The American vice presidency, as the saying goes, “is not worth a bucket of warm spit.” Yet vice presidential candidates, many people believe, can make all the difference in winning—or losing—a presidential election. Is that true, though? Did Sarah Palin, for example, sink John McCain’s campaign in 2008? Did Joe Biden help Barack Obama win? Do running mates actually matter? In the first book to put this question to a rigorous test, Christopher J. Devine and Kyle C. Kopko draw upon an unprecedented range of empirical data to reveal how, and how much, running mates influence voting in presidential elections. Building on their previous work in The VP Advantage and evidence from over 200 statistical models spanning the 1952 to 2016 presidential elections, the authors analyze three pathways by which running mates might influence vote choice. First, of course, they test for direct effects, or whether evaluations of the running mate influence vote choice among voters in general. Next, they test for targeted effects—if, that is, running mates win votes among key subsets of voters who share their gender, religion, ideology, or geographic identity. Finally, the authors examine indirect effects—that is, whether running mates shape perceptions of the presidential candidate who selected them, which in turn influence vote choice. Here, in this last category, is where we see running mates most clearly influencing presidential voting—especially when it comes to their qualifications for holding office and taking over as president, if necessary. Picking a running mate from a key voting bloc probably won’t make a difference, the authors conclude. But picking an experienced, well-qualified running mate will make the presidential candidate look better to voters—and win some votes. With its wealth of data and expert analysis, this finely crafted study, the most comprehensive to date, finally provides clear answers to one of the most enduring questions in presidential politics: can the running mate make a difference in this election?

During presidential campaigns, candidates crisscross the country nonstop—visiting swing states, their home turf, and enemy territory. But do all those campaign visits make a difference when Election Day comes? If so, how and under what conditions? Do they mobilize the partisan faithful or persuade undecided voters? What do campaigns try to achieve through campaign visits—and when do they succeed? I’m Here to Ask for Your Vote is a comprehensive and compelling examination of the strategy and effectiveness of presidential campaign visits. Christopher J. Devine uses an original database of presidential and vice-presidential campaign visits from 2008 through 2020 to estimate the effects of visits on vote choice and turnout, both among individual voters and within counties. He finds that campaign visits do not usually influence voting behavior, but when they do, most often it is by persuading undecided voters—as was the case for John McCain in 2008 and even Donald Trump in 2020. Challenging the recent emphasis on candidates playing to their base, this book suggests that persuasion is still a viable campaign strategy, in which candidate visits may play a major role. I’m Here to Ask for Your Vote is an authoritative and engaging analysis designed for scholars, strategists, students, and other readers interested in understanding how campaign visits—and campaigns more broadly—shape presidential election outcomes.

Now in its second edition, The Routledge Historical Atlas of Presidential Elections covers each race for the presidency with brisk, lively narratives up to the election of 2016. Filled with more than 100 full-color maps and illustrations, this updated volume is an indispensable resource for learning about the suspense-filled races to gain America’s highest office. Distinguished presidential historian Yanek Mieczkowski captures intriguing details about candidates, issues, and campaigns, allowing readers to experience the drama of every contest. The colorful maps that put state-by-state results at readers’ fingertips show geographic voting trends during the country’s history. The presidency is America’s greatest political prize, and this book describes how candidates have won it—including changes in electoral strategies and campaign practices over the years. This text offers a treasure trove of historical information, such as: The early tradition of the "mute" candidate The period where just one effective political party existed nationwide One race that witnessed an astounding 80 percent voter turnout A popular-vote victory of 39.9 percent that triggered secession The emergence of the "front-porch" campaign A third-party candidate who got more votes than the incumbent president The impact of radio, television, and the Internet on the election process This book is essential reading for students of American history and the U.S. presidency.

This book provides the first systematic, empirical analysis of the media’s approach to US vice-presidential selection (or the “veepstakes”). In their news coverage, Devine finds that media outlets typically treat vice-presidential selection as little more than a game—by focusing on how potential running mates might help to win the election, rather than how they might help the next president to govern. Based on an original content analysis of hundreds of veepstakes profiles from 2000–2020, this book quantifies the news media’s relative emphasis on various selection criteria, in general and across different electoral circumstances. The analysis suggests that journalists generally fail to serve the public interest by emphasizing electoral over governing considerations. However, Devine also points to positive examples of media coverage that help the public to evaluate potential running mates’ governing credentials, and suggests ways in which scholars, journalists, and citizens might encourage media outlets to provide more substantive, responsible coverage of the vice-presidential selection process in future elections.

Electoral behaviour is one of the most dynamic areas of study in the field of comparative politics today. A strongly emerging theme in recent years has been the need to set the study of voting behaviour in its wider context, that is to understand how the behaviour of the individual (non)voter is conditioned by the environment in which the election is occurring. The main motivation for this book is to respond to this need. The Act of Voting examines voting – both the question of whether to vote (ie. electoral turnout) and who to vote for – in context from a range of interdisciplinary perspectives. In addition to other topics and themes, chapters explore the national or social identities of individuals and how these contribute to complex social dynamics, discuss the institutions that determine who is able to vote and over what, and analyse the impact of the locale on the voting act. Offering chapters by up-and-coming scholars in the field of electoral behaviour, as well as reflections on how the act of voting should be viewed in the broadest context – normatively, institutionally and socially, this book will be of interest to students and scholars researching political behaviour, public opinion and politics more generally.

In the wake of the 2016 presidential election there was widespread shock that the Midwest, the Democrats’ so-called blue wall, had been so effectively breached by Donald Trump. But the blue wall, as The Conservative Heartland makes clear, was never quite as secure as so many observers assumed. A deep look at the Midwest’s history of conservative politics, this timely volume reveals how conservative victories in state houses, legislatures, and national elections in the early twenty-first century, far from coming out of nowhere, in fact had extensive roots across decades of political organization in the region. Focusing on nine states, from Iowa and the Dakotas to Indiana and Ohio, the essays in this collection detail the rise of midwestern conservatism after World War II—a trend that coincided with the transformation of the prewar Republican Party into the New Right. This transformation, the authors contend, involved the Midwest and the Sunbelt states. Through the lenses of race, class, gender, and sexuality, their essays explore the development of midwestern conservative politics in light of deindustrialization, environmentalism, second wave feminism, mass incarceration, privatization, and debates over same-sex marriage and abortion, among other issues. Together these essays map the region’s complex patchwork of viable rural and urban areas, variously subject to a wide array of conflicting interests and concerns; the perspective they provide, at once broad and in-depth, offers unique historical insight into the Midwest’s political complexity—and its status as the last real competitive battleground in presidential elections.

No subject is more central to the study of politics than elections. All across the globe, elections are a focal point for citizens, the media, and politicians long before--and sometimes long after--they occur. Electoral systems, the rules about how voters' preferences are translated into election results, profoundly shape the results not only of individual elections but also of many other important political outcomes, including party systems, candidate selection, and policy choices. Electoral systems have been a hot topic in established democracies from the UK and Italy to New Zealand and Japan. Even in the United States, events like the 2016 presidential election and court decisions such as Citizens United have sparked advocates to promote change in the Electoral College, redistricting, and campaign-finance rules. Elections and electoral systems have also intensified as a field of academic study, with groundbreaking work over the past decade sharpening our understanding of how electoral systems fundamentally shape the connections among citizens, government, and policy. This volume provides an in-depth exploration of the origins and effects of electoral systems.

No skeletons were rattling in "his" closet, Thomas Eagleton assured George McGovern's political director. But only eighteen days later--after a series of damaging public revelations and feverish behind-the-scenes maneuverings--McGovern rescinded his endorsement of his Democratic vice-presidential running mate, and Eagleton withdrew from the ticket. This fascinating book is the first to uncover the full story behind Eagleton's rise and precipitous fall as a national candidate.Within days of Eagleton's nomination, a pair of anonymous phone calls brought to light his history of hospitalizations for "nervous exhaustion and depression" and past treatment with electroshock therapy. The revelation rattled the campaign and placed McGovern's organization under intense public and media scrutiny. Joshua Glasser investigates a campaign in disarray and explores the perspectives of the campaign's key players, how decisions were made and who made them, how cultural attitudes toward mental illness informed the crisis, and how Eagleton's and McGovern's personal ambitions shaped the course of events.Drawing on personal interviews with McGovern, campaign manager Gary Hart, political director Frank Mankiewicz, and dozens of other participants inside and outside the McGovern and Eagleton camps--as well as extensive unpublished campaign records--Glasser captures the political and human drama of Eagleton's brief candidacy. Glasser also offers sharp insights into the America of 1972--mired in war, anxious about the economy, ambivalent about civil rights.

This book examines both the evolution of the Catholic vote in the US and the role of Catholic voters in the historic 2016 elections. There is a paucity of academic works on Catholics and US politics—scholars of religion and US politics tend to focus on evangelical Protestant voters—even though Catholics are widely considered the swing vote in national elections. The 2016 presidential election proves that the swing vote component of that group matters in close elections. What Trump gained from his impressive showing among Catholics, he could certainly lose in 2020 (should he seek re-election), just as Hillary Clinton lost the clear advantage among Catholics achieved by Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012. The book begins by analyzing the ideological patterns in the politics of U.S. Catholics as well as key alliances, and concludes by studying the political influences of the U.S. Catholic Bishops and the Holy See.