1. Voting Behavior II

2. Campaigns in Voting Theories VotersRole of Campaigns IgnorantTo manipulate

3. Campaigns in Voting Theories VotersRole of Campaigns IgnorantTo manipulate Bounded rationality

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

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

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

7. 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

8. Long term, stable predispositions

9. 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

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

11. 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%

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

13. 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

14. Partisanship

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

16. Behavioral independents, Reps

17. Independents

18. 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