Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
10 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Jacobson
|
increased spending helps the challenger more than the incumbent; inc. spending by incumbent lowers prob. of reelection
|
|
|
Green and Krasno
|
marginal effect of incumbent spending equal the challenger; Jacobson omitted challenger quality, reciprocal causation, and diminishing marginal returns
|
|
|
Abramowitz et al.
|
decline in marginal districts result of demographic change and ideological realignment, not redistricting
|
|
|
Steen
|
spending money not enough- have to know how and when to spend it; potential vs. actual self-financing; benefits of fundraising besides money
|
|
|
Campbell
|
presidential surge and midterm decline
|
|
|
Lublin
|
Senate similar to House, decreased importance of name recognition
|
|
|
Gerber
|
Estimating Senate elections through instrumental variables: challenger wealth, state population, lagged spending
|
|
|
Rothenberg and Sanders
|
members behave differently when there is no electoral connection; increased shirking of retiring members
|
|
|
Bianco et al.
|
evidence of electoral connection in 1800s: Compensation Act 1816
|
|
|
Carson and Engstrom
|
evidence of electoral connection in 1800s: Corrupt Bargain election of 1824 (JQA vs. Jackson) and midterms in 1826
|
