Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T19:49:28.307Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Issues in Presidential Election Forecasting: Election Margins, Incumbency, and Model Credibility

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2014

James E. Campbell
James E. Campbell*
Affiliation:
University at Buffalo, SUNY
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Symposium: US Presidential Election Forecasting
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 47 , Issue 2 , April 2014 , pp. 301 - 303
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abramowitz, Alan I. 1988. “An Improved Model for Predicting Presidential Outcomes.” PS: Political Science and Politics 4: 843–47.Google Scholar
Abramowitz, Alan I. 2010. The Disappearing Center: Engaged Citizens, Polarization, and American Democracy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Abramowitz, Alan I., and Saunders, Kyle L.. 1998. “Ideological Realignment in the American Electorate.” Journal of Politics 60: 634–52.Google Scholar
Abramowitz, Alan I. 2008. “Is Polarization a Myth?” Journal of Politics 70: 542–55.Google Scholar
Campbell, James E. 2000. “The Science of Forecasting Presidential Elections.” In Before the Vote: Forecasting American National Elections, ed. Campbell, James E. and Garand, James C.. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Campbell, James E. 2006. “Party Systems and Realignments in the United States, 1868-2004,” Social Science History 30: 359–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, James E. 2008. The American Campaign: U.S. Presidential Campaigns and the National Vote, 2nd ed. College Station: Texas A&M University Press.Google Scholar
Campbell, James E. 2010. “Explaining Politics, Not Polls: Examining Macropartisanship with Recalibrated NES Data,” Public Opinion Quarterly 74: 616–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, James E. 2013a. “A First Party-Term Incumbent Survives: The Fundamentals of 2012.” In Barack Obama and the New America: The 2012 Election and the Changing Face of Politics, ed. Sabato, Larry J.. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Campbell, James E. 2013b. “The Miserable Presidential Election of 2012: A First Party-Term Incumbent Survives,” The Forum: A Journal of Applied Research in Contemporary Politics 10 (4): 20–28.Google Scholar
Campbell, James E., Dettrey, Bryan J., and Yin, Hongxing. 2010. “The Theory of Conditional Retrospective Voting: Does the Presidential Record Matter Less in Open Seat Elections?” Journal of Politics, 72: 1083–95.Google Scholar
Campbell, James E., and Wink, Kenneth A.. 1990. “Trial-Heat Forecasts of the Presidential Vote,” American Politics Quarterly 18: 251–69.Google Scholar
Erikson, Robert S., and Wlezien, Christopher. 2012. The Timeline of Presidential Elections How Campaigns Do (and Do Not) Matter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Fair, Ray C. 1988. “The Effect of Economic Events on Votes for President: 1984 Update.” Political Behavior 10: 168–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holbrook, Thomas M. 2008. “Incumbency, National Conditions, and the 2008 Presidential Election.” PS: Political Science and Politics 41: 709–12.Google Scholar
Lazarsfeld, Paul F. 1944. “The Election is Over.” Public Opinion Quarterly 8: 317–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis-Beck, Michael S. 1988. Economics and Elections. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Lewis-Beck, Michael S. 2005. “Election Forecasting: Principles and Practice.” British Journal of Politics and International Relations 7: 145–64.Google Scholar
Mayhew, David R. 2008. “Incumbency Advantage in U.S. Presidential Elections: The Historical Record,” Political Science Quarterly 123 (2): 201–28.Google Scholar
Nadeau, Richard, and Lewis-Beck, Michael S.. 2001. “National Economic Voting in U.S. Presidential Elections,” Journal of Politics 63: 159–81.Google Scholar
Norpoth, Helmut. 2000. “Of Time and Candidates: A Forecast for 1996.” in Before the Vote: Forecasting American National Elections, ed. Campbell, James E. and Garand, James C.. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Norpoth, Helmut. 2002. “On a Short-Leash: Term Limits and the Economic Voter.” In Economic Voting, ed. Dorussen, Han and Taylor, Michael. Oxford: Routledge.Google Scholar
Vavreck, Lynn. 2009. The Message Matters: The Economy and Presidential Campaigns. Princeton. NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Weisberg, Herbert F. 2002. “Partisanship and Incumbency in Presidential Elections,” Political Behavior 24: 339–60.Google Scholar