Abstract

This paper presents an empirical measure of pivoting in the electoral college from 1880 to 2004. The measure derives from established theoretical concepts of power and pivoting first introduced by Shapley and Shubik (Am. Political Sci. Rev. 84:787–792, 1954). Pivotal states identified by this approach generally conform to popular interpretations—Ohio in 2004, Florida in 2000, and so forth—but, historically, pivotal states are also frequently small or medium-sized states. Also, pivotal states by this approach are not necessarily competitive states. In general, whether or not a state is pivotal is mainly a function of its size and bellwether tendency—i.e., its tendency to mirror the national voting trend. A state’s pivot position is also an excellent predictor of how presidential candidates allocated time and money across states in the general elections of 2000 and 2004. Controlling for a state’s pivot position, size and electoral competitiveness have little effect on the allocation of campaign resources.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.