Talking about what would happen versus what happened: Tracking Congressional speeches during COVID-19

In counterfactual thinking, an imagined alternative to the reality that comprises an antecedent and a consequent is widely adopted in political discourse to justify past behaviors (i.e., counterfactual explanation) or to depict a better future (i.e., prefactual). However, they have not been properly addressed in political communication literature. Our study examines how politicians used counterfactual expressions for explanation of the past or preparation of the future during COVID-19, one of the most severe public health crises. All Congressional speeches of the Senate and House in the 116th Congress (2019-2020) were retrieved, and counterfactual expressions were identified along with time-focusing in each speech, using recent advances in natural language processing (NLP) techniques. The results show that counterfactuals were more practiced among Democrats in the Senate and Republicans in the House. With the spread of the pandemic, the use of counterfactuals decreased, maintaining a partisan gap in the House. However, it was nearly stable, with no party differences in the Senate. Implications of our findings are discussed, regarding party polarization, institutional constraints, and the quality of Congressional deliberation. Limitations and suggestions for future research are also provided.

Just like the others: Party differences, perception, and satisfaction with democracy

A robust literature on citizens’ satisfaction with democracy argues that system satisfaction is based on the policy outcomes that citizens anticipate from electoral results. A tacit assumption in this research is that there are differences between the parties and that citizens are aware of the ideological and preference diversity in their political environment. Some citizens, however, fail to perceive these differences. Using a multi-national set of post-election surveys, regression analysis, and propensity score matching, perceived party difference is shown to substantially impact citizens’ systemic satisfaction. Those who believe all parties are the same are substantially less satisfied with the functioning of their democracy. The negative effect of perceived party homogeneity is mitigated by closeness to a political party and sense of representation. By manipulating the public’s reserve of democratic satisfaction, this perception of party homogeneity threatens democratic stability.

Valgt av og blant samer – og enkelte andre? Ulike velgergruppers holdninger til kriteriene for å delta ved sametingsvalg i Norge

Self-determination for Indigenous peoples requires boundaries between those who are entitled to take part in the processes of self-determination and those who are not. In Norway, the registration criteria of the Sámi Parliament’s electoral roll constitute such boundaries. These criteria have not caused as much conflict in Norway as in other Nordic countries with Sámi Parliaments, but some debate has taken place. Some have argued for wider criteria, to allow certain groups without a Sámi ethnic background to register, while others prefer more narrow criteria to ensure that the registered voters have sufficient Sámi roots and cultural competence. In this chapter, we analyse attitudes towards the registration criteria within the registered Sámi electorate. The 2013 and 2017 voter surveys show essentially the same picture. About two-thirds were satisfied with the current criteria on both occasions. Among those who wanted a change, the majority were for expansion rather than limitation. Marriage to a registered voter and long-term connection to a Sámi community received the most support among the potential extension criteria. Attitudes became slightly more restrictive from 2013 to 2017, but the changes were larger within certain groups. In 2013, the question of expansion was to some extent party polarized. By 2017, these party differences had decreased: Labour Party voters had moved towards the more restrictive NSR voters. Also, some differences in attitudes to limitation appeared in 2017, when those who wanted stricter criteria were found primarily among those who had high scores on various measures of ties to the Sámi community.

Politisk avstand ved sametingsvalg: En kartlegging av det samiske ideologiske landskapet i Norge1

In this chapter, we explore the ideological and political landscape of Sámi electoral politics. Which ideological and political cleavages are important in Sámi politics, and how do these cleavages manifest themselves in voting patterns and party differences? We use the Sámi election surveys from 2013 to 2017. The analysis describes a Sámi political landscape with small ideological and political differences, where primarily the Progress Party stands out. Voters who favour this party are far from other party voters on the central issue of Sámi self-determination, and there is a mutually frosty relationship between Progress Party voters and other voters. On some issues, Conservative Party voters are in an intermediate position between the Progress Party voters and the rest, and voters for the Nordkalottfolket party also have a somewhat different profile. However, the differences between the remaining parties are less clear. This also applies to the two main competitors, the NSR and the Labour Party, and the political distances found in our survey questions cannot explain the pattern of coalition formation in the Sámi Parliament. The relatively small distances between the largest parties can be advantageous in dealing outwardly with the Norwegian state. Internally, however, small political distances can blur the political landscape in the eyes of the voters and make it difficult to choose between parties.

Populist ideas on social media: A dictionary-based measurement of populist communication

This article presents a dictionary-based measurement of populist communication that reaches citizens directly through social media in German. The studied populist messages reflect ideational definitions of populism. Thus, populist messages appeal to the people, dismiss the elites as appalling, or highlight the people’s right to unfettered rule. Despite German-speaking countries offering a variety of populist parties, existing automated approaches are rarely applicable to German texts. Furthermore, they are not tailored to social media and often focus only on anti-elitism. I vastly improved existing dictionaries by analyzing populist ideology in its entirety, including people-centrism and the demand for people’s sovereignty. The article showed how known populist parties in Austria, Germany, and Switzerland spread these messages to a great extent on social media. Furthermore, I was able to highlight intra-party differences. Finally, the article discusses different aspects of validity and shows that the proposed approach offers high convergent validity and split-half reliability.

Why do per capita COVID-19 Case Rates Differ Between U.S. States?

BackgroundThe popular press has explored the differences among U.S. states in rates of COVID-19 cases, mostly focusing on political party differences, and often mentioning that political party differences in health outcomes are confounded by demographic and socio-economic differences between Democratic areas and Republican areas. The purpose of this paper is to present a thorough analysis of these issues.Design and MethodsState-specific COVID-19 cases per 100,000 people was the main outcome studied, with explanatory variables from Bureau of Census surveys, including percentages of the state population that were Hispanic, black, below poverty level, had at least a bachelor’s degree, or were uninsured, along with median age, median income, population density, and degree of urbanization. We also included political party in power as an explanatory variable in multiple linear regression. The units of analysis in this study are the 50 U.S. states.ResultsAll explanatory variables were at least marginally statistically significantly associated with case rate in univariate regression analysis, except for population density and urbanization. All the census characteristics were at least marginally associated with party in power in one factor analysis of variance, except for percentage black. In a forward stepwise procedure in a multivariable model for case rate, percentages of the state population that were Hispanic or black, median age, median income, population density, and (residual) percentage poverty were retained as statistically significant and explained 62% of the variation between states in case rates. In a model with political party in power included, along with any additional variables that notably affected the adjusted association between party in power and case rate, 69% of the variance between states in case rates was explained, and adjusted case rates per 100,000 people were 2155 for states with Democratic governments, 2269 for states with mixed governments, and 2738 for Republican-led states. These estimates are based on data through October 8, 2020.ConclusionsU.S. state-specific demographic and socio-economic variables are strongly associated with the states’ COVID-19 case rates, so must be considered in analysis of variation in case rates between the states. Adjusting for these factors, states with Democrats as the party in power have lower case rates than Republican-led states.

The Power of Being Transported: Efficacy Beliefs, Risk Perceptions, and Political Affiliation in the Context of Climate Change

We evaluated the short-term effects of transportation on efficacy beliefs and risk perceptions after exposure to a climate change documentary. Data were collected in randomized laboratory ( N = 624) and online ( N = 1,391) experiments. Participants watched one episode of Years of Living Dangerously or a control video. Regression analyses assessed whether narrative transportation and/or political affiliation were predictive of outcomes. Transportation and political affiliation were significantly associated with efficacy beliefs and risk perceptions ( p < .001). A significant transportation by political party interaction for efficacy beliefs ( p < .01) and risk perceptions (p < .01) indicated that cross-party differences could be mitigated by higher levels of transportation.

Polarized Pluralism: Organizational Preferences and Biases in the American Pressure System

For decades, critics of pluralism have argued that the American interest group system exhibits a significantly biased distribution of policy preferences. We evaluate this argument by measuring groups’ revealed preferences directly, developing a set of ideal point estimates, IGscores, for over 2,600 interest groups and 950 members of Congress on a common scale. We generate the scores by jointly scaling a large dataset of interest groups’ positions on congressional bills with roll-call votes on those same bills. Analyses of the scores uncover significant heterogeneity in the interest group system, with little conservative skew and notable inter-party differences in preference correspondence between legislators and ideologically similar groups. Conservative bias and homogeneity reappear, however, when weighting IGscores by groups’ PAC contributions and lobbying expenditures. These findings suggest that bias among interest groups depends on the extent to which activities like PAC contributions and lobbying influence policymakers’ perceptions about the preferences of organized interests.

The impact of full and partial social cleavages on party systems: A comparative analysis of the countries of the former SFRY

Party systems represent parts of political systems which arise as a result of interactions between political parties. Party relations produce characteristics which place a particular party system within the typology of party systems. A number of factors can be considered in explaining the nature of party competition, most often placed within the categories of institutional and sociostructural factors. This paper analyses the impact of full and partial social cleavages on party systems. Given that the theory of social cleavages has proved insufficient in explaining party differences and the dynamics of party systems, especially in new democracies, we will improve the analysis by including the concept of partial social cleavages. This research shows the unequivocal influence of dominant social cleavages on the situation and changes in party systems. Although in some cases no changes in the type of party system have occurred, it can be concluded that exactly in those cases there exist permanent and ingrained social cleavages, but also partial cleavages which affect the relations in the party system at the given time. Identity issues stand out as the dominant topic in political competition, especially in the countries where ethnic relations have not been resolved.