Gov Exam 2 lecture

How to characterize if protest is successful

Policy change(Passing legislation, change in interpretation),  Change in public opinion, Mobilization,  Agenda setting,  Electing candidates,  Emergence of new leaders, more informed public

Gillion’s what protest characteristics lead to a more informed public

large crowds at single moment, persistence over time & information level grows, strong organizational support & police presence, large arrests/violence (most informative), contentiousness matters (lots of attention but low ability to accomplish other goals)

Technology’s effect on protests

start protest, sustain protest, make protests more effective than ever before

Information Democrazation

increasing involvement of private citizens in creation, distribution, exhibition, curation of civically relevant info

Tufecki’s Networked Public Sphere

Communication between people not in same space (ppl that don’t know each other), Cell phone cameras document wrongdoing, Facebook allows activists to meet people where they are, X allows for one person to many people information dissemination (easily & searchable)

concerns about social media’s role

Tactical freeze: movements can’t agree on which paths to take, Attention economy: create de-facto spokespeople with pros & cons (likes, views, retweets), Ease of harassment, Will governments intervene? Is slacktivism outshining a more hands on form of activism?

How open are we to candidates from historically underrepresented groups?

More open than ever before (mostly about party for Americans)

Trends on voting for a candidate with associated religion

Protestant, Catholic, Jewish widely accepted (90%), Muslims & Athiests mostly supported (60-70%), Mormons not accepted

Factors that Influence Voting

Party identification, Social/group identities, Incumbent performance, Policy issues, Candidate traits

Identities to consider (ways Americans categorize themselves)

Race, Gender, Religion, Age, Income, Religion (sect & religiosity), Education, Sexual orientation, Urban/suburban/rural

Social Identities

Characteristics that sometimes reinforce party alignment, Reinforcement built on “group interests”, ties to identity, opinion leaders, communication with group members, easy way to make a decision with little information

Incumbent preformance

Economic based, Voters mixed on judging retrospective (judge on performance)& Prospective (judge on performance) Voters more likely to go sociotropic (judge on society) instead of pocketbook (judge on personal)

Policy Issues

Many don’t vote based on proximity(evaluate candidate position & chose who is closest) bc it takes too long, Need information on issues & where candidates stand, candidates not always very clear on some issues

candidate traits

Links between positive assessments on personality & likelihood of voting for someone, matter more when less information available on candidate (Caring/compassionate, understanding, experienced, trustworthy, leadership, honesty)

factors when deciding to run for office

motivation(How much you & family want it, How it compares with your current job, can you handle campaigning 24/7, are personal resources better spent doing other things) Resources (raising money, credentials, time, getting endorsements, support bases) Organization, History(Political/ personal past) Opportunity ( year, challengers, national conditions)

Opposition Research

Political: info generated while in office, Campaign finance: where money comes from, Career: what did you do before running for office, Personal: who are you when out of office

Benchmarking before the race

done via polling or informally, Candidates try to figure out what public thinks of them, where public stands on issues, Goal: answer if I should be running( if yes what are challenges)

Rosenstone & Hansen two types of processes by which candidates/parties/activists/groups “induce other people to participate” (mobilization)

Direct: contact from campaign, Indirect: contact through surrogates (media, endorsers, public)

verba/schlozman/brady why people don’t participate

can’t: lacking resources (time or money) or inefficient with their resources, don’t want to: little interest in politics, or they don't think they can make a difference, nobody asked: isolated from networks of recruitment or people around them in everyday life aren't political

Rational choice model

R= (BP) - C (campaigns sell you on B/D & minimize C)

Riker & Ordeshook add D to rational choice model

term to capture satisfaction (with democratic tradition, with supporting system, with standing up for party, with displaying efficacy)

B in rational choice model

benefits of choosing one candidate over another ( broader: benefits for groups & society)

C in rational choice model

cost (smaller: we minimize costs over time)

P in rational choice model

probability your vote will make a difference

R in rational choice model

reward for voting

targets of mobilization

people you know, people likely to participate, people centrally positioned in social networks, people with stake in outcome

ways campaigns mobilize voters

door to door, through mail, at events,  traditional media, internet, over the phone

most effective way to mobilize voters

in person (even though it’s more expensive it works the best)

how groups opposing candidates are targeting

not contacted

how undecided people are contacted

persuasive messages

how supporting people are contacted

asked to volunteer & for cash

what shapes people’s political opinions

family, peers/friends, schools, history/events, media

American’s mostly get their news from

Digital Devices, TV

How many Americans follow the news most/all of the time

less than 50%

What forces shaping news usage decision making

Psychological forces (Personal beliefs, likes, dislikes) , Social forces (Thoughts/expectations of others)

How many Americans get their news from social media

a bit over 50%

How many Americans usually get their news from a website/app

2/3 of Americans

What age is the dividing line on getting news from TV

50