-income citizen in excellent health is. Moreover, low-income citizens in poor health are 10 points more likely to cite sickness as an impediment to voting than are otherwise similar high-income citizens who are also in poor health. Conclusions: The findings have implications for health policy and unequal electoral engagement and suggest that health may narrow the scope of US democracy as poor health pushes low-income citizens out of the electoral sphere while high-income citizens continue to turn out to vote regardless of their underlying health conditions.

Why Studying State Voting Laws Is Not Enough

2020 ◽  
pp. 31-50
Author(s):  
Michael Ritter
Keyword(s):  
Voter Turnout ◽  
Census Data ◽  
Political Interest ◽  
Omitted Variables ◽  
Early Voting ◽  
Election Administration ◽  
Disadvantaged Groups ◽  
State Adoption ◽  
Voting Decisions ◽  
Voting Laws

Early studies of the effects of voter laws on turnout often showed that early voting, absentee, and mail voting had limited impacts on voter turnout, with only same day registration consistently linked to higher turnout. Much of the previous research measured these laws in isolation (although most states have combinations of the laws), omitted measurement of election administration, did not account for possible selection bias in state adoption of the laws, focused on overall voter turnout rather than that for disadvantaged groups, and did not measure the effects of the laws on campaign mobilization strategies. Census data used in previous studies omitted variables (e.g., political interest and partisanship) known to influence voting decisions. Building on research from 2000s and 2010s, Chapter 3 emphasizes how causal inference research design and national voter files can lead to more precise estimations of the effects of convenience voting laws and election administration on voter turnout.

scholarly journals Practice makes voters? Effects of student mock elections on turnout

Politics ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 377-393
Author(s):  
Richard Öhrvall ◽  
Sven Oskarsson
Keyword(s):  
Voter Turnout ◽  
Economic Status ◽  
Political Interest ◽  
Parliamentary Election ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Socio Economic Status ◽  
The World ◽  
Short And Long Term ◽  
Different Parts

Student mock elections are conducted in schools around the world in an effort to increase political interest and efficacy among students. There is, however, a lack of research on whether mock elections in schools enhance voter turnout in real elections. In this article, we examine whether the propensity to vote in Swedish elections is higher among young people who have previously experienced a student mock election. The analysis is based on unique administrative population-wide data on turnout in the Swedish 2010 parliamentary election and the 2009 European Parliament election. Our results show that having experienced a mock election as a student does not increase the likelihood of voting in subsequent real elections. This result holds when we study both short- and long-term effects, and when we divide our sample into different parts depending on their socio-economic status and study each part separately.

Ideological Heterogeneity and the Rise of Donald Trump

The Forum ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward G. Carmines ◽  
Michael J. Ensley ◽  
Michael W. Wagner
Keyword(s):  
Voter Turnout ◽  
American People ◽  
Media Campaign ◽  
National Elections ◽  
White House ◽  
Campaign Strategy ◽  
Primary Election ◽  
2016 Election ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
Economic Anxiety

AbstractIn the days after the 2016 election, a variety of explanations has been offered to explain Donald Trump’s unique ascendancy in American politics. Scholars have discussed Trump’s appeal to rural voters, his hybrid media campaign strategy, shifts in voter turnout, Hillary Clinton’s campaign advertising strategy, economic anxiety, differences in sexist and racist attitudes among Trump voters and so forth. Here, we add another key factor to the conversation: Trump’s appeal to a smaller, often ignored, segment of the electorate: populist voters. Building upon our previous work – demonstrating that while American political elites compete across a single dimension of conflict, the American people organize their attitudes around two distinct dimensions, one economic and one social – we use 2008 American National Elections Study (ANES) data and 2016 ANES primary election data to show that populist support for Trump, and nationalist policies themselves, help us to understand how Trump captured the Republican nomination and the White House.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document