<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why Joe and Jane Sixpack &#8211; and James Madison &#8211;  Are Likely Pleased With Tuesday&#8217;s Results</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2012/11/11/why-joe-and-jane-sixpack-and-james-madison-are-likely-pleased-with-tuesdays-results/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2012/11/11/why-joe-and-jane-sixpack-and-james-madison-are-likely-pleased-with-tuesdays-results/</link>
	<description>A NonPartisan Analysis of Presidential Politics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:45:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Dickinson</title>
		<link>http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2012/11/11/why-joe-and-jane-sixpack-and-james-madison-are-likely-pleased-with-tuesdays-results/comment-page-1/#comment-32986</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Dickinson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2012 20:21:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/?p=13814#comment-32986</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Your point regarding the sources of split-party control until 1994 - that it is in part a reflection of the fact that partisan ideology didn&#039;t fully match with party labels - is well taken, but it remains the fact that, for whatever reason, it has rarely been the case in the modern era that a majority of Americans have opted for one-party control under a specific single party. so, even as parties become more internally homogenized in the post-1994 era, we still don&#039;t see instances in which a majority of House voters opted for one-party control under one party.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Your point regarding the sources of split-party control until 1994 &#8211; that it is in part a reflection of the fact that partisan ideology didn&#8217;t fully match with party labels &#8211; is well taken, but it remains the fact that, for whatever reason, it has rarely been the case in the modern era that a majority of Americans have opted for one-party control under a specific single party. so, even as parties become more internally homogenized in the post-1994 era, we still don&#8217;t see instances in which a majority of House voters opted for one-party control under one party.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: star15389</title>
		<link>http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2012/11/11/why-joe-and-jane-sixpack-and-james-madison-are-likely-pleased-with-tuesdays-results/comment-page-1/#comment-32984</link>
		<dc:creator>star15389</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Nov 2012 19:51:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/?p=13814#comment-32984</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[You&#039;re ignoring the role very conservative Southern Democrats played until 1994, as well as the generally weaker ideological polarization between the parties up until around that point.  That voters gave Republicans and people who would by say 2002 basically all be Republicans unified control between 1980 and 1986 is at least an arguable point.  And since then, 1992, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2008, and, very nearly 2012 all produced one-party control of both chambers and the Presidency.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re ignoring the role very conservative Southern Democrats played until 1994, as well as the generally weaker ideological polarization between the parties up until around that point.  That voters gave Republicans and people who would by say 2002 basically all be Republicans unified control between 1980 and 1986 is at least an arguable point.  And since then, 1992, 2000, 2002, 2004, 2008, and, very nearly 2012 all produced one-party control of both chambers and the Presidency.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Dickinson</title>
		<link>http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2012/11/11/why-joe-and-jane-sixpack-and-james-madison-are-likely-pleased-with-tuesdays-results/comment-page-1/#comment-32874</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Dickinson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Nov 2012 20:36:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/?p=13814#comment-32874</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Bob, 

Just to echo Rob&#039;s point, I suspect much of the split-ticket voting is driven by the different standards by which some voters evaluate their member of Congress versus the President.  Constituency service at the local level can trump partisanship for at least some voters. So, to be clear, I&#039;m not saying all ticket splitters are deliberately voting for divided government, although I suspect some are.  If I can dig up individual data beyond polls, I&#039;ll pass it on. 

- Matt]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bob, </p>
<p>Just to echo Rob&#8217;s point, I suspect much of the split-ticket voting is driven by the different standards by which some voters evaluate their member of Congress versus the President.  Constituency service at the local level can trump partisanship for at least some voters. So, to be clear, I&#8217;m not saying all ticket splitters are deliberately voting for divided government, although I suspect some are.  If I can dig up individual data beyond polls, I&#8217;ll pass it on. </p>
<p>- Matt</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Dickinson</title>
		<link>http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2012/11/11/why-joe-and-jane-sixpack-and-james-madison-are-likely-pleased-with-tuesdays-results/comment-page-1/#comment-32873</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Dickinson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Nov 2012 20:29:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/?p=13814#comment-32873</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Arnim,

Note that that African-American presidential vote skews consistently toward the Democratic presidential candidate in recent elections. So, 88% of African-Americans voted for John Kerry in 2004, and 90% supported Gore in 2000.  Moreover, the proportion of the vote this year by African Americans was about the same as it was in 2008.  All a long way of saying that I doubt voter suppression was the primary factor driving their vote, although it certainly may have motivated some African-Americans.  But they have been a strong and consistent vote for Democrats for a long time now.

If you are interested in polling data, you can start with the national exit polls (CNN Election Center has them) and you can look at any of the pre-election polls that tapped into voters&#039; attitudes, such as those issued by Pew.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Arnim,</p>
<p>Note that that African-American presidential vote skews consistently toward the Democratic presidential candidate in recent elections. So, 88% of African-Americans voted for John Kerry in 2004, and 90% supported Gore in 2000.  Moreover, the proportion of the vote this year by African Americans was about the same as it was in 2008.  All a long way of saying that I doubt voter suppression was the primary factor driving their vote, although it certainly may have motivated some African-Americans.  But they have been a strong and consistent vote for Democrats for a long time now.</p>
<p>If you are interested in polling data, you can start with the national exit polls (CNN Election Center has them) and you can look at any of the pre-election polls that tapped into voters&#8217; attitudes, such as those issued by Pew.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Dickinson</title>
		<link>http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/2012/11/11/why-joe-and-jane-sixpack-and-james-madison-are-likely-pleased-with-tuesdays-results/comment-page-1/#comment-32824</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Dickinson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Nov 2012 01:15:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/?p=13814#comment-32824</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jeff - Good catch! Typo on my part - I&#039;ve fixed it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jeff &#8211; Good catch! Typo on my part &#8211; I&#8217;ve fixed it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
