Socializing Democrats: Examining Asian American vote choice with evidence from a national survey

Asian Americans are increasingly voting for Democrats in national elections. High levels of Democratic vote choice among Asian Americans are notable because many have high incomes, immigrated from countries with communist histories, or are Evangelical Christians. Why do Asian Americans support Democrats despite these conservative predispositions? I develop a novel theory of “social transmission” to explain Democratic vote choice among Asian Americans. The theory predicts that Asian Americans, who receive limited partisan socialization through the family, develop partisan preferences partly through the diffusion of political views in local contexts. This process leads to Democratic support because Asian Americans tend to settle in liberal metropolitan areas of the United States. I test this theory as an explanation for Asian American vote choice using data from the 2008 National Asian American Survey. In support of the theory, local partisan context emerges as a moderately-sized predictor of vote choice alongside some established predictors, including national origin and religion. Some measures of social integration into local communities heighten the effects of partisan context on vote choice. The results hold across various tests for self-selection and after accounting for several alternative explanations, including socioeconomic status, religion, national origin, group consciousness, and perceived discrimination.     

Trajectory of Asian American Nonpartisanship: Transitory,Transitional, or End State?

Scholarship holds that high rates of party identification constitute a key marker of successful immigrant incorporation, yet rates of Democratic or Republican affiliation remain surprisingly low among Asian Americans. This longitudinal study investigates the extent to which nonpartisanship for Asian Americans is stable or likely to change. Using a unique dataset that matches cases with corresponding observations over time, the analysis finds that No Preference is relatively permanent for individuals from large segments of Asian America. Low party support from Asian Americans is likely affected by weak party outreach. More than that, however, parties are a central organizing institution for aggregating the interests of and advocating for the base. Therefore, one potential consequence is that Asian Americans may be less effective in institutionalizing their interests and priorities in party politicking and in the political mainstream. This type of marginalization merits substantial reconsideration in a democratic and inclusive society.     

Correction to: Asian American Candidate Preferences: Evidence from California

Political Behavior - Using the 2012–2018 California State Assembly races, Sadhwani finds that Asian Americans who live in places that are 15–30% have higher voter turnout. Turnout in...     

Threat Perception and American Support for Torture

When do Americans support the government’s use of torture? We argue that perceptions of threat undermine the extent to which American public opinion serves as a bulwark against government torture. Although surveys demonstrate that a slim majority of the American public generally opposes torture, using a nationally-representative survey experiment, we show that Americans are considerably more supportive of government abuse when it is directed at individuals who they perceive as threatening: specifically, when a detainee has an Arabic name and when the alleged crime is terrorism. Given the malleability of public opinion as a potential constraint on abuse, our results underscore the importance of institutional protections of human rights.     

The Capitalist Peace: a New Way Forward for American Foreign Policy

Since the beginning of the republic, Americans have viewed their state as a “beacon of liberty.” This self-conception has caused Americans to think that they can be a force for positive change in the world. Over time, their outlook has facilitated increasingly aggressive efforts to democratization other countries, leading many to see America as an imperial power. It is my contention that regardless of other factors, Americans become the most invasive when liberal ideology, the very thing that makes them a “beacon of liberty” overpowers other ideological forces. Only by restoring a balanced debate about the merits of democratization by reintegrating other perspectives on America’s role in the world can they be the force for good they believe themselves to be.     

Ethnicity and political participation: A comparison between Asian and Mexican Americans

What is ethnicity and how does it matter for political participation? Previous research has shown that the participatory disparity of Asian Americans, as different from Latinos, cannot be explained with sociodemographic and group consciousness variables. Adopting the view of a growing body of scholars who think ethnicity is an evolving rather than a static phenomenon, this study proposes multidimensional measures of ethnicity for two immigrant groups. Reexamining part of the 1984 data set that contains a unique oversampling of Asian and Mexican Americans in California, it is found that the two groups, despite a huge socioeconomic gap, bear similar ethnicity and participation structures. For both groups, acculturation increases participation; attachment to homeland culture does not necessarily discourage participation; and the role of group consciousness is much more complex than previously conceived.     

Get Out on Behalf of Your Group: Electoral Participation of Latinos and Asian Americans

With the continuous inflow of new immigrants, political participation of Latinos and Asian Americans has become increasingly important for understanding the American electoral politics. A few previous studies examining how political participation of Latinos and Asian Americans is contextually determined reported mixed empirical findings, and this paper re-examines the issue by considering how different features of racial contexts interact to influence the voting turnout of individual Latinos and Asian Americans. Theoretically, we present a model of turnout where a rational individual is motivated to participate, not only by individualistic benefits accrued to him- or herself, but also by perceptions of group-level benefits—concerns regarding the welfare of other members of the racial group. We argue that racial contexts provide distinctive (dis-)incentives to participate, by influencing their perception of participatory benefits at the group level. Empirically, we find that the size of the group exerts a significant effect on turnout decisions of Latino and Asian American individuals, and, particularly for Latinos, its effect interacts with the economic status of the group and the overall racial heterogeneity in the county of residence.     

American Federalism as American Exceptionalism

Americans paradoxically claim uniqueness for their politicalsystem, yet promote it as a model for others. This is especiallytrue of federalism, the clearest example of American exceptionalism.At its inception, American federalism was produced in an environmentclosely approximating what scholars have since distilled asoptimal conditions for fostering such a system. In other contexts,federalism has not flourished, because those preconditions areseldom approximated. Remarkably, American federalism has adjustedto meet drastically changed social, geographic, and politicalconditions, and the case for its continued adaptiveness andappropriateness remains strong. Although enclaved state differencesin economics and religion are no longer a reality, these andother differences are widespread especially on a regional basis.Even on a statewide basis, cultural mixes keep the country heterogeneous.The U.S. Constitution has been reinterpreted to permit rathermore nationalized control in accordance with this process ofeliminating differences. Indeed, this is to the point wherefederalism could become legally problematic, explaining theRehnquist court's recent decisions.     

A swing vote from the ethnic backstage: The role of German American isolationist tradition for Trump's 2016 victory

We question the growing consensus in the literature that European Americans behave as a homogenous pan-ethnic coalition of voters. Seemingly below the radar of scholarship on voting groups in American politics, we identify a group of white voters that behaves differently from others: German Americans, the largest ethnic group, regionally concentrated in the ‘Swinging Midwest’. Using county level voting returns, ancestry group information from the American Community Survey (ACS), current survey data and historical census data going back as early as 1910, we provide evidence for a partisan and a non-partisan pathway that motivated German Americans to vote for Trump in 2016: a historically grown association with the Republican Party and an acquired taste for isolationist attitudes that mobilizes non-partisan German Americans to support isolationist candidates. Our findings indicate that European American experiences of migration and integration still echo into the political arena of today.     

Why are African American Governors and U.S. Senators so Rare? Exploring White Voters’ Responses to African American Statewide Candidates

Political Behavior - Despite making notable gains at the local level, very few African Americans have been elected to the high-profile statewide offices of governor or U.S. senator. Previous...     

The Effects of Age and Political Exposure on the Development of Party Identification Among Asian American and Latino Immigrants in the United States

This article seeks to understand the development of partisanship among the largest of contemporary immigrant groups, Asian Americans and Latinos. Identifying the processes that underlie the acquisition of partisanship is often complicated because the associated concepts are not easily isolated from one another. In particular, among those born in the U.S., distinguishing between the separate effects of age and political exposure on partisan development is especially difficult since age usually serves as an exact measure of exposure to the political system and vice versa. Because immigrants' length of residence does not correspond directly to their age, tracking the acquisition of party identification represents one way to untangle the effects of age and exposure on partisanship. A strong relationship between the number of years an immigrant has lived in the U.S. and the acquisition of partisanship is found. Further analysis shows that naturalization, gains in English language skills, and media use also contribute to immigrants' acquisition of partisanship. This study reveals that a process of reinforcement through exposure to the political system underlies the development of political attitudes across diverse immigrant groups.     

Polarization and the Decline of the American Floating Voter

The observed rate of Americans voting for a different party across successive presidential elections has never been lower. This trend is largely explained by the clarity of party differences reducing indecision and ambivalence and increasing reliability in presidential voting. American National Election Studies (ANES) Times Series study data show that recent independent, less engaged voters perceive candidate differences as clearly as partisan, engaged voters of past elections and with declining rates of ambivalence, being undecided, and floating. Analysis of ANES inter‐election panel studies shows the decline in switching is present among nonvoters too, as pure independents are as reliable in their party support as strong partisans of prior eras. These findings show parties benefit from the behavioral response of all Americans to polarization. By providing an ideological anchor to candidate evaluations, polarization produces a reliable base of party support that is less responsive to short‐term forces.     

Asian Americans for equality: A case study of strategies for expanding immigrant homeownership

Abstract

At a time when the overall homeownership rate in the United States is at a historic high, many groups still face severe hurdles in realizing the American dream. The public, private, and nonprofit sectors are working to address these barriers, and this article examines one nonprofit's activities. Asian Americans for Equality (AAFE) is a civil rights and housing organization providing homeownership and other services to Asian Americans, a group that often faces language, cultural, credit, and financial difficulties in achieving homeownership.

AAFE addresses these challenges by providing aggressive outreach through housing fairs and neighborhood publications; it offers homeownership education and counseling in a variety of languages and settings, secures multiple housing subsidies and develops affordable housing, and educates lenders on the employment and credit practices of the Asian community. AAFE thus helps tailor the complex web of activities required to expand homeownership to traditionally underserved—especially immigrant—populations.     

Rednecks,Norteños,and the Next American Melting Pot?

When Americans are frightened by ethnic or racial polarization, one response is the melting pot, a metaphor for intermarriage. Marriage across ethnic or racial lines turns distrustful groups into contributors to each other’s demographic future. Melting pots have been multiple in American history. While they often have been constrained by racial prejudice, racial intermarriage is now on a slow but steady upswing. Two groups that bear watching are Rednecks, who descend from British migration to what is now the United States, and Norteños, a term I use to refer to Mexican migration streams that, like Rednecks, have become a cultural model for a wider spectrum of Americans. Both Rednecks and Norteños originated as frontier populations in which the struggle for survival selected for self-reliance, distrust of government and the family-first principle. While both are beset by pejorative imagery of machismo, racism and criminality, their strong sense of kinship is a sign that they have more in common than might appear. Just as it is a mistake to reduce all relationships between white and black Americans to racism, it is also a mistake to assume that Norteños and Rednecks are necessarily hostile to each other. Despite the limitations of the melting pot metaphor, it does provide a plausible alternative to racialism.     

Margaret Fuller's Rome and the problem of provincial American democracy

ABSTRACT

Margaret Fuller's visit to Italy as a correspondent for the New York Tribune at the time of the 1848 revolutions gave her a unique perspective on them, not only as a feminist intellectual but also as a commentator on the American relationship with revolutionary Europe. In her Tribune writings she addressed issues at once more partisan and more global than those she had covered inside the United States, including the political condition of Italy as a subject state under Austrian imperial control, and as an object of ridicule by many American observers, and the condition of American slavery. Italian peoples and slaves, in her mind, were, like women, oppressed by a transatlantic patriarchy whose prejudices allowed only for white males to enjoy political independence. Fuller called for American support for the Roman republic, but her sympathies did not reflect the thrust of American opinion. Many Americans did not believe Italians were capable of maintaining republican self-government, which was different, they alleged, from their own version, part of the inheritance of the American Revolution. That heritage conferred a unique American revolutionary ‘exceptionalism’. For these Americans, the 1848 revolutions provided evidence that Europe was impulsive, reactionary and flawed; they saw in them confirmation of the superiority of American race relations and democratic society. After her death in 1850, the American Civil War would confirm Fuller's implicit sense that the United States and Europe were more alike than many Americans of her generation believed or realized. Her critique of American attitudes to the prospect for democracy in Italy provides perspective on the ambiguity of American global leadership today.     

Anger and Declining Trust in Government in the American Electorate

Partisanship in the United States in the contemporary era is largely characterized by feelings of anger and negativity. While the behavioral consequences of this new style of partisanship have been explored at some length, less is known about how the anger that is at the root of this growing partisan antipathy affects Americans’ views of the national government. In this paper, I utilize data from the 2012 American National Election Studies to show that higher levels of anger are associated with a greater level of distrust in government across a variety of metrics. I then present evidence from a survey experiment on a national sample of registered voters to show that anger has a causal effect in reducing citizens’ trust in government. Importantly, I find that anger is able to affect an individual’s views of the national government even when it is aroused through apolitical means. I also find that merely prompting individuals to think about politics is sufficient to arouse angry emotions. In total, the results suggest that anger and politics are closely intertwined, and that anger plays a broad and powerful role in shaping how Americans view their governing institutions.     

Alexis de Tocqueville and the American Character: The Problem of Reconciling Excellence and Consent

Although Tocqueville was deeply concerned about the adverseconsequences of democratic equality and the tyranny of the majority,he nonethless believed that the character of the American people-reinforcedby America's customs, laws, circumstances, constitutional heritage,and favorable geography-would help Americans to achieve a decent,liberal, constitutional polity. Culturally, however, Americanswere deficient in reconciling excellence and consent. Less friendlycritics have argued that a democracy cannot reconcile excellenceand consent. It is, however, possible to move beyond Tocqueville'squalified confidence in American democracy, and his reservationsabout the ability of Americans to reconcile excellence and consent,by arguing that there is a fundamental concord between excellenceand consent, that there is significant popular acceptance andpractice of excellence in a democracy, and that creative democraticleadership can advance excellence in a democratic society.     

Adversarial legalism and American government

Compared to other economically advanced democracies, the United States is uniquely prone to adversarial, legalistic modes of policy formulation and implementation, shaped by the prospect of judicial review. While adversarial legalism facilitates the expression of justice-claims and challenges to official dogma, its costs are often neglected or minimized. A survey of existing research, together with a case study of environmental regulation in the Port of Oakland, indicates the extent to which adversarial legalism causes (or threatens) enormous dispute-resolving costs and procedural delays, which in turn distort policy outcomes. Adversarial legalism, moreover, has increased in recent decades, as Americans have attempted to implement the ambitious, socially transformative policies of activist government through political structures, forms of legislation, and legal procedures that reflect deep suspicion of governmental authority.     

The 2000 American Presidential Election

Abstract

The 2000 Presidential election was one of the longest, most expensive and closest in American history. It was the Presidential election that exposed the flaws (or genius) of the electoral college system, demonstrated the imperfections of media dependency on exit polls and quick election calling, and showed how a third party candidate with just two percent of the popular vote could make the difference in the crucial state of Florida. Democrats lost states they should have won; Republicans lost every big city and most of their suburbs; and the Florida election came down to a five-to-four muddled decision by the Supreme Court. Americans collectively learned a great civics lesson: that even in a bitter, controversial contest, our candidates accept defeat graciously; the simple act of voting is not so simple; and that for all its shortcomings, the electoral college did work.