Confidence in American government has been declining for three decades. Three-quarters of Americans said they trusted the Federal government to do the right thing in 1964. Today, only a quarter do. Why the decline? Is this mistrust a healthy reflection of America's long-lasting skepticism of a strong state? Is mistrust a problem for the future of governance?

Bringing together essays by leading Harvard scholars, this book explores the roots of mistrust. It first examines government's current scope, its actual performance, and citizens' perceptions of its performance. It then assesses many possible explanations that have been offered for the decline of trust, including the end of the Cold War, elevated expectations following World War II, a weakened economy, the effects of globalization, resentment over political scandals, and incompetence of bureaucrats. The book clarifies thinking about the sources of public disaffection.

Mistrust, the contributors find, is largely unrelated to national economic conditions, to challenges of a global economy, to the Cold War, or to bumbling bureaucrats and venal politicians. Rather, they show that the most likely culprits are all around us--an interacting blend of cultural and political conflicts stirred by an increasingly corrosive news media.

A new perspective on policy responsiveness in American government. Scholars of American politics have long been skeptical of ordinary citizens' capacity to influence, let alone control, their governments. Drawing on over eight decades of state-level evidence on public opinion, elections, and policymaking, Devin Caughey and Christopher Warshaw pose a powerful challenge to this pessimistic view. Their research reveals that although American democracy cannot be taken for granted, state policymaking is far more responsive to citizens' demands than skeptics claim. Although governments respond sluggishly in the short term, over the long term, electoral incentives induce state parties and politicians-and ultimately policymaking-to adapt to voters' preferences. The authors take an empirical and theoretical approach that allows them to assess democracy as a dynamic process. Their evidence across states and over time gives them new leverage to assess relevant outcomes and trends, including the evolution of mass partisanship, mass ideology, and the relationship between partisanship and ideology since the mid-twentieth century; the nationalization of state-level politics; the mechanisms through which voters hold incumbents accountable; the performance of moderate candidates relative to extreme candidates; and the quality of state-level democracy today relative to state-level democracy in other periods.

Pollsters and pundits armed with the best public opinion polls failed to predict the election of Donald Trump in 2016. Is this because we no longer understand what the American public is? In A Troubled Birth, Susan Herbst argues that we need to return to earlier meanings of "public opinion" to understand our current climate. Herbst contends that the idea that there was a public-whose opinions mattered-emerged during the Great Depression, with the diffusion of radio, the devastating impact of the economic collapse on so many people, the appearance of professional pollsters, and Franklin Roosevelt's powerful rhetoric. She argues that public opinion about issues can only be seen as a messy mixture of culture, politics, and economics-in short, all the things that influence how people live. Herbst deftly pins down contours of public opinion in new ways and explores what endures and what doesn't in the extraordinarily troubled, polarized, and hyper-mediated present. Before we can ask the most important questions about public opinion in American democracy today, we must reckon yet again with the politics and culture of the 1930s.

Public opinion about homosexuality varies substantially around the world. While residents in some nations have embraced gay rights as human rights, people in many other countries find homosexuality unacceptable. What creates such big differences in attitudes? This book shows that cross-national differences in opinion can be explained by the strength of democratic institutions, the level of economic development, and the religious context of the places where people live. Amy Adamczyk uses survey data from almost ninety societies, case studies of various countries, content analysis of newspaper articles, and in-depth interviews to examine how demographic and individual characteristics influence acceptance of homosexuality.

Ethnocentrism--our tendency to partition the human world into in-groups and out-groups--pervades societies around the world. Surprisingly, though, few scholars have explored its role in political life. Donald Kinder and Cindy Kam fill this gap with "Us Against Them," their definitive explanation of how ethnocentrism shapes American public opinion.

Arguing that humans are broadly predisposed to ethnocentrism, Kinder and Kam explore its impact on our attitudes toward an array of issues, including the war on terror, humanitarian assistance, immigration, the sanctity of marriage, and the reform of social programs. The authors ground their study in previous theories from a wide range of disciplines, establishing a new framework for understanding what ethnocentrism is and how it becomes politically consequential. They also marshal a vast trove of survey evidence to identify the conditions under which ethnocentrism shapes public opinion. While ethnocentrism is widespread in the United States, the authors demonstrate that its political relevance depends on circumstance. Exploring the implications of these findings for political knowledge, cosmopolitanism, and societies outside the United States, Kinder and Kam add a new dimension to our understanding of how democracy functions.

From World War II to the war in Iraq, periods of international conflict seem like unique moments in U.S. political history--but when it comes to public opinion, they are not. To make this groundbreaking revelation, "In Time of War" explodes conventional wisdom about American reactions to World War II, as well as the more recent conflicts in Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf, Afghanistan, and Iraq. Adam Berinsky argues that public response to these crises has been shaped less by their defining characteristics--such as what they cost in lives and resources--than by the same political interests and group affiliations that influence our ideas about domestic issues.

With the help of World War II-era survey data that had gone virtually untouched for the past sixty years, Berinsky begins by disproving the myth of "the good war" that Americans all fell in line to support after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. The attack, he reveals, did not significantly alter public opinion but merely punctuated interventionist sentiment that had already risen in response to the ways that political leaders at home had framed the fighting abroad. Weaving his findings into the first general theory of the factors that shape American wartime opinion, Berinsky also sheds new light on our reactions to other crises. He shows, for example, that our attitudes toward restricted civil liberties during Vietnam and after 9/11 stemmed from the same kinds of judgments we make during times of peace.

With Iraq and Afghanistan now competing for attention with urgent issues within the United States, "In Time of War "offers a timely reminder of the full extent to which foreign and domestic politics profoundly influence--and ultimately illuminate--each other.

'Some of the most experienced and thoughtful research experts in the world have contributed to this comprehensive Handbook, which should have a place on every serious survey researcher's bookshelf' - Sir Robert Worcester, Founder of MORI and President of WAPOR '82-'84. 'This is the book I have been waiting for. It not only reflects the state of the art, but will most likely also shape public opinion on public opinion research' - Olof Petersson, Professor of political science, SNS, Stockholm, Sweden 'The Handbook of Public Opinion Research is very authoritative, well organized, and sensitive to key issues in opinion research around the world. It will be my first choice as a general reference book for orienting users and training producers of opinion polls in Southeast Asia' - Mahar K. Mangahas, Ph.D., President of Social Weather Stations, Philippines (www.sws.org.ph) 'This is the most comprehensive book on public opinion research to date' - Robert Ting-Yiu Chung, Secretary-Treasurer, World Association for Public Opinion Research (WAPOR); Director of Public Opinion Programme, The University of Hong Kong Public opinion theory and research are becoming increasingly significant in modern societies as people's attitudes and behaviours become ever more volatile and opinion poll data becomes ever more readily available. This major new Handbook is the first to bring together into one volume the whole field of public opinion theory, research methodology, and the political and social embeddedness of polls in modern societies. It comprehensively maps out the state-of-the-art in contemporary scholarship on these topics. With over fifty chapters written by distinguished international researchers, both academic and from the commercial sector, this Handbook is designed to: - give the reader an overview of the most important concepts included in and surrounding the term 'public opinion' and its application in modern social research - present the basic empirical concepts for assessing public opinion and opinion changes in society - provide an overview of the social, political and legal status of public opinion research, how it is perceived by the public and by journalists, and how it is used by governments - offer a review of the role and use of surveys for selected special fields of application, ranging from their use in legal cases to the use of polls in marketing and campaigns. The Handbook of Public Opinion Research provides an indispensable resource for both practitioners and students alike.

What motivates us to rethink and act on our opinions during times of political and social unrest? To investigate this question, Taeku Lee's smartly argued book looks to the critical struggle over the moral principles, group interests, and racial animosities that defined public support for racial policies during the civil rights movement, from the late 1940s to the mid-1960s. Challenging the conventional view that public opinion is shaped by elites, Lee crafts an alternate account of the geographic, institutional, historical, and issue-specific contexts that inform our political views. He finds that grassroots organizations and local protests of ordinary people pushed demands for social change into the consciousness of the general public. From there, Lee argues, these demands entered the policy agendas of political elites. Evidence from multiple sources, including survey data, media coverage, historical accounts, and presidential archives, animates his argument.
Ultimately, "Mobilizing Public Opinion" is a timely, cautionary tale about how we view public opinion and a compelling testament to the potential power of ordinary citizens.

The "British Elections and Parties" series publishes research on parties, elections and voting behaviour in Britain, providing analyses of current and historical developments. It is produced under the auspices of the Political Studies Association's Election, Public Opinion and Parties study group.
Volume 9 includes research based around four themes: electoral reform; partisanship and voting; parliamentary behaviour; and the attitudes of the young. It provides a source of data on public opinion polls, a summary of local election results, UK referendums, key economic indicators, political parties and a chronology of major political events in 1998.

The Persian Gulf crisis may well have been the most extensively polled episode in U.S. history as President Bush, his opponents, and even Saddam Hussein appealed to, and tried to influence, public opinion. As well documented as this phenomenon was, it remains largely unexplained. John Mueller provides an account of the complex relationship between American policy and public opinion during the Gulf crisis.
Mueller analyzes key issues: the actual shallowness of public support for war; the effect of public opinion on the media (rather than the other way around); the use and misuse of polls by policy makers; the American popular focus on Hussein's ouster as a central purpose of the War; and the War's short-lived impact on voting. Of particular interest is Mueller's conclusion that Bush succeeded in leading the country to war by increasingly convincing the public that it was inevitable, rather than right or wise.
Throughout, Mueller, author of "War, Presidents, and Public Opinion," an analysis of public opinion during the Korean and Vietnam wars, places this analysis of the Gulf crisis in a broad political and military context, making comparisons to wars in Panama, Vietnam, Korea, and the Falklands, as well as to World War II and even the War of 1812. The book also collects nearly 300 tables charting public opinion through the Gulf crisis, making "Policy and Opinion in the Gulf War" an essential reference for anyone interested in recent American politics, foreign policy, public opinion, and survey research.

Photo opportunities, ten-second sound bites, talking heads and celebrity anchors: so the world is explained daily to millions of Americans. The result, according to the experts, is an ignorant public, helpless targets of a one-way flow of carefully filtered and orchestrated communication. "Common Knowledge" shatters this pervasive myth. Reporting on a ground-breaking study, the authors reveal that our shared knowledge and evolving political beliefs are determined largely by how we actively reinterpret the images, fragments, and signals we find in the mass media.
For their study, the authors analyzed coverage of 150 television and newspaper stories on five prominent issues--drugs, AIDS, South African apartheid, the Strategic Defense Initiative, and the stock market crash of October 1987. They tested audience responses of more than 1,600 people, and conducted in-depth interviews with a select sample. What emerges is a surprisingly complex picture of people actively and critically interpreting the news, making sense of even the most abstract issues in terms of their own lives, and finding political meaning in a sophisticated interplay of message, medium, and firsthand experience.
At every turn, "Common Knowledge" refutes conventional wisdom. It shows that television is far more effective at raising the saliency of issues and promoting learning than is generally assumed; it also undermines the assumed causal connection between newspaper reading and higher levels of political knowledge. Finally, this book gives a deeply responsible and thoroughly fascinating account of how the news is conveyed to us, and how we in turn convey it to others, making meaning of at once so much and solittle. For anyone who makes the news--or tries to make anything of it--"Common Knowledge" promises uncommon wisdom.

This monumental study is a comprehensive critical survey of the policy preferences of the American public, and will be the definitive work on American public opinion for some time to come. Drawing on an enormous body of public opinion data, Benjamin I. Page and Robert Y. Shapiro provide the richest available portrait of the political views of Americans, from the 1930's to 1990. They not only cover all types of domestic and foreign policy issues, but also consider how opinions vary by age, gender, race, region, and the like.
The authors unequivocally demonstrate that, notwithstanding fluctuations in the opinions of individuals, "collective" public opinion is remarkably coherent: it reflects a stable system of values shared by the majority of Americans and it responds sensitively to new events, arguments, and information reported in the mass media. While documenting some alarming case of manipulation, Page and Shapiro solidly establish the soundness and value of collective political opinion. "The Rational Public" provides a wealth of information about what we as a nation have wanted from government, how we have changed our minds over the years, and why.
For anyone interested in the short- and long-term trends in Americans' policy preferences, or eager to learn what Americans have thought about issues ranging from racial equality to the MX missile, welfare to abortion, this book offers by far the most sophisticated and detailed treatment available.

Americans want electoral reforms so that they can have more choice in elections. Recent surveys show that 20 to 50 percent of Americans are open to a new electoral system, while demand for a third party has crept upward since Gallup began asking in 2003. More Americans now call themselves "independent" than identify with either of the major parties, but what happens when Americans try to reform their way out of a two-party system? So far, demand for reform has found footing in a push for ranked-choice voting. In More Parties or No Parties, Jack Santucci traces the origins and performance of proportional representation in US cities, the reasons for repeal in all but one case, and discusses the implications of this history for current reform movements in US cities and states, as well as at the national level. In a two-party system, reform requires appealing to the group that wants to "get the parties out of politics" (or, in modern terms, to "reduce polarization"). This leads to ostensibly nonpartisan reform packages, yet party-like formations emerge anyway, as voters and governments need to be organized. However, such reform is not stable and has tended to make voting difficult for everyday people. Introducing a new shifting-coalitions theory, Santucci argues that electoral reform is likely in periods of party-system instability. The players, according to this theory, are politicians and allied interest groups, motivated to get or keep control of government. Reform can be used to insulate a coalition, dislodge a coalition in power, or deal with noncommittal "centrists." The theory also suggests why reform happens, illuminates why reforms take the shapes that they do, and shows what it might take to make a government reform itself. Using roll-call, election, and other archival data, the book answers several questions: why electoral reforms were adopted, how they worked in practice, why they were repealed, and why only "ranked-choice" was considered in the first place. Drawing on extensive research in cities with experience of proportional representation, Santucci provides a timely and insightful theory of electoral reform with advice for the next generation of reformers.

Most members of Congress begin their careers through regularly scheduled elections, but terms may be cut short due to death, scandal, or different career opportunities. In these cases, special elections are held to fill vacancies. In fact, a number of prominent political figures, including Lyndon Johnson, Nancy Pelosi, and John Dingell, began their long and distinguished careers through special election to Congress. While the media often look to special elections as a way of measuring public sentiment on presidential performance, even though voter turnout tends to be significantly lower than in regular elections, these events have rarely attracted academic attention. Oftentimes, studies of these contests lead to generalizations about how a party should proceed if it hopes to wrest a seat away from the opposition in a special election. This book is the first large-scale scholarly treatment of special elections: both in terms of explaining what factors influence outcomes and in determining whether special elections are bellwethers for general elections. Charles S. Bullock, III and Karen L. Owen argue that special elections offer parties a testing ground for messaging and strategies for mobilizing voters in anticipation of general elections. Moreover, these elections provide opportunities for diversification of Congress as reduced commitment to resources for campaigning has led more women and candidates of color to compete in them-and win. Based on 75 years of data, the authors closely examine several competitive special elections during the first two years of the Trump era and quantitatively assess the almost 300 House special elections held since World War II.

A new perspective on policy responsiveness in American government. Scholars of American politics have long been skeptical of ordinary citizens' capacity to influence, let alone control, their governments. Drawing on over eight decades of state-level evidence on public opinion, elections, and policymaking, Devin Caughey and Christopher Warshaw pose a powerful challenge to this pessimistic view. Their research reveals that although American democracy cannot be taken for granted, state policymaking is far more responsive to citizens' demands than skeptics claim. Although governments respond sluggishly in the short term, over the long term, electoral incentives induce state parties and politicians-and ultimately policymaking-to adapt to voters' preferences. The authors take an empirical and theoretical approach that allows them to assess democracy as a dynamic process. Their evidence across states and over time gives them new leverage to assess relevant outcomes and trends, including the evolution of mass partisanship, mass ideology, and the relationship between partisanship and ideology since the mid-twentieth century; the nationalization of state-level politics; the mechanisms through which voters hold incumbents accountable; the performance of moderate candidates relative to extreme candidates; and the quality of state-level democracy today relative to state-level democracy in other periods.

The politics of inclusion is about more than hate, exclusion, and discrimination. It is a window into the moral character of contemporary liberal democracies. The Struggle for Inclusion introduces a new method to the study of public opinion: to probe, step by step, how far non-Muslim majorities are willing to be inclusive, where they draw the line, and why they draw it there and not elsewhere. Those committed to liberal democratic values and their concerns are the focus, not those advocating exclusion and intolerance. Notwithstanding the turbulence and violence of the last decade over issues of immigration and of Muslims in the West, the results of this study demonstrate that the largest number of citizens in contemporary liberal democracies are more open to inclusion of Muslims than has been recognized. Not less important, the book reveals limits on inclusion that follow from the friction between liberal democratic values. This pioneering work thus brings to light both pathways to progress and polarization traps.

The politics of inclusion is about more than hate, exclusion, and discrimination. It is a window into the moral character of contemporary liberal democracies. The Struggle for Inclusion introduces a new method to the study of public opinion: to probe, step by step, how far non-Muslim majorities are willing to be inclusive, where they draw the line, and why they draw it there and not elsewhere. Those committed to liberal democratic values and their concerns are the focus, not those advocating exclusion and intolerance. Notwithstanding the turbulence and violence of the last decade over issues of immigration and of Muslims in the West, the results of this study demonstrate that the largest number of citizens in contemporary liberal democracies are more open to inclusion of Muslims than has been recognized. Not less important, the book reveals limits on inclusion that follow from the friction between liberal democratic values. This pioneering work thus brings to light both pathways to progress and polarization traps.

Pollsters and pundits armed with the best public opinion polls failed to predict the election of Donald Trump in 2016. Is this because we no longer understand what the American public is? In A Troubled Birth, Susan Herbst argues that we need to return to earlier meanings of "public opinion" to understand our current climate. Herbst contends that the idea that there was a public-whose opinions mattered-emerged during the Great Depression, with the diffusion of radio, the devastating impact of the economic collapse on so many people, the appearance of professional pollsters, and Franklin Roosevelt's powerful rhetoric. She argues that public opinion about issues can only be seen as a messy mixture of culture, politics, and economics-in short, all the things that influence how people live. Herbst deftly pins down contours of public opinion in new ways and explores what endures and what doesn't in the extraordinarily troubled, polarized, and hyper-mediated present. Before we can ask the most important questions about public opinion in American democracy today, we must reckon yet again with the politics and culture of the 1930s.

The judicial system in a liberal democracy is deemed to be an independent branch of government with judges free from political agendas or societal pressures. In reality, judges are often influenced by their economic and social backgrounds, gender, race, religion, and sexuality. This volume explores the representation of different identities in the judiciary in the United States. The contributors investigate the pipeline, ambition, institutional inclusion, retention, and representation of groups previously excluded from federal, state, and local judiciaries. This study demonstrates how diversity on the bench improves the quality of justice, bolsters confidence in the legitimacy of the courts, and provides a vital voice in decision-making power for formerly disenfranchised populations.

Debates over redistribution, social insurance, and market regulation are central to American politics. Why do some citizens prefer a large role for government in the economic life of the nation while others wish to limit its reach? In Open versus Closed, the authors argue that these preferences are not always what they seem. They show how deep-seated personality traits underpinning the culture wars over race, immigration, law and order, sexuality, gender roles, and religion shape how citizens think about economics, binding cultural and economic inclinations together in unexpected ways. Integrating insights from both psychology and political science - and twenty years of observational and experimental data - the authors reveal the deeper motivations driving attitudes toward government. They find that for politically active citizens these attitudes are not driven by self-interest, but by a desire to express the traits and cultural commitments that define their identities.

The fifth edition of Public Opinion: Measuring the American Mind provides a comprehensive, accessible introduction to public opinion in the United States and describes how public opinion data are collected, how they are used, and the role they play in the U.S. political system. Bardes and Oldendick introduce students to the history of polling and explain the factors a good consumer of polls should know in order to critically evaluate public opinion data. Public Opinion: Measuring the American Mind is the only text to devote significant space to the history of polling, the use of polling in America today, and to explain the methods used for survey research. In addition, the authors engage students by providing in-depth coverage of public opinion on such issues as political ideology, health care, race, and foreign policy, as well as an update and discussion of the major changes that have taken place on controversial issues such as gay marriage, gun control, and immigration. Updated to include the latest data from the American National Election Study and the General Social Surveys in 2012 and 2014, this lively, engaging text combines a comprehensive grounding in the nuts and bolts of the field with relevant, real-world examples.

In 1963 Richard Hofstadter published his landmark book Anti-Intellectualism in American Life. Today, Matt Lewis argues, America's inclination toward simplicity and stupidity is stronger than ever, and its greatest victim is the Republican Party. Lewis, a respected Republican columnist and frequent MSNBC contributor, eviscerates the phenomenon of candidates with a "no experience required" mentality and tea party "patriots" who possess bluster but few core beliefs. Lewis traces the conservative movement's roots, from Edmund Burke to William F. Buckley, and from Goldwater's loss to Reagan's landslide victory. He highlights visionary thinkers who embraced nuance and deep ideology and changed history.

Latin American Political Culture: Public Opinion and Democracy presents a genuinely pan-Latin American examination of the region's contemporary political culture. This is the only book to extensively investigate the attitudes and behaviors of Latin Americans based on the Latin American Public Opinion Project's (LAPOP) AmericasBarometer surveys. Through its analysis of data on eighteen countries, the book systematically and comparatively evaluates norms, attitudes, and opinions concerning democracy and its consolidation. Beginning with an introduction of political culture and its scholarship, it examines democratic and authoritarian norms, explores how citizens relate to the political world, and considers implications for democratic stability. It then examines key behavioral outcomes in politics, such as in attitudes toward gays and fear of crime, and how political culture changes over time. Case studies highlight how these factors come together in particular cases. The findings reveal a complex Latin America with distinct political cultures. This book joins rigorous analysis with clear graphic presentation and extensive examples. Readers learn about public opinion research, engage with further questions for analysis, and have access to data, an expansive bibliography, and links to appendices.

The Arab World is a region that has been vastly misunderstood in the West. Arab Voices asks the questions, collects the answers, and shares the results that will help us see Arabs clearly. The book will bring into stark relief the myths, assumptions, and biases that hold us back from understanding this important people. Here, James Zogby debuts a brand new, comprehensive poll, bringing numbers to life so that we can base policy and perception on the real world, rather than on a conjured reality. Based on a new poll run by Zogby International exclusively for this book, some of the surprising results revealed include:* Despite the frustration with the peace process and the number of wars of the past few years, 74% of Arabs still support a two state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. And over one-third of Lebanese, Saudis, and Jordanians think that their governments should do more to advance peace. * Despite wars in and around their region and the worldwide economic crisis, when asked "Are you better off than you were 4 years ago?" 42% of those polled say they are better off, 19% worse off. * Arabs like American people (59% favorable rating), values (52%) and products (69%), giving them all high ratings. And Canada gets high favorability ratings everywhere (an overall rating of 55% favorable and 32% unfavorable). * However, Arabs overwhelmingly rate American society "more violent and war-like" (77%) or "less respectful of the rights ofothers" (78%) than their own society. Why? Because of the Iraq war and continuing fallout from Abu Ghraib,Guantanamo, and the treatment of Arab and Muslim immigrants and visitors to the United States. * What type of TV show do Saudis and Egyptians prefer to watch? The answer is, "Movies", which draws over 50% of the first and second choice votes. In Morocco, the top rated shows are "soap operas" and music and entertainment programs, drawing almost two-thirds of the first and second choice votes. Religious programs are near the bottom of the list of viewer preferences, garnering less than 10% of votes in all three countries.

This book seeks to go beyond existing public polls regarding Barack Obama, and instead offers a comprehensive treatment of public perceptions that resist mass generalizations based on race, gender, age, political affiliation, or geographical location. Drawing from a large national qualitative data set generated by 333 diverse participants from twelve different states across six U.S. regions, Mark P. Orbe offers a comprehensive look into public perceptions of Barack Obama's communication style, race matters, and the role of the media in 21st century politics. Communication Realities in a "Post-Racial" Society: What the U.S. Public Really Thinks about Barack Obama is the first of its kind in that it uses the voices of everyday U.S. Americans to advance our understanding of how identity politics influence public perceptions. The strength of a book such as this one lies within the power of the diverse perspectives of hundreds of participants. Each chapter features extended comments from rural volunteer fire fighters in southern Ohio, African American men in Oakland, CA, religious communities in Alabama; New England senior citizens; military families from southern Virginia; Tea Party members from Nebraska; business and community leaders from North Carolina; individuals currently unemployed and/or underemployed in Connecticut; college students from predominately White, Black, and Hispanic-serving institutions of higher learning; and others. As such, it is the first book that is based on comments from multiple perspectives - something that allows a deeper understanding that hasn't been possible with public polls, media sound bites, and political commentary. It is a must read for scholars interested in contemporary communication in a time when "post-racial" declarations are met with resistance and political junkies who seek an advanced understanding of the peculiarities of rapidly changing political realities.