This work examines the impact of macroeconomic conditions on public support for the government in Britain, France, Netherlands, Denmark and Germany.

This work examines the impact of macroeconomic conditions on public support for the government in Britain, France, Netherlands, Denmark and Germany.

Militarization and nuclearization were the historical developments most essential to the creation of the rural New Right. Both North Dakota and South Dakota have long been among the most reliably Republican states in the nation: in the past century, voters have only chosen two Democrats, Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon B. Johnson, and in 2016 both states preferred Donald Trump by over thirty points. Yet in the decades before World War II, the people of the Northern Plains were not universally politically conservative. Instead, many Dakotans, including Republicans, supported experiments in agrarian democracy that incorporated ideas from populism and progressivism to socialism and communism and fought against "bigness" in all its forms, including "bonanza" farms, out-of-state railroads, corporations, banks, corrupt political parties, and distant federal bureaucracies-but also, surprisingly, the culture of militarism and the expansion of American military power abroad. In Nuclear Country, Catherine McNicol Stock explores the question of why, between 1968 and 1992, most voters in the Dakotas abandoned their distinctive ideological heritage and came to embrace the conservatism of the New Right. Stock focuses on how this transformation coincided with the coming of the military and national security states to the countryside via the placement of military bases and nuclear missile silos on the Northern Plains. This militarization influenced regional political culture by reinforcing or re-contextualizing long-standing local ideas and practices, particularly when the people of the plains found that they shared culturally conservative values with the military. After adopting the first two planks of the New Right-national defense and conservative social ideas-Dakotans endorsed the third plank of New Right ideology, fiscal conservativism. Ultimately, Stock contends that militarization and nuclearization were the historical developments most essential to the creation of the rural New Right throughout the United States, and that their impact can best be seen in this often-overlooked region's history.

Public Opinion in the United States tracks developments in American society since World War II through the lens of public opinion. The authors assess national public opinion poll data from 1945 to 2008, targeting opinions about African Americans, Jews, Muslim Americans, gays and lesbians, immigration, abortion, and affirmative action. The authors consider whether American attitudes have developed faster than Supreme Court decisions in the areas surveyed. They assess how social change is processed by the public, how people responded to the race riots of the 1950s and 1960s, and how the war in Vietnam shaped new perspectives on issues such as race, citizenship rights, and the role of the individual. Each chapter begins by introducing the political, social, or international events that were critical in setting the stage for influencing public opinion in each decade since World War II. The volume provides a unique portrait of American society and how it has changed over the last sixty plus years. The reader will learn whether Americans are more or less prejudiced against blacks, Jews, and Muslims than they were in earlier years; whether their views on immigration, affirmative action, and abortion have changed; and when views have changed, in what direction. Do men and women, rich and poor, more and less educated, secular versus religious share the same views? And if there are differences, what directions do those differences take? Th is work describes American society in 2008 compared to the post-World War II era, and it offers stunning glimpses at the future.

Using data from the Williamsburg Charter surveys, this book provides a portrait of public attitudes on church-state issues. It examines the social, religious and political sources of differences on issues, making comparisons among Protestants, Catholics, Jews and non-denominational others.

In an era disgusted with politicians and the various instruments of "direct democracy," Walter Lippmann's The Phantom Public remains as relevant as ever. It reveals Lippmann at a time when he was most critical of the ills of American democracy. Antipopulist in sentiment, this volume defends elitism as a serious and distinctive intellectual option, one with considerable precursors in the American past. Lippmann's demythologized view of the American system of government resonates today.

The Phantom Public discusses the "disenchanted man" who has become disillusioned not only with democracy, but also with reform. According to Lippmann, the average voter is incapable of governance; what is called the public is merely a "phantom." In terms of policy-making, the distinction should not be experts versus amateurs, but insiders versus outsiders. Lippmann challenges the core assumption of Progressive politics as well as any theory that pretends to leave political decision making in the hands of the people as a whole.

In his biography Walter Lippmann and the American Century, Ronald Steel praised The Phantom Public as "one of Lippmann's most powerfully argued and revealing books. In it he came fully to terms with the inadequacy of traditional democratic theory." This volume is part of a continuing series on the major works of Walter Lippmann. As more and more Americans are inclined to become apathetic to the political system, this classic will be essential reading for students, teachers, and researchers of political science and history.

With this book, Clarissa Peterson and Emmitt Y. Riley, III dive into how racial attitudes change and inform political decisions. Peterson and Riley use racial resentment, black blame, and racial identity to investigate the extent to which racial attitudes influence vote choice, evaluations of Black Lives Matter, and attitudes toward public policies. Moving the conversation beyond the study of Blacks and Whites, the authors unpack the potency of racial attitudes among Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, and Whites. In doing so, they challenge our understanding of how racial attitudes are central to political decision making in an environment that is inundated with anti-Blackness. The book reframes discussions of racial attitudes to propose that, like White people, some racial minorities in the United States harbor negative attitudes toward Black people. The authors suggest that while White political attitudes are significantly explained by racial resentment, the overall influence of racial resentment on political decision making among some racial groups, may be mitigated by racial identity. At a time when White supremacists walk unhooded in the streets of America, Racial Attitudes in America Today is essential reading for educators wanting to fully engage with and understand racial resentment in America and undergraduate students in the fields of political science, sociology, history, and psychology.

The role of the news media in defining the important issues of the day, also known as the agenda-setting influence of mass communication, has received widespread attention over the past 20 years. Since the publication of McCombs and Shaw's seminal empirical study, more than one hundred journal articles and monographs have appeared. This collection exemplifies the major phases of research on agenda-setting: tests of the basic hypothesis, contingent conditions affecting the strength of this influence, the natural history of public issues, mass media influence on public policy, and the role of external sources from the president to public relations staffs on the news agenda.

First Published in 1990. The decade of the 1980s witnessed an increasing use of polls and surveys as well as an expanded research effort into public opinion polls and survey research from the economic, historical, legal, methodological, organizational, and political viewpoints. The purpose of this volume is to provide a resource for practitioners, researchers, students, librarians, and others seeking access to this interdisciplinary literature. Instructional guides, handbooks, reference works, textbooks, research studies, and evaluative and critical studies on public opinion polls and survey research published since 1980 are included in this bibliography.

First Published in 1986. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

Research in localities in India, Cuba, Ethiopia, Taiwan and Lebanon is used to develop a broader understanding of global political phenomena such as democracy, representation and accountability. To contextualise aspects of 'good' governance the articles in the volume deal with people's perceptions of and interactions with the state; how they interpret government laws and regulations; how they interact with officials and how they comment on acts and speeches made by local bureaucrats and national power holders. Through a discussion of the much debated distinction between private and public, the articles show how the notions of public and private are interconnected in many ways, how they are contested and reformulated by people based on their experiences, and how they can be used as a tool in questioning dominant ideas and ways of executing 'good' governance.

Between one election and the next, members of Congress introduce thousands of bills. What determines which become law? Is it the public? Do we have government 'of the people, by the people, for the people?' Or is it those who have the resources to organize and pressure government who get what they want? In the first study ever of a random sample of policy proposals, Paul Burstein finds that the public can get what it wants - but mainly on the few issues that attract its attention. Does this mean organized interests get what they want? Not necessarily - on most issues there is so little political activity that it hardly matters. Politics may be less of a battle between the public and organized interests than a struggle for attention. American society is so much more complex than it was when the Constitution was written that we may need to reconsider what it means, in fact, to be a democracy.

What motivates citizens to support one party over the other? Do they carefully weigh all of the relevant issues and assess which party or candidate best matches their own positions? Or do people look at politics as something more akin to a team sport-the specifics do not matter as long as you know what side your team is on? Answering these questions requires us to think about how much the average American knows about politics. Many scholars of public opinion believe that the majority of Americans only pay passing attention to politics. Thus the electorate's apparent lack of political competence presents a direct challenge to normative theories of democracy. How are citizens supposed to exert control over the government if they have no idea what is going on? In Political Choice in a Polarized America, Joshua N. Zingher argues that these fears are overblown. Not only do individuals have core beliefs about what the government should or should not do, but individuals have become more likely to support the party that best matches their policy attitudes by both identifying as a member of that party and voting for that party in elections. However, as Zingher demonstrates, voters' ability to match their attitudes to a party or candidate varies according to signals sent by elites and increases as parties become more polarized. This is true even among citizens with less political knowledge and efficacy. Voters now consistently cast ballots for the candidates who best match their own policy orientations and are increasingly likely to express hostility towards members of the other party due to growing elite polarization. Moreover, policy preferences tend to remain stable over time and both shape and are shaped by partisanship. Tackling decades of mixed findings about the prevalence (or lack) of policy voting, Zingher argues that the average American is much more likely to vote for the party that best represents their views than they were in the past. American voters have adapted to a more polarized environment by becoming more polarized themselves.

East Asia is one of the most dynamic areas of political change in the world today-what role do citizens play in these processes of change? Drawing upon a unique set of coordinated public opinion surveys conducted by the World Values Survey, this book provides a dramatically new image of the political cultures of East Asia. Most East Asian citizens have strong democratic aspirations, even in still autocratic nations. Most East Asians support liberal market reforms, even in nations where state socialism has been dominant. The books findings thus provide a new perspective on the political values of Asian publics. We demonstrate that the dramatic socioeconomic changes of the past several decades have transformed public opinion, altering many of the social norms traditionally identified with Asian values, and creating public support for further political and economic modernization of the region. Political culture in East Asia is not an impediment to change, but creates the potential for even greater democratization and marketization. Comparative Politics is a series for students and teachers of political science that deals with contemporary government and politics. The General Editors are Max Kaase, Professor of Political Science, Vice President and Dean, School of Humanities and Social Science, International University Bremen, Germany; and Kenneth Newton, Professor of Comparative Politics, University of Southampton. The series is produced in association with the European Consortium for Political Research.

Researching the Public Opinion Environment informs the reader on the rationale, purposes, theories, and methodologies involved in researching publics. The book is divided into four parts. Part one looks at theories and systems relevant to opinion research. Part two addresses the topics of monitoring and analyzing the media. Part three describes the basics of survey research, focus groups, Delphi techniques, stakeholder assemblies, and Q methodology. And finally, part four analyzes the impact of the media.

Although a number of books have been written on public opinion, few address both theoretical and methodological issues. Graphs, tables, and sample analysis help the reader to understand applications described in the book. The material discussed in this book has numerous applications. Communicators can apply information acquired on key publics to plan and evaluate campaigns, track the extent to which messages have appeared in the media, assess organizational image, develop marketing strategies, and manage their issues. Students will learn an important job function for added credibility when they apply for jobs.

Donald Trump's election as President of the United States confounded the pundits and crowned a year of political surprises. In Hopes And Fears, Lord Ashcroft sets out in compelling detail why America sent Trump to the White House. With the rigorous research and analysis that is his hallmark, he argues that - contrary many people's assumptions - the American people made the choice with their eyes wide open. We hear from swing-state voters in their own words as they wrestle with their decision and explain why they, and their country, want change - with all the risks it may entail. Drawing the parallels with the UK's Brexit referendum, the book explores the lessons of 2016 for both parties, the divisions within the American electorate and what they mean for the future. For anyone wondering how America came to choose its new leader, Hopes And Fears has the answers.

To continue doing business in Germany after Hitler's ascent to power, Hollywood studios agreed not to make films that attacked the Nazis or condemned Germany's persecution of Jews. Ben Urwand reveals this bargain for the first time-a "collaboration" (Zusammenarbeit) that drew in a cast of characters ranging from notorious German political leaders such as Goebbels to Hollywood icons such as Louis B. Mayer. At the center of Urwand's story is Hitler himself, who was obsessed with movies and recognized their power to shape public opinion. In December 1930, his Party rioted against the Berlin screening of All Quiet on the Western Front, which led to a chain of unfortunate events and decisions. Fearful of losing access to the German market, all of the Hollywood studios started making concessions to the German government, and when Hitler came to power in January 1933, the studios-many of which were headed by Jews-began dealing with his representatives directly. Urwand shows that the arrangement remained in place through the 1930s, as Hollywood studios met regularly with the German consul in Los Angeles and changed or canceled movies according to his wishes. Paramount and Fox invested profits made from the German market in German newsreels, while MGM financed the production of German armaments. Painstakingly marshaling previously unexamined archival evidence, The Collaboration raises the curtain on a hidden episode in Hollywood-and American-history.

Practical and evidence-based, this unique book is the first comprehensive text focused on person-centered approaches to people with serious mental illness such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. It reflects a range of views and findings regarding assessment, treatment, rehabilitation, self-help, policy-making, education and research. It is highly recommended for all healthcare professionals, students, researchers and educators involved in general practice, psychiatry, nursing, social work, clinical psychology and therapy. Healthcare service providers, and policy makers and shapers, will find the book's wide-ranging, multi-professional approach enlightening. 'Serious Mental Illness reflects a continued distancing from the outmoded and unsubstantiated belief that people with severe mental illnesses could not recover, and that they would respond positively only to goals and treatment plans chosen, designed and implemented by providers in order to prevent their further deterioration. Anyone with an interest in the concept of person-centered approaches will discover new ideas in this book. Indeed, anyone with an interest in person-centered approaches has to read this book. Not only is it the first such book on person-centered approaches, but it will serve as the gold standard in this topic area for years to come.' William A Anthony, in the Foreword

No longer preoccupied with the East-West divide, contemporary foreign policymakers now have to confront regional conflicts, peace-enforcing and humanitarian missions, and a host of other global problems and issues in areas such as trade, health, and the environment. During the Cold War a widely-shared consensus on national interest and security in the United States and western Europe affected news reporting, public opinion, and foreign policy. But with the end of this Cold War frame of reference, foreign policy making has changed. As we enter the new century, the question is how and to what extent will the new realities of the post-Cold War world_as well as advances in communication technology_influence news reporting, public attitudes, and, most of all, foreign policy decisions on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. In this volume, American and European scholars examine change and continuity in these important aspects of the foreign policy process at the beginning of the 21st century.

"Public Opinion in the United States" tracks developments in American society since World War II through the lens of public opinion. The authors assess national public opinion poll data from 1945 to 2008, targeting opinions about African Americans, Jews, Muslim Americans, gays and lesbians, immigration, abortion, and affirmative action.

The authors consider whether American attitudes have developed faster than Supreme Court decisions in the areas surveyed. They assess how social change is processed by the public, how people responded to the race riots of the 1950s and 1960s, and how the war in Vietnam shaped new perspectives on issues such as race, citizenship rights, and the role of the individual. Each chapter begins by introducing the political, social, or international events that were critical in setting the stage for influencing public opinion in each decade since World War II.

The volume provides a unique portrait of American society and how it has changed over the last sixty plus years. The reader will learn whether Americans are more or less prejudiced against blacks, Jews, and Muslims than they were in earlier years; whether their views on immigration, affirmative action, and abortion have changed; and when views have changed, in what direction. Do men and women, rich and poor, more and less educated, secular versus religious share the same views? And if there are differences, what directions do those differences take? Th is work describes American society in 2008 compared to the post-World War II era, and it offers stunning glimpses at the future.

Public outcries and political platforms based on misinformation and misconceptions about the criminal justice system and current sentencing practice occur all too often in democratic societies. Penal Populism, Sentencing Councils and Sentencing Policy attempts to address this problem by bringing together important contributions from a number of distinguished experts in the field. Penal Populism presents theoretical perspectives on the role of the public in the development of sentencing policy. It places particular emphasis on the emerging role of sentencing commissions, advisory councils or panels in a number of English speaking countries: Australia, New Zealand, the United States, the United Kingdom, Scotland and South Africa. The book explains, expands and develops the existing literature that looks at public attitudes to justice and the role that the 'public' can play in influencing policy. Written in a scholarly yet accessible style, Penal Populism asks the critical questions: should 'public opinion', or preferably, 'public judgment' be relevant to court decision-making, to institutional decision-making and to the political process? And if so, how?

Public outcries and political platforms based on misinformation and misconceptions about the criminal justice system and current sentencing practice occur all too often in democratic societies. Penal Populism, Sentencing Councils and Sentencing Policy attempts to address this problem by bringing together important contributions from a number of distinguished experts in the field. Penal Populism presents theoretical perspectives on the role of the public in the development of sentencing policy. It places particular emphasis on the emerging role of sentencing commissions, advisory councils or panels in a number of English speaking countries: Australia, New Zealand, the United States, the United Kingdom, Scotland and South Africa. The book explains, expands and develops the existing literature that looks at public attitudes to justice and the role that the 'public' can play in influencing policy. Written in a scholarly yet accessible style, Penal Populism asks the critical questions: should 'public opinion', or preferably, 'public judgment' be relevant to court decision-making, to institutional decision-making and to the political process? And if so, how?

Political Obligations provides a full defense of a theory of political obligation based on the principle of fairness (or fair play), which is widely viewed as the strongest theory of obligation currently available. The work responds to the most important objections to the principle of fairness, and extends a theory based on fairness into a developed 'multiple principle' theory of obligation. In order to establish the need for such a theory, Political Obligations criticizes alternative theories of obligation based on a natural duty of justice and 'reformist' consent, and critically examines the non-state theories of libertarian and philosophical anarchists. The work breaks new ground by providing the first in-depth study of popular attitudes towards political obligations and how the state itself views them. The attitudes of ordinary citizens are explored through small focus groups, while the 'self image of the state' in regard to the obligations of its citizens is studied through examination of judicial decisions in three different democratic countries.

When the U.S. Supreme Court announces a decision, reporters simplify and dramatize the complex legal issues by highlighting dissenting opinions and thus emphasizing conflict among the justices themselves. This often sensationalistic coverage fosters public controversy over specific rulings, despite polls which show that Americans strongly believe in the Court's legitimacy as an institution. In The Limits of Legitimacy, Michael A. Zilis illuminates this link between case law and public opinion. Drawing on a diverse array of sources and methods, he employs case studies of eminent domain decisions, analysis of survey data and media reporting, an experiment to test how volunteers respond to media messages, and finally the natural experiment of the controversy over the Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare. Zilis finds, first, that the media tends not to quote from majority opinions. However, the greater the division over a particular ruling among the justices themselves, the greater the likelihood that the media will criticize that ruling, characterize it as activist, and employ inflammatory rhetoric. Zilis then demonstrates that the media's portrayal of a decision, as much as the substance of the decision itself, influences citizens' reactions to and acceptance of it. This meticulously constructed study and its persuasively argued conclusion advance the understanding of the media, judicial politics, political institutions, and political behavior.

A call to tone down our political rhetoric and embrace a common-sense approach to change. Many experts believe that we are at a fulcrum moment in history, a time that demands radical shifts in thinking and policymaking. Calls for bold change are everywhere these days, particularly on social media, but is this actually the best way to make the world a better place? In Gradual, Greg Berman and Aubrey Fox argue that, contrary to the aspirations of activists on both the right and the left, incremental reform is the best path forward. They begin by emphasizing that the very structure of American government explicitly and implicitly favors incrementalism. Particularly in a time of intense polarization, any effort to advance radical change will inevitably engender significant backlash. As Berman and Fox make clear, polling shows little public support for bold change. The public is, however, willing to endorse a broad range of incremental reforms that, if implemented, would reduce suffering and improve fairness. To illustrate how incremental changes can add up to significant change over time, Berman and Fox provide portraits of "heroic incrementalists" who have produced meaningful reforms in a variety of areas, from the expansion of Social Security to more recent efforts to reduce crime and incarceration. Gradual is a bracing call for a "radical realism" that prioritizes honesty, humility, nuance, and respect in an effort to transcend political polarization and reduce the conflict produced by social media.