One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.
-
Upload
jocelyn-bashford -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
0
Transcript of One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.
![Page 1: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
One last negative ad
• Rated most effective of 2008
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxqjAejRF94
![Page 2: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Voter Turnout
• Who votes, who doesn’t?
• Why?
• Why a decline?
• Is there a decline?
• What proposals to increase turnout?
![Page 3: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Voter Turnout in US
• Is there a turnout problem?
• In US• about 50-55% vote in presidential elections
– up in 2004 % 2008 (60%)
• about 30% vote in congressional elections
• Washington state above the national average
![Page 4: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Voter Turnout
• In the US• a steady decline (maybe)
• turnout 10% lower 2000 than 1960
• turnout much lower now than 1900– why ??
• today, a lower % of eligible voters participate– farmore eligible voters now
![Page 5: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Turnout Trend 1948 - 2000
• High rates 1952 - 1968
• Decline post 1972
QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressor
are needed to see this picture.
M. McDonald data
![Page 6: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Turnout Trend through 2008
• Large change in VAP vs. VEP turnout
• Since 1980
• Pool of eligible voters smaller vs. voting age population
M. McDonald data
![Page 7: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Voter Turnout
• 1896 90% drop to 62% in 1904– voter registration laws
– Jim Crow laws
• 1916 61% drop to 42% in 1920– suffrage to women
– size of eligible electorate doubled
• 1936 59% drop to 51% in 1948– WWII
• 1968 60% drop to 52% 1972– suffrage granted to 18 y/olds
![Page 8: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Voter Turnout in US
• 1960 = 63% in pres (47% in 1962)
• 1964 = 62% in pres (48% in 1966)
• 1968 = 61% in pres (47% in 1970)
• 1984 = 54% in pres (36% in 1986)
• 1988 = 50% in pres (36% in 1990)
• 1996 = 49% in pres (36% in 1998)
• 2000 = 51% in pres (34% in 2002)
![Page 9: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Voter Turnout in US
• Why a decline since 1890s?
• Old numbers from a different context– high mobilization
• labor intensive parties
– limited pool of eligible voters– fraud– more mobilization then vs. now?
![Page 10: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Voter Turnout in US
• Why a decline since 1960s?
• Demise of parties– campaigns now capital intensive (ads)– less direct contacts w/ voters– candidate centered politics– “party building” efforts (soft money) for
GOTV had little effect
![Page 11: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Voter Turnout in US
• Why a decline?
• Demise of competition– Fewer US House races competitive now
vs. 1960s• even with demise of one-party south
– Fewer state legislative seats competitive– Campaign activity concentrated in rare,
competitive districts (and states)
![Page 12: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Voter Turnout in US
• Why a decline?• Demise of Competition• Effects of competition
– 10% more competitive presidential race in state = 1% more turnout
• ie: Ohio (2%) vs (22%) = 2% more
– 2 initiatives = 1% more– Senate race, Gov race...
![Page 13: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Voter Turnout in US
• Why a decline?• Increase in 2004 & 2008• Why; stakes higher?
– some new issue?– candidate effects?
![Page 14: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Voter Turnout in US
• Why a decline?
• Regulatory barriers – 30 day advance registration– vote only on day of election– must vote at specific location– limits on use of mail, absentee ballots– Prohibition on felons voting
![Page 15: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Voter Turnout in US
• Why a decline
• Regulator barriers– What effects of Election Day Registration
(EDR)?• Seven states• 4.5% increase in presidential elections• 2.0% increase in midterm
![Page 16: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Voter Turnout in US
• Election Day Registration – Idaho, Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, Montana,
New Hampshire, North Dakota, Wisconsin, Wyoming (ND doesn’t require registration)
– Bill in WA (SB 6778)• 2008 10 days before election• 2009 5 days before• 2010 day of election in WA
![Page 17: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Voter Turnout in US
• Election Day Registration– Why bother?
• makes voting more convenient
– Who will take advantage?• ???• ???
![Page 18: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Voter Turnout in US
• Election Day Registration– Proponents:
• Democratic Party
– Opponents:• County Auditors• Bureaucratic nightmare
– requires more staff– vote provisional ballot?– check if registered/voted in other county
![Page 19: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Voter Turnout
• Felon disenfranchisement– Two states do not ban from voting (Maine
and Vermont)– Some states restore after release /
probation (ex Felons)– Some states make ban permanent (unless
govt. approves individual’s restoration)
![Page 20: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Voter Turnout
• Felon Laws– Adoption corresponds with extension of
rights to Black Americans– Before 1860, 12 of 21 states w/ laws– By 1890s, 38 of 45 had laws
• another spike in adoption 1960s
![Page 21: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Voter Turnout
• Effects of Felon laws– There might not be a decline in turnout– Levels of criminal punishment in US way,
way up– More felons than ever (Why??)
• 1.4% of Voting age pop by 2000 • was .5% before 1982
– 8% of US Voting age population by 2000• up from 2% in 1966
![Page 22: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Voter Turnout in the US
• Why a decline
• Regulatory Barriers– Not a factor growing over time– Easier to register now, easier to vote by
mail– EDR explains variation in an election, not
since 1960.
![Page 23: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Voter Turnout in US
• Maybe no decline?
• Yes, lower 1972 than 1948 - 1968
• Decline mostly outside of south
• Low turnout rate of young (post 1972) accounts for 1/4 of decline
• VAP vs. VEP....
![Page 24: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Turnout by Age
• Not quite linear
• Young voters lowest turnout
• Youth vote up in 2004 (red line) & 2008
charles franklin data
![Page 25: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Turnout by Age
• Youngest cohort largest segment of the electorate
• Greatest under-representation in voting
![Page 26: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Turnout by Age
• Under-representation?
• Youth vote by party– 2000 51% Dem– 2004 54% Dem– 2008 66% Dem
![Page 27: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Voter Turnout
• So why don’t young people vote?– efficacy– life experiences re: politics– campaigns don’t care about them?
• MTV ‘Rock to Vote’ a flop?• youth vote way up in place where competitive
races (stakes are higher)• youth vote 10% nationally in 2004
![Page 28: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Voter Turnout
• So, who votes?– See Dalton, Chpt. 3
• Education• Age (old people rule)
– Cohort and life cycle effects
• Partisans (not independents)• Income (see ‘Big Tilt’)• Efficacy
– OK, so what drives efficacy
![Page 29: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Voter Turnout
• When & Why do they vote?
• Regular voters– older people and well educated
• Peripheral voters– younger people and less-educated
![Page 30: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Voter turnout
• Competitive elections mobilize
• larger effect on young & less educated
• Presidential race 2004– person living in uncompetitive state w/ 10th
grade ed. had .46 prob. of voting– person in Ohio w/ 10th grade ed .55 prob.
![Page 31: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Voter Turnout
• Midterm election (2002)– 33 y/o person in state w/ no US Senate
race = .37 prob. of voting– 33 y/o in state w/ most competitive Senate
race .77 prob. of voting
– for 62 y.o., high prob. of voting anyway
![Page 32: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Voter Turnout in US
• What difference would it make if turnout was higher?– Composition of electorate change?
• EDR, Vote by Mail, etc. seem to increase turnout but not change electorate
• Competitive elections seem to increase turnout of everyone
– greater effect on young, less educated
![Page 33: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Voter Turnout in US
• What happens if higher turnout – and low participating groups show up?
• Young people• Less affluent• Ex-felons
![Page 34: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Voter Turnout
• Uggen & Manza– Because felons are drawn from ranks of
poor and racial minorities, laws take votes from Dems.
– Estimate that 2000 Pres. election would have been reversed
– Estimate that Dems would have controlled US Senate after 1984 if not for these laws
• Thus changed composition of US Courts
![Page 35: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Young voters nominated Obama
• Young voters (under 30 in 2004)– Born post 1975 = 60% D, 30% R– Born 1943 - 58 = 44% D, 46% R
• 2008 Primaries– Ds NH 18-24 60% Obama, 22% HRC– Ds NH over 65 32% Obama, 48% HRC– Ds FL 18-24 49% Obama, 39% HRC– Ds FL over 65 24% Obama, 59% HRC– Ds IA 17 - 29 57% Obama, 11% HRC– Ds IA over 65 18% Obama, 45% HRC
![Page 36: One last negative ad Rated most effective of 2008 jRF94.](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062423/56649c8b5503460f94945082/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Voter Turnout
• Dem primaries: Obama won where youth turnout reduced age gap
– 28% over 65 in FL, 5 % under 25– 13% over 65 in NH, 11% under 25– 25% over 65 in IA, 22% under 27– 26% over 60 in MI, 8% under 25