Affiliation:
1. Department of Political Science , Hunter College and The Graduate Center, CUNY , New York , USA
2. Department of Political Science , University of Iowa , Iowa , USA
Abstract
Abstract
Among certain politicians, pundits and people, the expectation was that President Trump would make an economic difference in the 2018 congressional elections. In particular, the belief was that his economic appeal, coupled with his economic policies, would favor Republican candidates. However, an application of the classic referendum model for forecasting congressional outcomes shows no detectable Trump economic effect. That is, the economic conditions prevailing prior to the election, measured in multiple ways, worked as usual, helping to predict the actual Republican 40 seat loss rather closely. Put another way, any incumbent administration, faced with this set of numbers, would likely have experienced the same outcome. In sum, the Trump presence, in its economic manifestations, did not positively impact the Republican party fortune at midterm time.
Subject
General Social Sciences,Sociology and Political Science
Reference39 articles.
1. Berg, J. E., F. D. Nelson, and T. A. Rietz. 2008. “Prediction Market Accuracy in the Long Run.” International Journal of Forecasting 24 (2): 283–298.
2. Blumenthal, Mark. 2014. “Polls, Forecasts, Aggregators.” PS: Political Science and Politics 47 (2): 297–300.
3. Borosage, Robert. 2018. “The Real Deal of Trump’s Trade Tantrums.” The Progressive Populist, May 15, 2018, p. 10.
4. Clinton, Hillary R. 2017. What Happened. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
5. Cook, Charles E., Jr. and David Wasserman. 2014. “Recalibrating Ratings for a New Normal.” PS: Political Science and Politics 47 (2): 304–308.
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献