The “Economic and Demographic Determinants of Presidential Voting”, a journal published in 2005 and written by Robert McNown from the Department of Economics at the University of Colorado, examines on how George Bush won the 2004 US Presidential election. McNown claimed that the area of socio-economic uniqueness of the citizenry removes the implication of statistics of 2 macro-economic concepts, such as increase in real disposable income and unemployment rate, in which the increase of inflation and employment are significant factors in voting for a President (McNown 2).
The claim of McNown was based on “seven economic models” which utilizes a prediction from a variety of experimental and chronological data, such as economic indicators, public opinion, and factors indicating the advantages of incumbency or Presidential term of office, predictive of probable winning of George Bush from 50–97 percent over Senator John Kerry.
The seven economic models are basically “political perceptions or analysis” that forecasted George Bush ability to win, in which the American Political Science Association (APSA) based in Washington DC has compiled the predictions of seven political scholars that McNown refers as “seven economic models” (Rajaee 1&2). Party affiliations and strong economy According to McNown, voters are influenced by underlying economic factors relating to family values. McNown implied that Party “affiliation” is a determining factor in Presidential voting, which means “party loyalty” is perceived by electorates (McNown 7&8).
To further explain, McNown exemplified the Democratic Party as reflecting only the awareness of economic destitute in a society but “partisanship” may favor or captivate impact to voters (McNown 8). What could be interpreted in McNown’s analysis on the “seven economic models” or political forecasts relating to the “pulse” of George Bush’ winning ability was the “voters perception” of party loyalty of Republicans, in which the party platform could be perceived as sensibly inculcated to the overall perceptions of general electorates, specifically the traditional American family values.
Thus, the indicators of “economic values”, to which the Democrats were also bearing, could have been much attributed to the Republicans party loyalty as bearing the “family values” relating to a more advantageous approach to establishing a strong American economy. Findings McNown’s claim may be supported by the indicators and factors that made George W. Bush win the 2004 elections.
First, partisanship has proven the support of American voters from the metropolitan areas, as the Electoral College may have intensified the issue on family values that bore more weight of perceptions in “party loyalty”, as mentioned on probable winning of George Bush from 50–97 percent over Senator John Kerry. Second, the Democrats bearing on issues of economic destitute being supported by the African-American electorates outside the metropolitan areas have been marginalized, in which the perception to “socio-economic variables” (like poverty) did not “pick up” or make a vital sense to the overall electorates.
Third, integrating party affiliations, party loyalty and economic issues may still boil down to the “stance” of the conservative voters, ranging from middle-aged to elder electorates. We may synthesize McNown’s claim from his derivatives of “seven economic models” or perceptions that most of the old and young American voters were overly conscious in partisanship, party affiliations and loyalty, in which would mean being loyal to a party may extend the consistency and realization of the party platform in the public office. Conclusion We may conclude that partisanship creates and establishes a “domino effect” to voters.
The magnitude of impact summons the loyalty to party affiliations regardless of the current socio-economic issues. Having a two-party system of partisanship in America could be largely “weight” by popular perceptions to which America shall vote. This popular perception may be also referred as pre-conditioning the outcome of election and the insights upon the shift of government. With the performance of the Republicans to the 2004 winning of President Bush, it may have once again proven the old American saying, “America belongs to loyal Americans”.
McNown, R. “Economic and Demographic Determinants of Presidential Voting”. Department of Economics and Institute of Behavioral Science. University of Colorado. 2005. 28 June 2008 <http://spot. colorado. edu/~mcnownr/working_papers/presidential_voting. pdf > Rajaee, B. “Political Scientists Forecast Bush Victory in 2004: Six Out of Seven Models Predict Bush Will Win”. American Political Science Association (APSA). 2004. 28 June 2008 <http://www. apsanet. org/imgtest/campbell. pdf>
Courtney from Study Moose
Hi there, would you like to get such a paper? How about receiving a customized one? Check it out https://goo.gl/3TYhaX