US campaign 2000: Of pregnant chads, butterfly ballots and partisan vitriol

Government and Opposition

Volumn 36, Issue 1, 2001, Pages 3-26

  Norris, Pippa ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0035579863     PISSN: 0017257X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1477-7053.00051     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. This estimate includes the money spent on the presidential and congressional races, including funds spent by outside groups that do not declare their spending, The biggest increase came from soft money collected by both parties' congressional committees. Ruth Marcus, 'Costliest Race in US History Nears End', Washington Post, 6 November 2000, p. A01.
2. Governor Mel Carnahan died in a plane crash on 16 October yet he remained on the ballot and won the Missouri US Senate race.
3. For a balanced assessment of the President's policy performance see Colin Campbell and Bert A. Rockman (eds), The Clinton Legacy, New York, Chatham House Publishers/Seven Bridges Press, 2000.
4. For a review of the forecasts see Robert Kaiser, 'Is This Any Way to Pick a Winner?', Washington Post, PA01. The estimates made at the September annual meeting, 26 May 2000, of the American Political Science Association were 52.8% (James Campbell, University of Buffalo), 52.9% (Brad Lockerbie, University of Georgia), 53.2% (Alan Abramowitz Emory University), 55% (Helmut Norpoth, SUNY), 55.2% (Christopher Wlezian, University of Houston) and 60.3% (Thomas Holbrook, University of Wisconsin). In mid-October Michael Lewis-Beck and Charles Tien forecast that, based on presidential popularity, the percentage change in GNP, and a peace and prosperity index, Al Gore would get 55.4% of the popular vote, and that the Democrats would regain the House and the Senate. http://Urban.hunter.cuny.edu/ctien/ For a critical review of the economic models and replies see Karl Eisenhower and Pete Nelson, 'The Phony Science of Predicting Elections', Slate, 20 May 2000. http://slate.msn/com/Features/forecast.forecast.asp
5. For a review of the forecasts see Robert Kaiser, 'Is This Any Way to Pick a Winner?', Washington Post, PA01. The estimates made at the September annual meeting, 26 May 2000, of the American Political Science Association were 52.8% (James Campbell, University of Buffalo), 52.9% (Brad Lockerbie, University of Georgia), 53.2% (Alan Abramowitz Emory University), 55% (Helmut Norpoth, SUNY), 55.2% (Christopher Wlezian, University of Houston) and 60.3% (Thomas Holbrook, University of Wisconsin). In mid-October Michael Lewis-Beck and Charles Tien forecast that, based on presidential popularity, the percentage change in GNP, and a peace and prosperity index, Al Gore would get 55.4% of the popular vote, and that the Democrats would regain the House and the Senate. http://Urban.hunter.cuny.edu/ctien/ For a critical review of the economic models and replies see Karl Eisenhower and Pete Nelson, 'The Phony Science of Predicting Elections', Slate, 20 May 2000. http://slate.msn/com/Features/forecast.forecast.asp
6. For details see Joint Economic Committee and the Council for Economic Advisers, Economic Indicators, US Government Printing Office, Washington DC, 2000.
7. See, for example, US Department of Commerce, The Emerging Digital Economy, US Department of Commerce, Washington DC, 1999. http: www.ecommerce.gov/ede.
8. Bob Woodward, Maestro: Greenspan's Fed and the American Boom, New York, 2000.
9. For an assessment of Clinton's foreign policy see Emily O. Goldman and Larry Berman, 'Engaging the World: First Impressions of the Clinton Foreign Policy Legacy', in Colin Campbell and Bert A. Rockman (eds), The Clinton Legacy, New York, Chatham House Publishers/Seven Bridges Press, 2000.