Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorChristenson, Dino P.en_US
dc.contributor.authorStern, Andrew John Sigurden_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-10-26T18:50:02Z
dc.date.available2020-10-26T18:50:02Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2144/41543
dc.description.abstractIn this paper, I discuss the area of issue-ownership as it applies to the 2016 presidential primaries. The central discussion of the paper features a tradeoff between viability and issues in primary contests. Viability, which is presented through The Party Decides: Presidential Nominations Before and After Reform by Marty Cohen et al. as party elites deciding who should be the nominee, and issues that are salient to primary voters, and thus candidates, which I present as the more likely reason for how nominees are selected. Using a combination of national polls and analysis of candidates’ Twitter feeds, I hope to compare data on who primary and caucus voters support and which issues are important to them. The hypothesis is simple: if candidates stake claims on issues that voters care about and frequently remind voters of that via Twitter, they will receive a bump in the polls.en_US
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.rightsAttribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internationalen_US
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/
dc.subjectPolitical scienceen_US
dc.subjectIssue ownershipen_US
dc.subjectPresidential primariesen_US
dc.subjectVoting behavioren_US
dc.titleIssue ownership in presidential primaries: a 2016 case studyen_US
dc.typeThesis/Dissertationen_US
dc.date.updated2020-10-19T01:01:50Z
etd.degree.nameM.A.en_US
etd.degree.levelmastersen_US
etd.degree.disciplinePolitical Scienceen_US
etd.degree.grantorBoston Universityen_US
dc.identifier.orcid0000-0003-4990-5524


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International