Building a Research Paper in Class: Postpartisan Politics ...



Building a Research Paper in Class: Postpartisan Politics in 2008?

I. Problem

Both candidates in the 2008 presidential election claimed to be representing a new form of post-partisan politics….They were trying to appeal to widespread American distrust and disgust of political parties. Both claimed they were better at appealing across party lines and working with members of the other party. If this is true, wouldn’t we expect people to base their votes on something other than party id. Did voters in 2008 make their decisions in a post-partisan way, or did they follow the model of partisan-based voting? If post-partisan politics is to become reality, then voters should be making decisions on factors other than political party.

II. Theory

Political science research has long established that party identification is the bedrock for voting choice. Party identification prevents most voters from changing their choice of candidates during a campaign (Erikson, et al, p. 247, 2005). Independents are more likely to be affected by short-term events than strong partisans (Ibid, 268).

To the extent that this theory holds in 2008, we would expect that the stronger the partisanship, the more likely voters in Aiken county are to support the candidates of their party. However, if the candidates were correct, we might expect a weaker relationship.

In 2008, the economy was the number one issue. Any issue that overrides party loyalty we would expect it to be the economy.

According to the theory of retrospective voting, if the economy is bad then people are more likely to change parties. More specifically, people change their votes based on their own changes in standard of living (Wayne p. 313, 2008). “The more the election year growth in per capita income, the stronger the national vote for the president’s party” (Erikson, et al, 286-287, 2007).

In thinking about the relationship between party and vote, we would expect those whose economic situation has declined to vote for the party out of power, regardless of their own party identification.

III. Concepts

This research involves three concepts: party identification, voting choice, and changes in personal economic status. Voting choice refers to the candidate for whom they voted in the 2008 presidential election. Party identification “whether people think of themselves as Democrat, Republican, or independent” (Gitelson, et al, 137, 2008). In short, party identification is simply a psychological self-identification. Changes in personal economic status refers to how people perceive their family’s change in economic status during the previous president’s term. In the 1980 election candidate Ronald Reagan asked voters to consider whether they were better off or worse off than they had been four years previously.

IV. Hypothesis and Control Variable

Bivariate hypothesis:

Party identification-----------------( Pres. voting choice

We hypothesize that party identification will predict voting choice. In this relationship, party identification is the independent variable and voting choice is the dependent variable.

The controlled variable is perceived change in family economic status. It can be diagramed as follows.

Party identification-----------------( Pres. voting choice

Economic change

We hypothesize that economic change will condition the bivariate relationship so that those who perceive their economic situation has worsened will punish the Republicans (party in control of the White House the previous eight years).

V. Operationalization

We measured each of these concepts by asking voters in Aiken county, using an exit poll, the following questions:

. Who did you support in the race for President? 1) Obama 2) McCain 3) other __________

Financially speaking, are you and your family better off today than you were four years ago?

1) Worse off 2) no change 3) better off 4) I have no opinion on this

Which of the following best describes your party identification?

1) strong Democrat 5) leaning Republican

2) moderate Democrat 4) independent 6) moderate Republican

3) leaning Democrat 7) strong Republican 8) other _______

All these questions are standard questions that have been used in many surveys, so they should be both reliable and valid.

VI. Data Gathering

On November 4, 2008 the class performed an exit survey on 721 voters at twelve different precincts across Aiken county. The data were stratified according to precinct size based on turnout in the 2004 elections and geographical location and demographic areas of Aiken county. We used four rural precincts, two North Augusta precincts, two Midland Valley precincts, and four Aiken precincts. We also stratified by gender and time, so that our sample would be approximately half male and half female. These precincts were chosen so that their voting totals represented the county as a whole. This held up for the 2008 election, in that McCain and Obama’s percentages for these precincts was within one percentage point of the actual Aiken county results.

In each precinct, students interviewed voters during two time periods using a systematic method. The first time period began at 7:00am and the second time period began at 11:00am. As voters exited the precinct locations, students put surveys on two female clipboards and two male clipboards. When the respondent completed the survey, the clipboard was handed to the next available male of female. We maximized our response rate by assuring respondents the survey was completely anonymous, having a friendly smile, and asking respondents to please help us complete our assignment for this class- plea for pity. These techniques yielded a 68% response rate.

VII. Analysis (bivariate table and statistics and control tables and statistics)

A. Bivariate table

PresVot08 by PtyID3

Weight Variable: WghtRace2

Dem indep Rep Missing TOTAL

Obama 221 51 12 6 283

95.5% 47.6% 3.4% 41.5%

McCain 11 56 333 7 400

4.5% 52.4% 96.6% 58.5%

Missing 6 12 5 4 24

TOTAL 231 108 344 13 683

100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

P=0.0 Cramer’s V=.84

As we move from Democrat to Republican, the percentage of people who voted for Obama decreased from 96% to 3%. As we move from Democrat to Republican the percentage of people who voted for McCain increases from 5% to 97%. The relationsihp was very strong (V=.84) and is statistically significant (P=0.00). There is practically no chance that we would draw a sample like this from a population in which there is no relationship.

B. Control Tables

PresVot08 by PtyID3

Controls: BetWrsOff: worse off

Weight Variable: WghtRace2

Dem indep Rep Missing TOTAL

Obama 139 27 7 3 172

97.2% 63.6% 7.8% 64.0%

McCain 4 15 77 1 97

2.8% 36.4% 92.2% 36.0%

Missing 4 4 0 1 8

TOTAL 143 42 84 4 269

100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

P=0.00 V=.83

Among voters who said they were economically worse off, as we move from Democrat to Republican the percentage of those who voted for Obama decreases from 97% to 8%. As we move from Democrat to Republican the percentage of those who voted for McCain increases from 3% to 92%. There is practically no chance that we would draw a sample like this from a population in which there is no relationship. Among those who were economically worse off, party identification was still extremely important.

PresVot08 by PtyID3

Controls: BetWrsOff: no change

Weight Variable: WghtRace2

Dem indep Rep Missing TOTAL

Obama 35 6 3 1 45

94.2% 28.6% 3.3% 29.8%

McCain 2 16 87 2 105

5.8% 71.4% 96.7% 70.2%

Missing 1 3 2 0 6

TOTAL 37 22 90 3 150

100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

P=0.00 V=.83

Among voters who said they experienced no economic change, as we move from Democrat to Republican the percentage of those who voted for Obama decreases from 94% to 3%. As we move from Democrat to Republican the percentage of those who voted for McCain increases from 6% to 98%. There is practically no chance that we would draw a sample like this from a population in which there is no relationship. Among those who were economically worse off, party identification was still extremely important.

PresVot08 by PtyID3

Controls: BetWrsOff: better off

Weight Variable: WghtRace2

Dem indep Rep Missing TOTAL

Obama 20 11 2 0 34

86.2% 36.7% 1.7% 18.3%

McCain 3 20 129 1 152

13.8% 63.3% 98.3% 81.7%

Missing 1 4 3 2 10

TOTAL 24 31 131 3 186

100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

P=0.00 V=.75

Among voters who said they were better off economically, as we move from Democrat to Republican the percentage of those who voted for Obama decreases from 86% to 2%. As we move from Democrat to Republican the percentage of those who voted for McCain increases from 14% to 98%. There is practically no chance that we would draw a sample like this from a population in which there is no relationship. Among those who were economically better off, party identification was still extremely important.

We would conclude from these three tables that changes in perception in economic well-being did not condition the relationship.

VIII. Theory Reformulation

We began this research paper with the theory that we might be moving into a post-partisan age. If this were true, party would not have a strong relationship to vote. Moreover, the influence of party would be greatly weakened among those whose financial situation had either improved or worsened. Neither was true. Party was still a powerful predictor of vote and remained a powerful predictor regardless of perceived change in economic status.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download