Voting Behavior II

Campaigns in Voting Theories VotersRole of Campaigns IgnorantTo manipulate

Campaigns in Voting Theories VotersRole of Campaigns IgnorantTo manipulate Bounded rationality

Campaigns in Voting Theories VotersRole of Campaigns IgnorantTo manipulate Bounded rationalityTo provide simple information to help people use shortcuts

Campaigns in Voting Theories VotersRole of Campaigns IgnorantTo manipulate Bounded rationalityTo provide simple information to help people use shortcuts Highly socialized

Campaigns in Voting Theories VotersRole of Campaigns IgnorantTo manipulate Bounded rationalityTo provide simple information to help people use shortcuts Highly socializedMeaningless?

Funnel of Causality Long term, stable partisan and policy predispositions Current policy preferences and perceptions of current conditions Retrospective evaluations of the president concerning results Impressions of the candidates’ personal qualities Prospective evaluations of the candidates and parties Vote choice

Long term, stable predispositions

Social class 1992: –Lowest quintile income: 37% more D than R –2 nd lowest:33% more D –Middle:23% more D –2 nd highest: 3% more D –Highest: 9% more R –Union household30% more D –Non-union household 4% more D

Education In 1992: –Less than high school: 39% more D than R –High School grad: 22% more D –Some college +:1% more R

Gender In 1992: –Male: 1% more D than R –Female:16% more D than R In 2004: –Male: 1% more D than R –Female:11% more D than R –Gender Gap in Party ID: 10%

Race & Ethnicity: Hispanics Mexican originNon-Mexican origin Democrats5946 Independents3027 Republicans1117

Religion In 1992: –Committed mainline Protestant: 17% more R than D –Nominal mainline Protestant 10% more R –Committed evangelical Protestant 3% more R –Nominal evangelical Protestant 20% more D –Committed Catholic 31% more D –Nominal Catholic 28% more D –Jewish 64% more D –Non-religious 18% more D

Partisanship

Percent of party identifiers voting for their party’s presidential candidate (Dems)

Behavioral independents, Reps

Independents

Funnel of Causality Long term, stable partisan and policy predispositions Current policy preferences and perceptions of current conditions Retrospective evaluations of the president concerning results Impressions of the candidates’ personal qualities Prospective evaluations of the candidates and parties Vote choice