Abstract: Since the publication of Southern Politics, political scientists have been intrigued by the phenomenon of localism in voting patterns. To assess such "friends and neighbors" voting in presidential elections, Lewis-Beck and Rice (1983) devised a technique that takes into account both the electoral traditions of the state and the short-term effect of a particular election. This note extends the Lewis-Beck and Rice analysis to vice-presidential candidates. Such an extension seems particularly warranted since the vicepresidential candidate is one political nomination still made by party elites who can purposely take regional appeals into account. Despite a lack of empirical support, the notion that a vice-president must add balance to the ticket maintains a strong hold (Hinckley, 1985, p. 11). Moreover, although strategic considerations regarding the vicepresidential selection extend to candidate ideology, religion, and type of government experience, the dominant factor has been region. Between 1952 and 1980, for example, 15 of 16 major party tickets showed regional balance. But only six showed an ideological balance; five, a religious balance; and seven balanced candidate experience (legislative vs. executive) (Goldstein, 1982 p. 69). Similarly, between 1884 and 1984, only five of 52 major party nominations (Republicans in 1936 and 1976 and Democrats in 1900, 1908, and 1948) were not regionally balanced-and in four of these, the party with such a ticket lost. The perception of a home state advantage is also the reason that vice-presidential candidates have been so likely to come from electorally large states (Adkison, 1982, p. 334).

Abstract: The struggle for and against Robert Bork's Supreme Court nomination was a soul-searching dissection of the country's values. This book investigates both sides of the issue with scores of interviews with key figures as the most critical political fight during the Reagan years unfolds.

Abstract: Fourteen southern and border states established a same-day presidential primary on 8 March 1988. This analysis shows that this Super Tuesday, in several senses, was less than super. The results turned out to be less satisfying than its Democratic founders preferred but less upsetting than its critics anticipated. Despite Super Tuesday, Iowa and New Hampshire remained dominant in the 1988 presidential primaries. Although voter turnout increased slightly over 1984 and the results contributed mightily toward settling the nomination in the Republican party, Super Tuesday neither settled the Democratic nomination nor gave meaningful momentum to the more moderate Democratic candidates.

Abstract: This article focuses on the interplay of four elements to be considered in designing and using peer nomination forms: purpose, characteristics of gifted and talented students, grade level, and item...

Abstract: sample's overwhelming support for President Mondale, any predictions made by those brave enough to venture a guess were taken with the appropriate grains of salt. On reflection, perhaps these results should have been released much earlier, if only to save the nation a lot of time and money. Respondents selected George Bush and Michael Dukakis as their respective party nominees. While Bush was mentioned most frequently for the Republican nomination (for a 49% plurality), members of the Legislative Studies Section actually sided with Robert Dole over the former vice president by a slim margin. Dukakis, meanwhile, won a plurality of votes (32%) among nine Democrats mentioned, followed not all that closely by Mario Cuomo, apparently despite his protestations to noncandidacy. When all was said and done, respondents tagged George Bush as the eventual winner, with Dole mentioned next most frequently as the probable 41st president. Dukakis came in a distant third. So much for all that talk about a repeat of the election of 1960.

Abstract: This study examined an alternative to negative nomination sociometric measures. One hundred fifty-nine fourth through sixth graders completed both a positive and a negative nomination sociometric measure and a repeated positive nomination sociometric measure. Using the positive and negative nomination measure as the criterion, 66% of the popular children, 82% of the rejected children, and 50% of the neglected children were correctly identified by the repeated positive nomination measure. These results indicate that the repeated positive nomination sociometric measure could be used as a substitute for a positive and negative nomination measure for identifying rejected, but not neglected, children.

Abstract: ‘Big Mo’ has just switched uniforms. —Dandy Don Meredith, football commentator According to a staple item of conventional wisdom about the politics of presidential nominations, it has become essential for a candidate to perform well early in the primary and caucus season, weighing in with an early victory or, what is probably more important, an unexpectedly strong early showing. Toward that end, serious presidential aspirants now gear up their campaigns years in advance of the first primaries and caucuses, in the belief that in order to stand any chance of being nominated, they must establish from the very outset the viability of their candidacy. Since nomination contests are, in effect, winnowing processes (see, e.g., Matthews, 1978), presidential aspirants who fail to establish their credibility very early in the race may find themselves left at the post, their supporters having forsaken them for other, seemingly more electable candidates. On the other hand, those who do well early in the fray live to fight another day. Indeed, they are likely, according to a related bit of conventional wisdom, to hop aboard a victory bandwagon, with impressive early performances enhancing their support and this increased support in turn bolstering their subsequent performance. Taken in tandem, the ideas that it is vital to do well early and that doing well becomes self-perpetuating form the keystones of momentum -based interpretations of the presidential nomination process.

Abstract: The impact of different types of election systems on the representation of women has only recently commanded attention from political scientists. Most of this impact research focuses on the local, state, or cross-national levels. This paper is nearly unique in its focus on the potential impact of variations in congressional election procedures on women's representation. An examination of three such variations–filing date for candidates, the open or closed nature of primaries, and whether or not party endorsement is used–indicates some impact on the presence and success of women candidates in the Democratic, but not Republican, primaries. Thus, even small differences in election structures may affect the recruitment and success of women candidates.

Abstract: Public funding was conceived and has been used to help equalize economic resources and to open up the political system to candidates without ready access to personal funds or to wealthy contributors. Government funds, according to advocates, are an alternative funding system designed to enable candidates and parties to avoid obligations, tacit or expressed, that might go along with dependence on large contributors and special interests. Public matching funds are also intended to enhance the role that small donors play in campaigns and, by opening up the nomination process, to make the system more competitive. Underlying most public-funding systems is the assumption that new or alternative sources of campaign funding are desirable. This is particularly true when state laws limit contributions, as twenty-five now do, or restrict traditional sources, as all but nine do to some degree. The public funds are intended to help provide or in the presidential general-election period to supply all the money serious candidates need to present themselves and their ideas to the electorate. The public funds are also meant to diminish or to eliminate the need for money from wealthy donors and interest groups and thereby minimize opportunities for contributors to exert undue influence on officeholders. In the nomination period, public funding is designed to make the contest for the nomination more competitive and to encourage candidates to broaden their bases of support by seeking out large numbers of relatively small, matchable contributions. The system of public funding of presidential campaigns has operated since 1976, and its consequences have been widely analyzed.' Twenty states also have taxassisted funding of political parties and candidates. Additionally, two citiesSeattle, Washington, and Tucson, Arizona have enacted public financing, as has Sacramento County, California. Seattle, in fact, twice enacted laws. The first, passed in 1978, operated in the 1979 and 1981 elections and lapsed in 1982 when a sunset provision terminated it. The second was enacted in 1984 and was effective for the 1987 elections.2 Much can be learned from these experiences with contribution and expenditure limits, public financing of campaigns, and related laws concerning election financing.

Abstract: Mitterrand’s public decision to seek the PS’s nomination as the party’s candidate in the 1981 presidential elections ended all internal party criticism, and directed party attention and effort to the presidential and the legislative election campaign. The reassertion of unquestioning allegiance to Mitterrand was maintained and amplified by his success in the elections but, as we shall see in the present chapter, the relationship between the new President and his party became qualitatively different. Let us now examine the manner in which changes in the relationship informed French Socialism after the PS took power in 1981.

Abstract: The ten dwellings considered in this nomination are the D.W.Thomas House(N-6237), Hill Island Farm(N-5898), Green Meadow(N-6240), Brook Ramble(N-101), the Vandyke-Heath House(N-5891), the Johnson Home Farm( N-4247), Mount Jones( N-1503), Windsor(N-), the Savin-Wilson House(K-3967), and Mount Pleasant(K-3863). There ar other dwellings within the geographical boundaries of this nomination that share the characteristics of this thematic nomination and have already been listed individually in the National Register of Historic Places. These related sites are listed in an appendix to the Statement of Historic Contexts.

Abstract: The evaluation of presidential nomination reforms has been the topic of elite discussion and debate, with little attention paid to popular evaluations. Public attitudes toward a number of reforms to the presidential nomination process were evaluated through survey data collected in 1988. The evaluations included campaign costs, debates, the influence of consultants, and the role of the media. The analysis suggests that there is a relatively high level of popular satisfaction with these dimensions of the current system. Popular concern about the nomination process is focused in two areas—the roles of money and the media. There is a strong suggestion that the movement toward regionalization of the calendar was responsive to partisan concerns in different regions of the country.

Abstract: Sidney Weintraub was born in Brooklyn on 28 April 1914 and, like many young Americans, grew up wanting to be a professional baseball player. The aura of Ebbetts Field clearly isolated Flatbush from the Wall Street stock market boom and the subsequent crash which took place across the East River in Manhattan. It was only after he had recognised that a sports career was not to be his that Weintraub concentrated his attention on the economic problems of the day. The result was one of the most original and imaginative approaches to economic theory of the post-war period. In an autobiographical essay written just before his death on 19 June 1983, he described himself as a ’Jevonian seditionist’, recalling a passage from Jevon’s Theory of Political Economy: `. .. authority has ever been the great opponent of truth. A despotic calm is usually the triumph of error. In the republic of sciences sedition and even anarchy are beneficial in the long run to the greatest happiness of the greatest number.’ Weintraub was too original an economist to generate the consensus for his positions required for consideration for a Nobel prize nomination. He was more interested in finding solutions to theoretical questions with practical relevance, solutions which would also have practical applicability. Two interconnected episodes best characterise this aspect of his approach to the subject.

Abstract: By 1992, the party of the majority, the Democratic Party, will have been out of power for twenty years of a twenty-four year span. Since 1968, numerous reforms in the presidential nominating process have been considered and adopted by the Democrats. These reforms have had the effect of opening the nominating process to rank-and-file Democrats through state primaries and participatory caucuses. While the reforms achieve this purpose, the end result is a mixed system that has been described as a disjointed hodgepodge of rules. This article presents ten criteria of a sound nomination system. Then a panel of researchers and practitioners weighs seven options for further reform against the ten criteria. Several policy options are considered by the panel as improvements over the current presidential nomination system.