Master and Commander
Marisa Abrajano & Craig Burnett
Presidential Studies Quarterly, June 2012, Pages 363-375
Abstract:
Recent presidential approval trends have led many pollsters to conclude that a "racial gap" exists in President Barack Obama's job approval ratings. Pollsters have focused disproportionately on the substantial gap between Blacks and Whites. Some political commentators and media outlets attribute this divergence to the fact that Obama is the first ethnic/racial minority to occupy the White House. The existence of a White-Black gap, however, could merely reflect the differences in the political preferences of White and Black Americans. In this article, we assess these two competing arguments by analyzing CNN polling data spanning President Obama's inauguration in January 2009 to June 2011. For comparative purposes, we examine Time/CNN polling data that begins with President Bill Clinton's inauguration in January 1993 to June 1995. Our findings suggest that the gap in Black support for President Obama is significantly larger than it is for President Clinton, providing evidence that racial group pride and solidarity appear to play an important role in Blacks' evaluations of Obama.
----------------------
David Luban
Philosophy & Public Affairs, Fall 2011, Pages 299-330
"Until recently, rulers routinely treated the punishment of affronts as a legitimate reason to make war. Today, warmaking to punish misbehaving princes may seem no better than warmaking to grab land, tribute, or glory...[T]he punishment theory of just cause, which holds that states may justly fight wars as retribution for wrongdoing, has been a theme in Western just war theory since it began. Only in the last two centuries have theorists clearly broken with the punishment theory. Arguably, international law did not decisively reject the punishment theory until the end of World War II. During that war, we should recall, Winston Churchill made no apologies for launching the terror bombing of German cities as retaliation for the Nazi blitz, and Churchill emphasized that the aim was retribution, not mere inducement for the Germans to stop the blitz: 'if tonight the people of London were asked to cast their votes whether a convention should be entered into to stop the bombing of all cities, the overwhelming majority would cry, ‘No, we will mete out to the Germans the measure, and more than the measure, that they have meted out to us.''...I doubt matters have changed greatly in the last half century. No American who lived through the shock of 9/11 can forget how deeply and powerfully our retributive emotions ran. In his memoirs, President George W. Bush recollects, 'My blood was boiling. We were going to find out who did this, and kick their ass.'...I provisionally accept retributivism, but I shall argue that even for retributivists punishment through warmaking is morally unacceptable for at least five reasons: (1) It places punishment in the hands of a biased judge, namely the aggrieved party, which (2) makes it more likely to be vengeance than retributive justice. (3) Vengeance does not follow the fundamental condition of just retribution, namely proportionality between punishment and offense. (4) Furthermore, punishment through warmaking punishes the wrong people and (5) it employs the wrong methods. Regardless of the intuitive pull of the punishment theory, modern international law was right to reject it."
----------------------
Anthony Little et al.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, forthcoming
Abstract:
Facial appearance of candidates has been linked to real election outcomes. Here we extend these findings by examining the contributions of attractiveness and trustworthiness in male faces to perceived votability. We first use real faces to show that attractiveness and trustworthiness are positively and independently related to perceptions of good leadership (Rating study). We then show that computer graphic manipulations of attractiveness and trustworthiness influence choice of leader (Study 1 and 2). Finally, we show that changing context from war-time to peace-time can affect which face receives the most votes. Attractive faces were relatively more valued for war-time and trustworthy faces relatively more valued for peace-time (Study 1 and 2). This pattern suggests attractiveness, which may signal health and fitness, is perceived to be a useful attribute in war-time leaders whereas trustworthiness, which may signal pro-social traits, is perceived to be more important during peace-time. Our studies highlight the possible role of facial appearance in voting behaviour and the role of attributions of attractiveness and trust. We also show that there may be no general characteristics of faces that make them perceived as the best choice of leader; leaders may be chosen because of characteristics that are perceived as the best for leaders to possess in particular situations.
----------------------
Bandit Heroes: Social, Mythical, or Rational?
Nicholas Curott & Alexander Fink
American Journal of Economics and Sociology, April 2012, Pages 470-497
Abstract:
Bandits steal from their fellow men. Yet they are regularly subjects of folksongs, novels, and movies. In these outlets they are presented as folk heroes despite their crimes. Sociological explanations for this phenomenon based upon Eric Hobsbawm's concept of the "social bandit" and psychological explanations based upon myth building have been brought forth to explain the seeming contradiction. We propose an alternative explanation for the bandit hero phenomenon. We argue that bandits, acting solely in their own self-interest, unintentionally provide valuable services to societies under the rule of a predatory government. We identify three separate mechanisms by which bandits benefit society that do not necessarily hinge upon class struggles or historical dialectics. The social benefits that bandits generate form the foundation for their positive reception.
----------------------
Signing Statements as Bargaining Outcomes: Evidence from the Administration of George W. Bush
Andrew Whitford
Presidential Studies Quarterly, June 2012, Pages 343-362
Abstract:
Recent studies have documented how presidents issue signing statements. A president might try to bend policy closer to his own position through shaping how bureaucrats use their discretion to implement a law. Later in time, it may serve as a defense if it shapes how judges decide whether a particular interpretation is consistent with the Constitution. A president may construct more detailed and complex statements when his ideal point is distant from Congress. I test this hypothesis and others using data from the George W. Bush administration between 2001 and 2006. Both the number of objections applied to a given bill and their complexity increase when the president is distant from Congress.
----------------------
Victor Shih, Christopher Adolph & Mingxing Liu
American Political Science Review, February 2012, Pages 166-187
Abstract:
Spectacular economic growth in China suggests the ruling Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has somehow gotten it right. A key hypothesis in both economics and political science is that the CCP's cadre evaluation system, combined with China's geography-based governing logic, has motivated local administrators to compete with one another to generate high growth. We raise a number of theoretical and empirical challenges to this claim. Using a new biographical database of Central Committee members, a previously overlooked feature of CCP reporting, and a novel Bayesian method that can estimate individual-level correlates of partially observed ranks, we find no evidence that strong growth performance was rewarded with higher party ranks at any of the postreform party congresses. Instead, factional ties with various top leaders, educational qualifications, and provincial revenue collection played substantial roles in elite ranking, suggesting that promotion systems served the immediate needs of the regime and its leaders, rather than encompassing goals such as economic growth.
----------------------
José Villalobos & Cigdem Sirin
International Journal of Public Opinion Research, Spring 2012, Pages 21-41
Abstract:
This study employs an experimental approach to isolate and directly test the extent to which presidents can affect public perceptions of issue importance and support for policy action, taking into consideration key factors that condition such effects. Our findings provide new empirical evidence that presidents can, in fact, positively influence public opinion through agenda setting, particularly by increasing the perceptual importance of low salience foreign policy issues. However, the results also indicate that such positive effects do not translate into public support for policy action; instead, presidential appeals actually decrease support. Last, our study offers new evidence that employing bipartisan cues can help presidents further increase public perceptions of issue importance, though such cues are unlikely to spur increased support.
----------------------
Cigdem Sirin
Armed Forces & Society, April 2012, Pages 252-272
Abstract:
This study examines the effect of political information levels and intervention stages on the formation and continuity of public support for military interventions by analyzing survey data pertaining to the 2003 military intervention in Iraq. The results show that before and immediately after the launch of the intervention, politically uninformed individuals expressed higher support for the war compared to politically informed ones. However, as the intervention proceeded and casualties were incurred, higher rates of decrease in support were observed among the politically uninformed. Politically informed individuals, on the other hand, demonstrated more stable levels of support throughout the course of the intervention.
----------------------
Kevin Evans
Presidential Studies Quarterly, June 2012, Pages 390-405
Abstract:
How did the signing statements of the modern presidency before Watergate shape the development of the tool and contribute to its institutionalization? A content analysis of the 626 signing statements from 1933 to 1974 shows that the Eisenhower, Johnson, and Nixon administrations set important precedents for the modern constitutional use of the tool by protecting the institution from legislative vetoes and perceived encroachments in regard to foreign affairs and executive privilege. The results reveal that the constitutional logic required for the growth of challenges is rooted in this era and that Watergate served to amplify a trend that was already in motion.
----------------------
Sophie Trawalter et al.
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, May 2012, Pages 333-345
Abstract:
This study examines physiological stress responses to the 2008 U.S. presidential election. The week before and after Election Day, participants provided three daily saliva samples, assayed for cortisol (a principal "stress hormone") and testosterone. Results revealed that, on Election Day, all participants on average and Republicans in particular exhibited stunted cortisol and testosterone rhythms, perhaps reflecting participants' anticipation. After Election Day, participants' political affiliation was not a strong predictor of physiological responses. Their social dominance orientation - that is, their tolerance of social inequalities - was predictive of responses. Those higher in social dominance orientation had higher cortisol and testosterone morning values. These changes suggest that individuals higher in social dominance orientation were distressed but ready to fight back. The present findings add to an emerging body of work showing that sociopolitical differences can influence biological systems relevant to health and behavior.
----------------------
The Presidential Ranking Game: Critical Review and Some New Discoveries
Curt Nichols
Presidential Studies Quarterly, June 2012, Pages 275-299
Abstract:
This study provides critical analysis of ranking surveys, leading to regression analysis that provides fresh insight into the factors that structure presidential rating scores. Results demonstrate that rating scores can be predicted with relative ease. Furthermore, new measures are found to be significant - two operationalizing the latest extension of Stephen Skowronek's "political time" thesis and one controlling for cultural level preferences favoring "progressive" presidents. This suggests that expert evaluators take note of presidential performance within context. It also suggests that experts of all political stripes are influenced by the milieu in which their evaluation takes place. In the end, while no claim is made that the popular expert surveys used in this study provide a true measure of presidential greatness, it is argued that ranking polls may tell us more than critics admit.
----------------------
Folk Realism: Testing the Microfoundations of Realism in Ordinary Citizens
Joshua Kertzer & Kathleen McGraw
International Studies Quarterly, forthcoming
Abstract:
International Relations scholars have long debated whether the American public is allergic to realism, which raises the question of how they would "contract" it in the first place. We argue that realism isn't just an IR paradigm, but a belief system, whose relationship with other ideological systems in public opinion has rarely been fully examined. Operationalizing this disposition in ordinary citizens as "folk realism," we investigate its relationship with a variety of personality traits, foreign policy orientations, and political knowledge. We then present the results of a laboratory experiment probing psychological microfoundations for realist theory, manipulating the amount of information subjects have about a foreign policy conflict to determine whether uncertainty leads individuals to adopt more realist views, and whether realists and idealists respond to uncertainty and fear differently. We find that many of realism's causal mechanisms are conditional on whether subjects already hold realist views, and suggest that emotions like fear may play a larger role in realist theory than many realists have assumed.
----------------------
Amplifying Silence: Uncertainty and Control Parables in Contemporary China
Rachel Stern & Jonathan Hassid
Comparative Political Studies, forthcoming
Abstract:
Well-known tools of state coercion, such as administrative punishment, imprisonment, and violence, affect far fewer than 1% of Chinese journalists and lawyers. What, then, keeps the other 99% in line? Building on work detailing control strategies in illiberal states, the authors suggest that the answer is more complicated than the usual story of heavy-handed repression. Instead, deep-rooted uncertainty about the boundaries of permissible political action magnifies the effect of each crackdown. Unsure of the limits of state tolerance, lawyers and journalists frequently self-censor, effectively controlling themselves. But self-censorship does not always mean total retreat from political concerns. Rather, didactic stories about transgression help the politically inclined map the gray zone between (relatively) safe and unacceptably risky choices. For all but the most optimistic risk takers, these stories - which we call control parables - harden limits on activism by illustrating a set of prescriptions designed to prevent future clashes with authority. The rules for daily behavior, in short, are not handed down from the pinnacle of the state but jointly written (and rewritten) by Chinese public professionals and their government overseers.
----------------------
Executive Orders and Presidential Unilateralism
Andrew Rudalevige
Presidential Studies Quarterly, March 2012, Pages 138-160
Abstract:
How should we assess unilateral tactics and their contribution to presidential power in a less-than-unitary executive branch? To explore this question this article examines the provenance of nearly 300 executive orders from 1947 through 1987. Archival data show that executive orders are frequently a less-than-perfect representation of presidential preferences, despite the assumptions of recent work on unilateral power. That is, the issuance of executive orders often involves persuasion rather than simply command: it incorporates wide consultation across the executive branch and, frequently, White House ratification of what agencies wanted to do in the first place.
----------------------
Sandra González-Bailón, Rafael Banchs & Andreas Kaltenbrunner
Human Communication Research, April 2012, Pages 121-143
Abstract:
This article examines how emotional reactions to political events shape public opinion. We analyze political discussions in which people voluntarily engage online to approximate the public agenda: Online discussions offer a natural approach to the salience of political issues and the means to analyze emotional reactions as political events take place in real time. We measure shifts in emotions of the public over a period that includes 2 U.S. presidential elections, the 9/11 attacks, and the start of military action in Afghanistan and Iraq. Our findings show that emotional reactions to political events help explain approval rates for the same period, which casts novel light on the mechanisms that mediate the association between agenda setting and political evaluations.
----------------------
Presidential Leverage and the Politics of Policy Formulation
Daniel Ponder
Presidential Studies Quarterly, June 2012, Pages 300-323
Abstract:
This article applies a concept of "presidential leverage" to the inner workings of the White House, specifically decisions regarding the location of policy formulation. The guiding question addresses how a president's leverage in the political system influences decisions regarding policy making. Findings support the propositions that (1) leverage has a systematic impact on presidential policy formation, (2) divided government has little or no impact on policy making location, and (3) presidents who are ideologically compatible with Congress are less likely to centralize. I conclude with some general thoughts on the current state of presidential leverage.
----------------------
If You're Against Them You're With Us: The Effect of Expropriation on Autocratic Survival
Michael Albertus & Victor Menaldo
Comparative Political Studies, forthcoming
Abstract:
This article advances a theory of why some dictators weaken the elite through expropriation whereas others do not. When the organization that launches a new dictator into power is uncertain about whether he will remain loyal to them, a dictator's decision to expropriate the preexisting elite may contribute to political stability by signaling his exclusive reliance on this group. The authors corroborate this claim empirically. Using new data compiled on land, resource, and bank expropriations in Latin America from 1950 to 2002, the authors show that large-scale expropriation helps dictators survive in power. Furthermore, expropriation tends to occur early in a dictator's tenure, and its effect on leader survival decays over time, providing additional evidence for its signaling value. The history of autocracy in Mexico between 1911 and 2000 further illustrates the importance of expropriation in promoting autocratic survival as well as how the codification of new property rights can transform a dictator's launching organization into a new economic elite.
----------------------
Jarret Crawford & Anuschka Bhatia
Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, forthcoming
Abstract:
Despite an abundance of evidence to the contrary, a substantial number of Americans believed that President Barack Obama was not born in the United States, even almost two years into his administration (CNN, 2010, July). Both anecdotal and polling evidence at the time suggested that Republicans and political conservatives were more likely to hold these inaccurate beliefs. This study demonstrated that across a variety of operationalizations of political orientation, both explicit and implicit beliefs that President Obama was foreign were related to political conservatism. Potential sources of these beliefs are considered.
----------------------
To Change or Not to Change Horses: The World War II Elections
Helmut Norpoth
Presidential Studies Quarterly, June 2012, Pages 324-342
Abstract:
Folk wisdom counsels voters to stick with leaders in time of a war, though recent experience suggests otherwise. Taking advantage of largely unexplored polls from the 1940s (Gallup and National Opinion Research Center), this research probes vote choices in the World War II elections. Of particular interest is a counterfactual question that asked respondents how they would have voted if there was no war. In addition, the aggregate vote in presidential contests over time is used to estimate how the White House party fares in wartime elections. President Roosevelt received a special premium in electoral support from the wartime condition in both 1940 and 1944. This premium was earned through popular support for war-related issues. Hence, in wartime elections where such support is lacking voters may be inclined to change horses.
----------------------
Weichun Zhu et al.
Leadership, May 2012, Pages 109-124
Abstract:
This study examined the dynamic relationships among ethical political leadership, the public's confidence in political leaders, commitment to the nation, and the perception of being safe from a terrorist attack. Based on a U.S. national random sample (n = 1604), we found that the public's confidence in political leaders mediates the effect of ethical political leadership on the public's commitment to the nation and the perception of being safe from a terrorist attack. Both theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
----------------------
The Framers and Executive Prerogative: A Constitutional and Historical Rebuke
David Gray Adler
Presidential Studies Quarterly, June 2012, Pages 376-389
Abstract:
Continued assertions of a presidential prerogative power, broad enough, in the literary tradition of the Lockean Prerogative to permit the president in an emergency to act in the absence or violation of law, raises anew the question of the existence, source, and scope of such extraordinary authority. This article explains that the framers of the Constitution delivered a constitutional and historical rebuke to the concept of executive prerogative. As Justice Jackson observed in the Steel Seizure Case, the framers recognized that the possession of an emergency power would "tend to kindle emergencies." Presidential violation of the Constitution is illegal, and can be made legal only through congressional passage of retroactive ratification.
----------------------
When Backing Down Is the Right Decision: Partisanship, New Information, and Audience Costs
Matthew Levendusky & Michael Horowitz
Journal of Politics, April 2012, Pages 323-338
Abstract:
How do domestic political conditions shape when leaders get punished for backing down in international crises? We explore how three factors - the president's partisanship, the reaction of other elites, and whether the president justifies his decision on the basis of new information - influence the size of domestic audience costs. While standard theories in American politics suggest that partisanship should exert a large effect over voter behavior, we offer an alternative theory explaining why the president's unique informational advantage following a crisis will mute partisanship's effect on audience costs. We argue that the president's justification for why he backed down, however, will have a large effect on audience costs. Using a series of original survey experiments, we find strong support for our theoretical argument. We conclude by discussing the implications of these findings for the role of partisanship, framing, and the audience costs literature more broadly.