The 2012 presidential elections represented the second consecutive defeat for the Republican Party, and the fourth defeat out of the last six presidential elections. In recent years both Republican and Democratic strategists and pundits have spoken of an emerging Democratic Party "lock" on the Electoral College and speculated that even in the wake of Republican victories in Congress, presidential candidates are still at a major disadvantage due to the party's increasing demographic and geographic isolation. This prediction flies in the face of population shifts of the last several decades from Democratic regions (Upper-Midwest and Northeast) to Republican-leaning regions (South and Southwest); at the same time, it seems to follow from demographic changes favoring an increase in the minority vote. In fact, there is an initiative to convert Texas to a Democratic state by mobilizing Latino and Black voters. In Altered States, Thomas Holbrook looks at electoral change in presidential elections since 1972, documenting the magnitude, direction, and consequences of changes in party support in the states. He finds that the Democrats do not have a "lock" on the Electoral College, but that their position has improved dramatically over the past forty years in a number of formerly competitive or Republican-leaning states in the Northeast, Southeast, and Southwest. Republican candidates have made many fewer gains, mostly improving their position in "misplaced," formerly Democratic states, such as Kentucky and West Virginia, or in already deeply Republican states in the Plains and Mountain West. Holbrook looks at the ways that changes in the racial and ethnic composition of the state electorates, migratory patterns from large Democratic states to Republican-leaning states, and changes in the public's level of education and occupational status, state party identification, and ideology drive these changes. Additionally, he explores the extent to which the Republican "problem" stems from the geographic concentration of party support. While Democratic concentration in major metropolitan areas tends to put them at a disadvantage in House races, as Republican votes increasingly are concentrated in fewer states where they win by wider margins, they may be "wasting" more Electoral College votes than Democrats, whose supporters are more efficiently distributed.

If elections are easily predicted and voting behavior is easily explained with just a few fundamental variables, it seems quite plausible to argue that campaigns don't matter. This book attempts to answer the question, "Do campaigns matter?" by analyzing changes in public opinion during and across several presidential election campaigns. The crux of the argument is that although the national political and economic context of the election is very important, campaigns also play a crucial role in determining election outcomes. In particular, campaign events, such as conventions and debates, are primarily responsible for changes in public opinion that occur during the campaign period. Using many different data sources from several presidential campaigns, this important volume demonstrates that election outcomes are jointly produced by campaigns and national conditions. Covering an important and neglected subject, Do Campaigns Matter? is essential for students in political science at both graduate and undergraduate levels. Its original research, imaginative approach at conceptualizing data, and excellent empirical analysis, make it a must read for researchers and professionals as well.

The 2012 presidential elections represented the second consecutive defeat for the Republican Party, and its fourth defeat out of the last six presidential elections. In recent years both Republican and Democratic strategists and pundits have spoken of an emerging Democratic Party "lock" on the Electoral College and speculated that even in the wake of Republican victories in Congress, presidential candidates are still at a major disadvantage due to the party's increasing demographic and geographic isolation. In Altered States, Thomas Holbrook looks at change in party fortunes in presidential elections since 1972, documenting the magnitude, direction, and consequences of changes in party support in the states. He finds that the Democrats do not have a "lock" on the Electoral College, but that their position has improved dramatically over the past forty years in a number of formerly competitive or Republican-leaning states in the Northeast, Southeast, and Southwest. Republican candidates have made many fewer gains, mostly improving their position in "misplaced," formerly Democratic states, such as Kentucky and West Virginia, or in already deeply Republican states in the Plains and Mountain West. Holbrook looks at the ways that changes in the racial and ethnic composition of the state electorates, internal (state to state) and external (foreign born) migratory patterns, and changes in other key demographic and political characteristics drive these changes. Additionally, he explores the ways in which increasing partisan polarization at the national level has altered group-based party linkages and contributed to changes in party support at the state level. These factors, along with an increasingly inefficient distribution of Republican votes, have converted what was once a Republican edge in electoral votes to an advantage for Democratic presidential candidates.

If elections are easily predicted and voting behavior is easily explained with just a few fundamental variables, it seems quite plausible to argue that campaigns don't matter. This book attempts to answer the question, "Do campaigns matter?" by analyzing changes in public opinion during and across several presidential election campaigns. The crux of the argument is that although the national political and economic context of the election is very important, campaigns also play a crucial role in determining election outcomes. In particular, campaign events, such as conventions and debates, are primarily responsible for changes in public opinion that occur during the campaign period. Using many different data sources from several presidential campaigns, this important volume demonstrates that election outcomes are jointly produced by campaigns and national conditions. Covering an important and neglected subject, Do Campaigns Matter? is essential for students in political science at both graduate and undergraduate levels. Its original research, imaginative approach at conceptualizing data, and excellent empirical analysis, make it a must read for researchers and professionals as well.