How consequential is residence in a presidential battleground state for how people engage in politics? I explore the effects of battleground strategies for campaign exposure, voter interest, political discussion, learning, and participation in the presidential campaign. I also consider the sources of battleground influence, including the campaign efforts of presidential candidates and particular partisan nature of battleground states. Using survey data from the 1992, 1996, and 2000 National Election Studies in conjunction with measures of state campaign context, I find that the effects of battleground environments are limited. Neither levels of campaign interest nor rates of political discussion are affected by presidential campaign intensity. While television advertising promotes learning and participation, battleground influence on the intention to vote reflects the partisan environment of a state rather than advertising or events sponsored by the presidential candidates.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Althaus, Scott L., Peter F. Nardulli, and Daron R. Shaw. 2002. “Candidate Appearances in Presidential Elections, 1972-2000.”Political Communication19: 49-72.
2.
Ansolabehere, Stephen, and Shanto Iyengar. 1995. Going Negative: How Political Advertisements Shrink and Polarize the Electorate. New York: Free Press.
3.
Bartels, Larry M.1985. “Resource Allocation in a Presidential Campaign.”Journal of Politics47: 928-936.
4.
Beck, Paul Allen, Russell J. Dalton, Steven Greene, and Robert Huckfeldt. 2002. “The Social Calculus of Voting: Interpersonal, Media, and Organizational Influences on Presidential Choices.”American Political Science Review96: 57-73.
5.
Brams, Steven J., and Morton D. Davis. 1974. “The 3/2’s Rule in Presidential Campaigning.”American Political Science Review68: 113-134.
6.
Brians, Craig L., and Martin Wattenberg. 1996. “Campaign Issue Knowledge and Salience: Comparing Reception from TV Commercials, TV News, and Newspapers.”American Journal of Political Science40: 172-193.
7.
Carsey, Thomas. 2000. Campaign Dynamics: The Race for Governor. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
8.
Chaffee, Steven H., and Stacey Frank Kanihan. 1997. “Learning about Politics from the Mass Media.”Political Communication14: 421-430.
9.
Colantoni, Claude S., Terrence J. Levesque, and Peter C. Ordeshook. 1975. “Campaign Resource Allocations Under the Electoral College.”American Political Science Review69: 141-154.
10.
Delli Carpini, Michael X., and Scott Keeter. 1996. What Americans Know About Politics and Why It Matters. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
11.
Erikson, Robert S., Gerald C. Wright, and John P. McIver. 1993. Statehouse Democracy: Public Opinion and Policy in the American States. New York: Cambridge University Press.
12.
Finkel, Steven E.1993. “Reexamining the ‘Minimal Effects’ Model in Recent Presidential Campaigns.”Journal of Politics55: 1-21.
13.
Franklin, Charles H.1991. “Eschewing Obfuscation: Campaigns and Perceptions of U.S. Senate Incumbents.”American Political Science Review85: 1193-1214.
14.
Freedman, Paul, Michael Franz, and Kenneth Goldstein. 2004. “Campaign Advertising and Democratic Citizenship.”American Journal of Political Science48: 723-741.
15.
Freedman, Paul, and Kenneth M. Goldstein. 1999. “Measuring Media Exposure and the Effect of Negative Campaign Ads.”American Journal of Political Science43: 1189-1208.
16.
Gelman, Andrew, and Gary King. 1993. “Why Are American Presidential Election Campaign Polls So Variable When Votes Are So Predictable?”British Journal of Political Science23: 409-451.
17.
Goldstein, Ken, and Paul Freedman. 2002a. “Campaign Advertising and Voter Turnout: New Evidence for a Stimulation Effect.”The Journal of Politics64: 721-740.
18.
Goldstein, Ken, and Paul Freedman. 2002b. “Lessons Learned: Campaign Advertising in the 2000 Elections.”Political Communication19: 5-28.
19.
Goldstein, Kenneth, Michael Franz, and Travis Ridout. 2002. “Political Advertising in 2000.” Combined File [dataset]. Final release. Madison, WI: The Department of Political Science at The University of Wisconsin-Madison and the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University.
20.
Herr, J. Paul. 2002. “The Impact of Campaign Appearances in the 1996 Election.”Journal of Politics64: 904-913.
21.
Hill, David, and Seth C. McKee. 2005. “The Electoral College, Mobilization, and Turnout in the 2000 Presidential Election.”American Politics Research33: 700-725.
22.
Holbrook, Thomas M.1996. Do Campaigns Matter?Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
23.
Holbrook, Thomas M., and Scott D. McClurg. 2005. “The Mobilization of Core Supporters: Campaigns, Turnout, and Electoral Composition in United States Presidential Elections.”American Journal of Political Science49: 689-703.
24.
Holbrook, Thomas M., and Emily Van Dunk. 1993. “Electoral Competition in the American States.”American Political Science Review87: 955-962.
25.
Huckfeldt, Robert, and John Sprague. 1995. Citizens, Politics, and Social Communication: Information and Influence in an Election Campaign. New York: Cambridge University Press.
26.
Huckfeldt, Robert, Jeffrey Levine, William Morgan, and John Sprague. 1998. “Election Campaigns, Social Communication, and the Accessibility of Perceived Discussant Preference.”Political Behavior20: 263-294.
27.
Johnston, Richard, Andre Blais, Henry E. Brady, and Jean Crete. 1992. Letting the People Decide: Dynamics of a Canadian Election. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
28.
Johnston, Richard, Michael Hagen, and Kathleen Hall Jamieson. 2004. The 2000 Presidential Election and the Foundations of Party Politics. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
29.
Just, Marion, Ann Crigler, Dean Alger, Timothy Cook, Montague Kern, and Darrell West. 1996. Crosstalk: Citizens, Candidates, and the Media in a Presidential Campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30.
Kahn, Kim Fridkin, and Patrick J. Kenney. 1999. The Spectacle of U.S. Senate Campaigns. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
31.
Luskin, Robert C.1990. “Explaining Political Sophistication.”Political Behavior12: 331-361.
32.
Partin, Randall W.2001. “Campaign Intensity and Voter Information: A Look at Gubernatorial Contests.”American Politics Research29: 114-140.
33.
Shaw, Daron R.1999. “The Effects of TV Ads and Candidate Appearances on Statewide Presidential Votes, 1988-96.”American Political Science Review93: 345-361.
34.
Westlye, Mark. 1991. Senate Elections and Campaign Intensity. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
35.
Zukin, Cliff, and Robin Snyder. 1984. “Passive Learning: When the Environment in the Message.”Public Opinion Quarterly48: 629-638.
