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?

This book provides evaluations of American presidents over the course of 66 years of U.S. economic history, using quantitative data to provide credible, defensible answers to controversial questions like "Whose economic policies were more effective, Ronald Reagan's or Bill Clinton's?" The President as Economist: Scoring Economic Performance from Harry Truman to Barack Obama provides eye-opening insights about matters of critical importance for the future of the United States. Author Richard J. Carroll tackles a topic that he has researched and been focused on for more than 20 years, providing impartial assessments and rankings of each presidential administration according to numerous key performance indicators-quantitative data, not subjective opinions. The final chapter combines all of the data to present a numeric score (Presidential Performance Index-PPI) for each administration that allows an overall ranking of the 11 presidents. The analysis covers 66 years of U.S. economic history, ranging from 1946 through 2011. The earlier administrations of Harry S. Truman through Jimmy Carter set the context against which more recent presidencies are judged. This title will be an invaluable resource for everyone from general readers to students at the high school, undergraduate, and graduate levels, as well as journalists, lobbyists, and anyone directly or indirectly involved in the political process. An appendix provides the official data upon which the rankings are based

This unique collection of data includes concise definitions and explanations relating to all aspects of the European Union. It explains the terminology surrounding the EU, and outlines the roles and significance of its institutions, member countries, foreign relations, programmes and policies, treaties and personalities. It contains over 1,000 clear and succinct definitions and explains acronyms and abbreviations, which are arranged alphabetically and fully cross-referenced. Among the 1,000 entries you can find explanations of and background details on: ACP states Article 50 Brexit competition policy Donald Tusk the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund the euro Greece Jean-Claude Juncker Europol migration and asylum policy the Schengen Agreement the Single Supervisory Mechanism the single rulebook the Treaty of Lisbon Ukraine

Multidimensional Democracy examines political representation from the supply (legislator) and demand (constituent) perspectives. Focusing on four dimensions - policy, service, allocation, and descriptive representation - it documents systematic variation in what people want from legislators and what legislators choose to emphasize while in office. It has important implications for the study of representation, as well as normative questions about political inequality in America. The demand-side results show that constituents who are economically advantaged tend to prefer policy-based representation while the disadvantaged place relatively more importance in constituent service and/or allocation. Suggestive results from the legislator data complement this finding; legislators in wealthy, white districts tend to focus more on policy while those representing economically disadvantaged and racially diverse districts may place more emphasis on service and/or allocation. A likely consequence is that the policy choices made by representatives reflect the policy preferences of the economically advantaged because policy representation is what those citizens want.

This thought-provoking book investigates the increasingly important subject of constitutional idolatry and its effects on democracy. Focused around whether the UK should draft a single written constitution, it suggests that constitutions have been drastically and persistently over-sold throughout the years, and that their wider importance and effects are not nearly as significant as constitutional advocates maintain. Analysing a number of issues in relation to constitutional performance, including whether these documents can educate the citizenry, invigorate voter turnout, or deliver 'We the People' sovereignty, the author finds written constitutions consistently failing to meet expectations. This innovative book also examines how constitutional idolatry may frustrate and distort constitutional change, and can lead to strong forms of constitutional paternalism emerging within the state. Ultimately, the book argues that idolising written constitutions is a hollow endeavour that will fail to produce better democratic outcomes or help solve increasingly complicated societal problems. Engaging and accessible, Constitutional Idolatry and Democracy will be a key resource for both new and established scholars interested in comparative constitutional law, constitutional theory, law and democracy and written vs. unwritten constitutions.

Precedent is an important tool of judicial decision making and reasoning in common law systems such as the United States. Instead of having each court decide cases anew, the rule of precedent or stares decisis dictates that similar cases should be decided similarly. Adherence to precedent promotes several values, including stability, reliability, and uniformity, and it also serves to constrain judicial discretion. Yet while adherence to precedent is important, there are some cases where the United States Supreme Court does not follow it when it comes to constitutional reasoning. Over time the US Supreme Court under its different Chief Justices has approached rejection of its own precedent in different ways and at varying rates of reversal. This book examines the role of constitutional precedent in US Supreme Court reasoning. The author surveys the entire history of the US Supreme Court up until 2020, keying in on decisions regarding when it chose to overturn its own constitutional precedent and why. He explores how the US Supreme Court under its different Chief Justices has approached constitutional precedents and justified its reversal and quantifies which Courts have reversed the most constitutional precedents and why. Constitutional Precedent in US Supreme Court Reasoning is essential reading for law professors and students interested in precedent and its role in legal reasoning. Law libraries which will find this book of importance to their collections on legal reasoning and analysis.