Search

We link the intensity of campaign competition in different electoral systems with the number of candidates running for public office and their ideological differentiation. We show that proportional elections have more candidates, competing less aggressively in campaign spending, than those in majoritarian elections. Candidates’ ideological positions, however, can in general be more differentiated in majoritarian or proportional elections. We also study the equilibrium effects of plurality premiums and the consequences of heterogeneity among candidates in nonideological characteristics. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Provides information on a study which argued that presidential campaign events are multifaceted and their effects are occasionally substantial. Why presidential campaign events do not have strong effects; Possibility that previous studies have misspecified the independent and dependent variable; Sources of confusion over campaign effects.

Presents a historical account of the political changes in Southern States from 1956 through 1972. Analysis on presidential voting activity in the region; Comparison of regression coefficients for Southerners and non-Southerners; Regional and time variation in the perceptual screening of party identification.

Discusses several views on politics. Advantages of independent variables used as pooling measures; Claims on the distribution of variables related to the mass and the elite; Comparison of demographic data in cities.

Comments on the views of Robert Jackman on the role of political elites and mass publics in the democratic society. Regression equations for the elite and mass samples presented by Jackman; Difference of education between mass and elite subjects; Statistics on variable differences of both samples.