Horse-race Coverage Research Articles

Political activists: the NDP in convention

Recent Work on Canadian Political InstitutionsRand DyckKeith Archer and Alan Whitehorn. Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1997.Patrick Malcolmson and Richard Myers are among political scientists who regret that discipline has moved away from study of government and political institutions in an attempt explain political phenomena in terms of economic, sociological, psychological and anthropological phenomena. Instead, they argue, the starting point for a sound understanding of Canadian politics is focus on basic institutions of Three of other four books in this varied collection do deal with government institutions - public service, House of Commons and courts - while fifth concerns a quasi-governmental institution, New Democratic Party. This review can thus be said examine recent books on Canadian political institutions, but not all of them depend on an institutional or neo-institutional approach.The Canadian Regime has about 200 pages of text and 50 pages of Constitution Acts, 1867 and 1982. Malcolmson and Myers aim for a short and clear account of Canadian Given poor condition of civic education in contemporary Canada, their target audience is first-year political science students and ordinary citizens who want be better informed. They hope to articulate inner logic and coherence of regime, that is, explain interactions among political institutions as well as their underlying principles.The book is a fairly basic civics text, which briefly describes constitution, federalism, Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Crown, cabinet and prime minister, Parliament and judiciary. It looks beyond this institutional base include chapters on elections, political parties and interest groups, public opinion, and democratic citizenship. Although they eschew theoretical approaches beyond their affection for institutions, authors make reference Aristotle, Mill and Locke in their categorization of political regimes and in their discussion of fundamental principles of equality and liberty. What they say is clearly written, necessarily condensed, and conventional; most theoretical questions are handled well; and while some of their examples are excellent, others are hypothetical when better real examples exist. They touch upon such controversial questions as merits of majority and minority governments, reserve powers of Crown, fixed election dates, federal spending power, Michael Mandel's critique of legalization of politics, prime ministerial government, principle of ministerial responsibility, effectiveness of backbenchers, Triple-E Senate, effects of single-member plurality electoral system, party ideology and horse-race coverage of election campaigns.The book's main strength is its defence of existing parliamentary system, with its executive dominance, party discipline, institutionalized opposition and accountability provided by principle of responsible government. It sees no reason look American institutions improve operation of Canadian system. The explanations of components of constitution, conventions of responsible government, constitutional amending formulas, Charter cases such as Southam and Oakes and Thomas Berger affair, are impressive. Key terms are listed at end of each chapter and discussion questions are at end of book.While authors succeed in their general explanation of Canadian political regime and in clarifying basic principles, they falter on many of details. Explaining such a broad subject in 200 pages leads oversimplifications, such as in collapsing several phases of Canadian federalism and in devoting only three pages civil service. Since they rarely refer Constitution Acts that consume last 50 pages of book, authors might have made more profitable use of that space. …

Mr. Smith goes to Ottawa: life in the House of Commons

Recent Work on Canadian Political InstitutionsRand DyckDavid C. Docherty. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press, 1997.Patrick Malcolmson and Richard Myers are among political scientists who regret that discipline has moved away from study of government and political institutions in an attempt explain political phenomena in terms of economic, sociological, psychological and anthropological phenomena. Instead, they argue, the starting point for a sound understanding of Canadian politics is focus on basic institutions of Three of other four books in this varied collection do deal with government institutions - public service, House of Commons and courts - while fifth concerns a quasi-governmental institution, New Democratic Party. This review can thus be said examine recent books on Canadian political institutions, but not all of them depend on an institutional or neo-institutional approach.The Canadian Regime has about 200 pages of text and 50 pages of Constitution Acts, 1867 and 1982. Malcolmson and Myers aim for a short and clear account of Canadian Given poor condition of civic education in contemporary Canada, their target audience is first-year political science students and ordinary citizens who want be better informed. They hope to articulate inner logic and coherence of regime, that is, explain interactions among political institutions as well as their underlying principles.The book is a fairly basic civics text, which briefly describes constitution, federalism, Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Crown, cabinet and prime minister, Parliament and judiciary. It looks beyond this institutional base include chapters on elections, political parties and interest groups, public opinion, and democratic citizenship. Although they eschew theoretical approaches beyond their affection for institutions, authors make reference Aristotle, Mill and Locke in their categorization of political regimes and in their discussion of fundamental principles of equality and liberty. What they say is clearly written, necessarily condensed, and conventional; most theoretical questions are handled well; and while some of their examples are excellent, others are hypothetical when better real examples exist. They touch upon such controversial questions as merits of majority and minority governments, reserve powers of Crown, fixed election dates, federal spending power, Michael Mandel's critique of legalization of politics, prime ministerial government, principle of ministerial responsibility, effectiveness of backbenchers, Triple-E Senate, effects of single-member plurality electoral system, party ideology and horse-race coverage of election campaigns.The book's main strength is its defence of existing parliamentary system, with its executive dominance, party discipline, institutionalized opposition and accountability provided by principle of responsible government. It sees no reason look American institutions improve operation of Canadian system. The explanations of components of constitution, conventions of responsible government, constitutional amending formulas, Charter cases such as Southam and Oakes and Thomas Berger affair, are impressive. Key terms are listed at end of each chapter and discussion questions are at end of book.While authors succeed in their general explanation of Canadian political regime and in clarifying basic principles, they falter on many of details. Explaining such a broad subject in 200 pages leads oversimplifications, such as in collapsing several phases of Canadian federalism and in devoting only three pages civil service. Since they rarely refer Constitution Acts that consume last 50 pages of book, authors might have made more profitable use of that space. …

Effects of Horse-Race Coverage on Campaign Coffers: Strategic Contributing in Presidential Primaries

The quantity of "horse-race" coverage of political campaigns has been amply documented, but its consequences for the dynamics of campaigns are less well understood. This study examines the effects of media portrayals of public support for candidates on the behavior of potential campaign contributors. This relationship is tested in the context of the four leading Democratic presidential primary candidates in 1988. A time-series analysis of contributor behavior suggests that horse-race spin--that is, the extent of media coverage suggesting a candidate is gaining or losing political support--helps determine the frequency of campaign contributions. Consistent with previous research, some contributors are motivated to donate by coverage suggesting that their strongly favored candidate is losing ground, while other candidacies benefit from coverage suggesting increased viability. Overall, findings suggest that strategic considerations weigh heavily in decisions to donate money to political candidates.

Filling Out the Racing Form: How the Media Covered the Horse Race in the 1988 Primaries

How the media covered the horse race changed during the course of the 1988 presidential primaries. A content analysis of newspaper and network coverage revealed that the press initially focused on general indicators of candidate strength, then concentrated on event-specific horse-race measures. After the New Hampshire primary, coverage began to center on the candidates' general momentum in the campaign. Also, different measures of horse-race coverage provided different perceptions of how each candidate was performing in the primaries. Finally, while the newspapers' coverage differed from the networks', there were few differences within each medium.

Televised presidential debates and public policy

Televised Presidential Debates and Public Policy, 2d ed. Sidney Kraus. Mahwah, NJ, and London, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2000. 323pp. $65.95 hbk., $32.50 pbk. In a new election season replete with candidate debates, it is useful to be reminded that things have not always been this waythat there have been long seasons without debates, that debates have been avoided or cancelled because of fearful strategists, and that wholesale controversy has sometimes raged among journalists and politicians about debate formats, rules, and sponsorship. Sidney Kraus provides just such a reminder. Kraus's work should also convince us that, despite the current ho-hum attitude regarding debates and even campaigns in general, these fixtures of today's political races were hard-fought-for, hard-won, and need care and improvement. Kraus has been our most careful observer of televised Presidential debates since the now mythic Kennedy-Nixon encounter of 1960. He is also a self-confessed lover of the debates. He believes intently that, despite their flaws, the debates-or what passes for debates-provide voters with perhaps their most valuable information source about candidates and their positions. Even in Election 2000, when polls show minimal public attention to the fledgling campaigns and fall turnout may reach another record low, who can doubt that we have already learned more from these encounters than from any other source? Despite his commitment to debates, however, Kraus maintains sufficient scholarly detachment so that his analyses of formats, sponsorship, and rules and his record of nearly three decades of debate observation appear sage and balanced. Kraus, longtime professor of communication at Cleveland State University and sometime chair, has often observed the debates from a privileged seat behind the scenes. He has documented his findings and observations in two edited volumes, The Great Debates: Background, Perspective, Effects (1962) and The Great Debates: Carter vs. Ford, 1976 (1979), as well as in the first edition of this book (1988). The current effort is clearly written and appropriate for university students at all levels. It is risky to abstract an argument from such a detailed book, but the thrust of his text is clear: Given the decline of political parties, the slippage of interest in political campaigns, the increased role of television in political socialization, the preoccupation with horserace coverage, and the limitation of debate formats, these encounters are a good thing anyway. …