Saint Anselm College

Assistant Professor

Christopher worked at Saint Anselm College as a Assistant Professor

Saint Anselm College

Associate Professor

Christopher worked at Saint Anselm College as a Associate Professor

St. Olaf College

Visiting Instructor

Christopher worked at St. Olaf College as a Visiting Instructor

University of Minnesota

Graduate Instructor

Christopher worked at University of Minnesota as a Graduate Instructor

Project for Excellence in Journalism

Research Associate

Christopher worked at Project for Excellence in Journalism as a Research Associate

Scott Brown, the Carpetbagger: The Political Rhetoric Surrounding the U.S. Senate Race in the Granite State in 2014

In Races, Reforms, & Policy: Implications of the 2014 Midterm Elections

Scott Brown, the Carpetbagger: The Political Rhetoric Surrounding the U.S. Senate Race in the Granite State in 2014

In Races, Reforms, & Policy: Implications of the 2014 Midterm Elections

Complex political calculus would complicate a Maggie Hassan candidacy

MassPoliticsProfs

Add Maggie Hassan, New Hampshire’s junior senator, to the already-large list of Democrats doing the sorts of things people planning to run for president to. Hassan is headed to Dubuque, Iowa, to speak at a Democratic Party event on August 26. Iowa, of course, is home to the first-in-the-nation caucuses that kick off the presidential primary season, followed close behind by New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary. Others can assess Hassan’s record and chances and what constituencies she might appeal to in today’s Democratic Party. What interests me is the impact a Hassan candidacy might have on New Hampshire’s primary, and how hailing from New Hampshire might complicate a Hassan campaign for president.

Scott Brown, the Carpetbagger: The Political Rhetoric Surrounding the U.S. Senate Race in the Granite State in 2014

In Races, Reforms, & Policy: Implications of the 2014 Midterm Elections

Complex political calculus would complicate a Maggie Hassan candidacy

MassPoliticsProfs

Add Maggie Hassan, New Hampshire’s junior senator, to the already-large list of Democrats doing the sorts of things people planning to run for president to. Hassan is headed to Dubuque, Iowa, to speak at a Democratic Party event on August 26. Iowa, of course, is home to the first-in-the-nation caucuses that kick off the presidential primary season, followed close behind by New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary. Others can assess Hassan’s record and chances and what constituencies she might appeal to in today’s Democratic Party. What interests me is the impact a Hassan candidacy might have on New Hampshire’s primary, and how hailing from New Hampshire might complicate a Hassan campaign for president.

Races, Reforms, & Policy: Implications of the 2014 Midterm Elections

University of Akron Press

The midterm elections of 2014 saw the culmination of long-term trends in American politics and laid the groundwork for Republicans' successes in 2016. To what extent were the results the product of shifting partisan and demographic trends, and to what extent did policy questions drive the results? What can 2014 tell us about midterm elections generally? In this volume, leading scholars look at this election in its broad strokes, in case studies of key races, and in terms of policy questions such as immigration, health care, the environment, and election administration itself.

Scott Brown, the Carpetbagger: The Political Rhetoric Surrounding the U.S. Senate Race in the Granite State in 2014

In Races, Reforms, & Policy: Implications of the 2014 Midterm Elections

Complex political calculus would complicate a Maggie Hassan candidacy

MassPoliticsProfs

Add Maggie Hassan, New Hampshire’s junior senator, to the already-large list of Democrats doing the sorts of things people planning to run for president to. Hassan is headed to Dubuque, Iowa, to speak at a Democratic Party event on August 26. Iowa, of course, is home to the first-in-the-nation caucuses that kick off the presidential primary season, followed close behind by New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary. Others can assess Hassan’s record and chances and what constituencies she might appeal to in today’s Democratic Party. What interests me is the impact a Hassan candidacy might have on New Hampshire’s primary, and how hailing from New Hampshire might complicate a Hassan campaign for president.

Races, Reforms, & Policy: Implications of the 2014 Midterm Elections

University of Akron Press

The midterm elections of 2014 saw the culmination of long-term trends in American politics and laid the groundwork for Republicans' successes in 2016. To what extent were the results the product of shifting partisan and demographic trends, and to what extent did policy questions drive the results? What can 2014 tell us about midterm elections generally? In this volume, leading scholars look at this election in its broad strokes, in case studies of key races, and in terms of policy questions such as immigration, health care, the environment, and election administration itself.

Conventional Wisdom, Parties, and Broken Barriers in the 2016 Election

Lexington Books

The 2016 presidential election was unconventional in many ways. The election of President Donald Trump caught many by surprise, with a true outsider — a candidate with no previous governmental experience and mixed support from his own party — won the election by winning in traditionally Democratic states with coattails that extended to Republican Senate candidates and resulted in unified Republican government for the first time since 2008. This result broke with the pre-election conventional wisdom, which expected Hillary Clinton to win the presidency and a closer Senate divide. This surprising result led many political scientists to question whether 2016 truly marked a major turning point in American elections as portrayed in the media — a break from the conventional wisdom – or whether it was really the exception that proved the rule. In this volume, political scientists examine previous theories and trends in light of the 2016 election to determine the extent to which 2016 was a break from previous theories. While in some areas it seems as though 2016 was really just what would have been predicted, in others, this election and the new president pose significant challenges to mainstream theories in political science. In particular, prominent political scientists examine whether voter trends, with particular focus on groups by gender, age, geography, and ethnicity, and election issues, especially the role of the Supreme Court, followed or bucked recent trends. Several political scientists examine the unconventional nomination process and whether this signals a new era for political parties. The role of conspiracy theories and voter confidence in the administration of elections are also discussed. Finally, contributors also examine the indirect effect the presidential candidates, especially Trump, played in congressional election rhetoric.

Scott Brown, the Carpetbagger: The Political Rhetoric Surrounding the U.S. Senate Race in the Granite State in 2014

In Races, Reforms, & Policy: Implications of the 2014 Midterm Elections

Complex political calculus would complicate a Maggie Hassan candidacy

MassPoliticsProfs

Add Maggie Hassan, New Hampshire’s junior senator, to the already-large list of Democrats doing the sorts of things people planning to run for president to. Hassan is headed to Dubuque, Iowa, to speak at a Democratic Party event on August 26. Iowa, of course, is home to the first-in-the-nation caucuses that kick off the presidential primary season, followed close behind by New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary. Others can assess Hassan’s record and chances and what constituencies she might appeal to in today’s Democratic Party. What interests me is the impact a Hassan candidacy might have on New Hampshire’s primary, and how hailing from New Hampshire might complicate a Hassan campaign for president.

Races, Reforms, & Policy: Implications of the 2014 Midterm Elections

University of Akron Press

The midterm elections of 2014 saw the culmination of long-term trends in American politics and laid the groundwork for Republicans' successes in 2016. To what extent were the results the product of shifting partisan and demographic trends, and to what extent did policy questions drive the results? What can 2014 tell us about midterm elections generally? In this volume, leading scholars look at this election in its broad strokes, in case studies of key races, and in terms of policy questions such as immigration, health care, the environment, and election administration itself.

Conventional Wisdom, Parties, and Broken Barriers in the 2016 Election

Lexington Books

The 2016 presidential election was unconventional in many ways. The election of President Donald Trump caught many by surprise, with a true outsider — a candidate with no previous governmental experience and mixed support from his own party — won the election by winning in traditionally Democratic states with coattails that extended to Republican Senate candidates and resulted in unified Republican government for the first time since 2008. This result broke with the pre-election conventional wisdom, which expected Hillary Clinton to win the presidency and a closer Senate divide. This surprising result led many political scientists to question whether 2016 truly marked a major turning point in American elections as portrayed in the media — a break from the conventional wisdom – or whether it was really the exception that proved the rule. In this volume, political scientists examine previous theories and trends in light of the 2016 election to determine the extent to which 2016 was a break from previous theories. While in some areas it seems as though 2016 was really just what would have been predicted, in others, this election and the new president pose significant challenges to mainstream theories in political science. In particular, prominent political scientists examine whether voter trends, with particular focus on groups by gender, age, geography, and ethnicity, and election issues, especially the role of the Supreme Court, followed or bucked recent trends. Several political scientists examine the unconventional nomination process and whether this signals a new era for political parties. The role of conspiracy theories and voter confidence in the administration of elections are also discussed. Finally, contributors also examine the indirect effect the presidential candidates, especially Trump, played in congressional election rhetoric.

New Hampshire Senate Race: Closest in the Nation

The Roads to Congress 2016, pp 321-337, Palgrave Macmillan

The New Hampshire Senate race between Maggie Hassan (D) and incumbent Kelly Ayotte (R) was the closest in the nation; Hassan won by just over a thousand votes. This was a closely watched race in 2016, as many believed it could decide the balance of the Senate. This meant significant outside money pouring into a small state. Reasons for Hassan’s victory include the increasingly Democratic lean of the New Hampshire electorate when it comes to federal offices, strong support for the Democratic candidate from women, young people, and minorities, Hassan’s high levels of popularity and name recognition, as well as the influence of the presidential campaign.

Scott Brown, the Carpetbagger: The Political Rhetoric Surrounding the U.S. Senate Race in the Granite State in 2014

In Races, Reforms, & Policy: Implications of the 2014 Midterm Elections

Complex political calculus would complicate a Maggie Hassan candidacy

MassPoliticsProfs

Add Maggie Hassan, New Hampshire’s junior senator, to the already-large list of Democrats doing the sorts of things people planning to run for president to. Hassan is headed to Dubuque, Iowa, to speak at a Democratic Party event on August 26. Iowa, of course, is home to the first-in-the-nation caucuses that kick off the presidential primary season, followed close behind by New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary. Others can assess Hassan’s record and chances and what constituencies she might appeal to in today’s Democratic Party. What interests me is the impact a Hassan candidacy might have on New Hampshire’s primary, and how hailing from New Hampshire might complicate a Hassan campaign for president.

Races, Reforms, & Policy: Implications of the 2014 Midterm Elections

University of Akron Press

The midterm elections of 2014 saw the culmination of long-term trends in American politics and laid the groundwork for Republicans' successes in 2016. To what extent were the results the product of shifting partisan and demographic trends, and to what extent did policy questions drive the results? What can 2014 tell us about midterm elections generally? In this volume, leading scholars look at this election in its broad strokes, in case studies of key races, and in terms of policy questions such as immigration, health care, the environment, and election administration itself.

Conventional Wisdom, Parties, and Broken Barriers in the 2016 Election

Lexington Books

The 2016 presidential election was unconventional in many ways. The election of President Donald Trump caught many by surprise, with a true outsider — a candidate with no previous governmental experience and mixed support from his own party — won the election by winning in traditionally Democratic states with coattails that extended to Republican Senate candidates and resulted in unified Republican government for the first time since 2008. This result broke with the pre-election conventional wisdom, which expected Hillary Clinton to win the presidency and a closer Senate divide. This surprising result led many political scientists to question whether 2016 truly marked a major turning point in American elections as portrayed in the media — a break from the conventional wisdom – or whether it was really the exception that proved the rule. In this volume, political scientists examine previous theories and trends in light of the 2016 election to determine the extent to which 2016 was a break from previous theories. While in some areas it seems as though 2016 was really just what would have been predicted, in others, this election and the new president pose significant challenges to mainstream theories in political science. In particular, prominent political scientists examine whether voter trends, with particular focus on groups by gender, age, geography, and ethnicity, and election issues, especially the role of the Supreme Court, followed or bucked recent trends. Several political scientists examine the unconventional nomination process and whether this signals a new era for political parties. The role of conspiracy theories and voter confidence in the administration of elections are also discussed. Finally, contributors also examine the indirect effect the presidential candidates, especially Trump, played in congressional election rhetoric.

New Hampshire Senate Race: Closest in the Nation

The Roads to Congress 2016, pp 321-337, Palgrave Macmillan

The New Hampshire Senate race between Maggie Hassan (D) and incumbent Kelly Ayotte (R) was the closest in the nation; Hassan won by just over a thousand votes. This was a closely watched race in 2016, as many believed it could decide the balance of the Senate. This meant significant outside money pouring into a small state. Reasons for Hassan’s victory include the increasingly Democratic lean of the New Hampshire electorate when it comes to federal offices, strong support for the Democratic candidate from women, young people, and minorities, Hassan’s high levels of popularity and name recognition, as well as the influence of the presidential campaign.

The Party Stands Aside: Elite Party Actor Endorsements during Presidential Primary and Caucus Voting, 2004- 2016

New England Journal of Political Science

Party elites influence the outcomes of presidential nomination contests through endorsements, financial support, encouragements to run, and other means. We compare the patterns of elite endorsements of presidential candidates in the Democratic races in 2004, 2008, and 2016, and the Republican contests in 2008, 2012, and 2016, with an eye toward the manner in which a set of elite party actors—governors and members of Congress—made their public endorsements of candidates. The results suggest that many elite actors in twenty-first century nomination contests, particularly in Republican contests, are more likely than not to choose to wait for the first caucuses and primaries to take place before choosing a candidate to support. This decision, while consistent with ideals of democratic participation, also reduces elite influence over nomination outcomes. Before voting begins, party actors can support a candidate for any number of reasons: Ideology, specific issue positions, experience, personal characteristics, as well as electability. Once voting has begun, however, the preferences of rank-and-file party members limit party actors' ability to slow down an undesirable candidate who wins early primaries and caucuses, and raises the importance of strong showings in the earliest primaries and caucuses.

Scott Brown, the Carpetbagger: The Political Rhetoric Surrounding the U.S. Senate Race in the Granite State in 2014

In Races, Reforms, & Policy: Implications of the 2014 Midterm Elections

Complex political calculus would complicate a Maggie Hassan candidacy

MassPoliticsProfs

Add Maggie Hassan, New Hampshire’s junior senator, to the already-large list of Democrats doing the sorts of things people planning to run for president to. Hassan is headed to Dubuque, Iowa, to speak at a Democratic Party event on August 26. Iowa, of course, is home to the first-in-the-nation caucuses that kick off the presidential primary season, followed close behind by New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary. Others can assess Hassan’s record and chances and what constituencies she might appeal to in today’s Democratic Party. What interests me is the impact a Hassan candidacy might have on New Hampshire’s primary, and how hailing from New Hampshire might complicate a Hassan campaign for president.

Races, Reforms, & Policy: Implications of the 2014 Midterm Elections

University of Akron Press

The midterm elections of 2014 saw the culmination of long-term trends in American politics and laid the groundwork for Republicans' successes in 2016. To what extent were the results the product of shifting partisan and demographic trends, and to what extent did policy questions drive the results? What can 2014 tell us about midterm elections generally? In this volume, leading scholars look at this election in its broad strokes, in case studies of key races, and in terms of policy questions such as immigration, health care, the environment, and election administration itself.

Conventional Wisdom, Parties, and Broken Barriers in the 2016 Election

Lexington Books

The 2016 presidential election was unconventional in many ways. The election of President Donald Trump caught many by surprise, with a true outsider — a candidate with no previous governmental experience and mixed support from his own party — won the election by winning in traditionally Democratic states with coattails that extended to Republican Senate candidates and resulted in unified Republican government for the first time since 2008. This result broke with the pre-election conventional wisdom, which expected Hillary Clinton to win the presidency and a closer Senate divide. This surprising result led many political scientists to question whether 2016 truly marked a major turning point in American elections as portrayed in the media — a break from the conventional wisdom – or whether it was really the exception that proved the rule. In this volume, political scientists examine previous theories and trends in light of the 2016 election to determine the extent to which 2016 was a break from previous theories. While in some areas it seems as though 2016 was really just what would have been predicted, in others, this election and the new president pose significant challenges to mainstream theories in political science. In particular, prominent political scientists examine whether voter trends, with particular focus on groups by gender, age, geography, and ethnicity, and election issues, especially the role of the Supreme Court, followed or bucked recent trends. Several political scientists examine the unconventional nomination process and whether this signals a new era for political parties. The role of conspiracy theories and voter confidence in the administration of elections are also discussed. Finally, contributors also examine the indirect effect the presidential candidates, especially Trump, played in congressional election rhetoric.

New Hampshire Senate Race: Closest in the Nation

The Roads to Congress 2016, pp 321-337, Palgrave Macmillan

The New Hampshire Senate race between Maggie Hassan (D) and incumbent Kelly Ayotte (R) was the closest in the nation; Hassan won by just over a thousand votes. This was a closely watched race in 2016, as many believed it could decide the balance of the Senate. This meant significant outside money pouring into a small state. Reasons for Hassan’s victory include the increasingly Democratic lean of the New Hampshire electorate when it comes to federal offices, strong support for the Democratic candidate from women, young people, and minorities, Hassan’s high levels of popularity and name recognition, as well as the influence of the presidential campaign.

The Party Stands Aside: Elite Party Actor Endorsements during Presidential Primary and Caucus Voting, 2004- 2016

New England Journal of Political Science

Party elites influence the outcomes of presidential nomination contests through endorsements, financial support, encouragements to run, and other means. We compare the patterns of elite endorsements of presidential candidates in the Democratic races in 2004, 2008, and 2016, and the Republican contests in 2008, 2012, and 2016, with an eye toward the manner in which a set of elite party actors—governors and members of Congress—made their public endorsements of candidates. The results suggest that many elite actors in twenty-first century nomination contests, particularly in Republican contests, are more likely than not to choose to wait for the first caucuses and primaries to take place before choosing a candidate to support. This decision, while consistent with ideals of democratic participation, also reduces elite influence over nomination outcomes. Before voting begins, party actors can support a candidate for any number of reasons: Ideology, specific issue positions, experience, personal characteristics, as well as electability. Once voting has begun, however, the preferences of rank-and-file party members limit party actors' ability to slow down an undesirable candidate who wins early primaries and caucuses, and raises the importance of strong showings in the earliest primaries and caucuses.

Stranger in a Strange State: The Politics of Carpetbagging from Robert Kennedy to Scott Brown

State University of New York Press

Candidates normally run for office in the places where they live. Occasionally, however, a politician will run as a carpetbagger—someone who moves to a new state for the express purpose of running, or who runs in one state after holding office in another. Stranger in a Strange State examines what makes some politicians take this drastic step and how that shapes their campaigns and chances for victory. Focusing on races for the US Senate from 1964 forward, Christopher J. Galdieri analyzes the campaigns of nine carpetbaggers, including nationally known figures such as Robert F. Kennedy and Hillary Rodham Clinton and less well-known candidates like Elizabeth Cheney and Scott Brown. These case studies draw on archival research, contemporaneous accounts of each campaign, and scholarship on campaigns and representation. While the record reveals that it generally takes national political stature for a carpetbagger to win an election, some recent campaigns suggest that in today’s polarized political era, both politicians and state political parties might want to be more open to the prospect of carpetbagging. “Galdieri’s book brings both life and systematic analysis to his case studies. It also takes on the concept of political ambition, seriously engaging the role of political parties in shaping and mitigating ambition. Highly recommended for anyone interested in American parties and elections.” — Julia R. Azari, coeditor of The Presidential Leadership Dilemma: Between the Constitution and a Political Party “This will be the go-to book any time prominent politicians strike out for new territory.” — Ross K. Baker, author of Is Bipartisanship Dead? A Report from the Senate

Scott Brown, the Carpetbagger: The Political Rhetoric Surrounding the U.S. Senate Race in the Granite State in 2014

In Races, Reforms, & Policy: Implications of the 2014 Midterm Elections

Complex political calculus would complicate a Maggie Hassan candidacy

MassPoliticsProfs

Add Maggie Hassan, New Hampshire’s junior senator, to the already-large list of Democrats doing the sorts of things people planning to run for president to. Hassan is headed to Dubuque, Iowa, to speak at a Democratic Party event on August 26. Iowa, of course, is home to the first-in-the-nation caucuses that kick off the presidential primary season, followed close behind by New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary. Others can assess Hassan’s record and chances and what constituencies she might appeal to in today’s Democratic Party. What interests me is the impact a Hassan candidacy might have on New Hampshire’s primary, and how hailing from New Hampshire might complicate a Hassan campaign for president.

Races, Reforms, & Policy: Implications of the 2014 Midterm Elections

University of Akron Press

The midterm elections of 2014 saw the culmination of long-term trends in American politics and laid the groundwork for Republicans' successes in 2016. To what extent were the results the product of shifting partisan and demographic trends, and to what extent did policy questions drive the results? What can 2014 tell us about midterm elections generally? In this volume, leading scholars look at this election in its broad strokes, in case studies of key races, and in terms of policy questions such as immigration, health care, the environment, and election administration itself.

Conventional Wisdom, Parties, and Broken Barriers in the 2016 Election

Lexington Books

The 2016 presidential election was unconventional in many ways. The election of President Donald Trump caught many by surprise, with a true outsider — a candidate with no previous governmental experience and mixed support from his own party — won the election by winning in traditionally Democratic states with coattails that extended to Republican Senate candidates and resulted in unified Republican government for the first time since 2008. This result broke with the pre-election conventional wisdom, which expected Hillary Clinton to win the presidency and a closer Senate divide. This surprising result led many political scientists to question whether 2016 truly marked a major turning point in American elections as portrayed in the media — a break from the conventional wisdom – or whether it was really the exception that proved the rule. In this volume, political scientists examine previous theories and trends in light of the 2016 election to determine the extent to which 2016 was a break from previous theories. While in some areas it seems as though 2016 was really just what would have been predicted, in others, this election and the new president pose significant challenges to mainstream theories in political science. In particular, prominent political scientists examine whether voter trends, with particular focus on groups by gender, age, geography, and ethnicity, and election issues, especially the role of the Supreme Court, followed or bucked recent trends. Several political scientists examine the unconventional nomination process and whether this signals a new era for political parties. The role of conspiracy theories and voter confidence in the administration of elections are also discussed. Finally, contributors also examine the indirect effect the presidential candidates, especially Trump, played in congressional election rhetoric.

New Hampshire Senate Race: Closest in the Nation

The Roads to Congress 2016, pp 321-337, Palgrave Macmillan

The New Hampshire Senate race between Maggie Hassan (D) and incumbent Kelly Ayotte (R) was the closest in the nation; Hassan won by just over a thousand votes. This was a closely watched race in 2016, as many believed it could decide the balance of the Senate. This meant significant outside money pouring into a small state. Reasons for Hassan’s victory include the increasingly Democratic lean of the New Hampshire electorate when it comes to federal offices, strong support for the Democratic candidate from women, young people, and minorities, Hassan’s high levels of popularity and name recognition, as well as the influence of the presidential campaign.

The Party Stands Aside: Elite Party Actor Endorsements during Presidential Primary and Caucus Voting, 2004- 2016

New England Journal of Political Science

Party elites influence the outcomes of presidential nomination contests through endorsements, financial support, encouragements to run, and other means. We compare the patterns of elite endorsements of presidential candidates in the Democratic races in 2004, 2008, and 2016, and the Republican contests in 2008, 2012, and 2016, with an eye toward the manner in which a set of elite party actors—governors and members of Congress—made their public endorsements of candidates. The results suggest that many elite actors in twenty-first century nomination contests, particularly in Republican contests, are more likely than not to choose to wait for the first caucuses and primaries to take place before choosing a candidate to support. This decision, while consistent with ideals of democratic participation, also reduces elite influence over nomination outcomes. Before voting begins, party actors can support a candidate for any number of reasons: Ideology, specific issue positions, experience, personal characteristics, as well as electability. Once voting has begun, however, the preferences of rank-and-file party members limit party actors' ability to slow down an undesirable candidate who wins early primaries and caucuses, and raises the importance of strong showings in the earliest primaries and caucuses.

Stranger in a Strange State: The Politics of Carpetbagging from Robert Kennedy to Scott Brown

State University of New York Press

Candidates normally run for office in the places where they live. Occasionally, however, a politician will run as a carpetbagger—someone who moves to a new state for the express purpose of running, or who runs in one state after holding office in another. Stranger in a Strange State examines what makes some politicians take this drastic step and how that shapes their campaigns and chances for victory. Focusing on races for the US Senate from 1964 forward, Christopher J. Galdieri analyzes the campaigns of nine carpetbaggers, including nationally known figures such as Robert F. Kennedy and Hillary Rodham Clinton and less well-known candidates like Elizabeth Cheney and Scott Brown. These case studies draw on archival research, contemporaneous accounts of each campaign, and scholarship on campaigns and representation. While the record reveals that it generally takes national political stature for a carpetbagger to win an election, some recent campaigns suggest that in today’s polarized political era, both politicians and state political parties might want to be more open to the prospect of carpetbagging. “Galdieri’s book brings both life and systematic analysis to his case studies. It also takes on the concept of political ambition, seriously engaging the role of political parties in shaping and mitigating ambition. Highly recommended for anyone interested in American parties and elections.” — Julia R. Azari, coeditor of The Presidential Leadership Dilemma: Between the Constitution and a Political Party “This will be the go-to book any time prominent politicians strike out for new territory.” — Ross K. Baker, author of Is Bipartisanship Dead? A Report from the Senate

50 Takes on Trump: New Hampshire

Utica College Center of Public Affairs and Election Research

Donald Trump has a complicated relationship with New Hampshire. His victory in the primary here last year revived his campaign after his loss to Ted Cruz in Iowa, and Trump made visit after visit to the state during the general election campaign. But he never made peace with the Republican establishment in the state, and his candidacy probably cost incumbent Kelly Ayotte a second term in the Senate. On Election Day, New Hampshire went for Hillary Clinton by just under 3,000 votes. How is Trump doing four months into his term?

Scott Brown, the Carpetbagger: The Political Rhetoric Surrounding the U.S. Senate Race in the Granite State in 2014

In Races, Reforms, & Policy: Implications of the 2014 Midterm Elections

Complex political calculus would complicate a Maggie Hassan candidacy

MassPoliticsProfs

Add Maggie Hassan, New Hampshire’s junior senator, to the already-large list of Democrats doing the sorts of things people planning to run for president to. Hassan is headed to Dubuque, Iowa, to speak at a Democratic Party event on August 26. Iowa, of course, is home to the first-in-the-nation caucuses that kick off the presidential primary season, followed close behind by New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary. Others can assess Hassan’s record and chances and what constituencies she might appeal to in today’s Democratic Party. What interests me is the impact a Hassan candidacy might have on New Hampshire’s primary, and how hailing from New Hampshire might complicate a Hassan campaign for president.

Races, Reforms, & Policy: Implications of the 2014 Midterm Elections

University of Akron Press

The midterm elections of 2014 saw the culmination of long-term trends in American politics and laid the groundwork for Republicans' successes in 2016. To what extent were the results the product of shifting partisan and demographic trends, and to what extent did policy questions drive the results? What can 2014 tell us about midterm elections generally? In this volume, leading scholars look at this election in its broad strokes, in case studies of key races, and in terms of policy questions such as immigration, health care, the environment, and election administration itself.

Conventional Wisdom, Parties, and Broken Barriers in the 2016 Election

Lexington Books

The 2016 presidential election was unconventional in many ways. The election of President Donald Trump caught many by surprise, with a true outsider — a candidate with no previous governmental experience and mixed support from his own party — won the election by winning in traditionally Democratic states with coattails that extended to Republican Senate candidates and resulted in unified Republican government for the first time since 2008. This result broke with the pre-election conventional wisdom, which expected Hillary Clinton to win the presidency and a closer Senate divide. This surprising result led many political scientists to question whether 2016 truly marked a major turning point in American elections as portrayed in the media — a break from the conventional wisdom – or whether it was really the exception that proved the rule. In this volume, political scientists examine previous theories and trends in light of the 2016 election to determine the extent to which 2016 was a break from previous theories. While in some areas it seems as though 2016 was really just what would have been predicted, in others, this election and the new president pose significant challenges to mainstream theories in political science. In particular, prominent political scientists examine whether voter trends, with particular focus on groups by gender, age, geography, and ethnicity, and election issues, especially the role of the Supreme Court, followed or bucked recent trends. Several political scientists examine the unconventional nomination process and whether this signals a new era for political parties. The role of conspiracy theories and voter confidence in the administration of elections are also discussed. Finally, contributors also examine the indirect effect the presidential candidates, especially Trump, played in congressional election rhetoric.

New Hampshire Senate Race: Closest in the Nation

The Roads to Congress 2016, pp 321-337, Palgrave Macmillan

The New Hampshire Senate race between Maggie Hassan (D) and incumbent Kelly Ayotte (R) was the closest in the nation; Hassan won by just over a thousand votes. This was a closely watched race in 2016, as many believed it could decide the balance of the Senate. This meant significant outside money pouring into a small state. Reasons for Hassan’s victory include the increasingly Democratic lean of the New Hampshire electorate when it comes to federal offices, strong support for the Democratic candidate from women, young people, and minorities, Hassan’s high levels of popularity and name recognition, as well as the influence of the presidential campaign.

The Party Stands Aside: Elite Party Actor Endorsements during Presidential Primary and Caucus Voting, 2004- 2016

New England Journal of Political Science

Party elites influence the outcomes of presidential nomination contests through endorsements, financial support, encouragements to run, and other means. We compare the patterns of elite endorsements of presidential candidates in the Democratic races in 2004, 2008, and 2016, and the Republican contests in 2008, 2012, and 2016, with an eye toward the manner in which a set of elite party actors—governors and members of Congress—made their public endorsements of candidates. The results suggest that many elite actors in twenty-first century nomination contests, particularly in Republican contests, are more likely than not to choose to wait for the first caucuses and primaries to take place before choosing a candidate to support. This decision, while consistent with ideals of democratic participation, also reduces elite influence over nomination outcomes. Before voting begins, party actors can support a candidate for any number of reasons: Ideology, specific issue positions, experience, personal characteristics, as well as electability. Once voting has begun, however, the preferences of rank-and-file party members limit party actors' ability to slow down an undesirable candidate who wins early primaries and caucuses, and raises the importance of strong showings in the earliest primaries and caucuses.

Stranger in a Strange State: The Politics of Carpetbagging from Robert Kennedy to Scott Brown

State University of New York Press

Candidates normally run for office in the places where they live. Occasionally, however, a politician will run as a carpetbagger—someone who moves to a new state for the express purpose of running, or who runs in one state after holding office in another. Stranger in a Strange State examines what makes some politicians take this drastic step and how that shapes their campaigns and chances for victory. Focusing on races for the US Senate from 1964 forward, Christopher J. Galdieri analyzes the campaigns of nine carpetbaggers, including nationally known figures such as Robert F. Kennedy and Hillary Rodham Clinton and less well-known candidates like Elizabeth Cheney and Scott Brown. These case studies draw on archival research, contemporaneous accounts of each campaign, and scholarship on campaigns and representation. While the record reveals that it generally takes national political stature for a carpetbagger to win an election, some recent campaigns suggest that in today’s polarized political era, both politicians and state political parties might want to be more open to the prospect of carpetbagging. “Galdieri’s book brings both life and systematic analysis to his case studies. It also takes on the concept of political ambition, seriously engaging the role of political parties in shaping and mitigating ambition. Highly recommended for anyone interested in American parties and elections.” — Julia R. Azari, coeditor of The Presidential Leadership Dilemma: Between the Constitution and a Political Party “This will be the go-to book any time prominent politicians strike out for new territory.” — Ross K. Baker, author of Is Bipartisanship Dead? A Report from the Senate

50 Takes on Trump: New Hampshire

Utica College Center of Public Affairs and Election Research

Donald Trump has a complicated relationship with New Hampshire. His victory in the primary here last year revived his campaign after his loss to Ted Cruz in Iowa, and Trump made visit after visit to the state during the general election campaign. But he never made peace with the Republican establishment in the state, and his candidacy probably cost incumbent Kelly Ayotte a second term in the Senate. On Election Day, New Hampshire went for Hillary Clinton by just under 3,000 votes. How is Trump doing four months into his term?

Political Communication & Strategy: Consequences of the 2014 Midterm Elections

University of Akron Press

Some aspects of the 2014 midterm elections would have been unimaginable a decade earlier. SuperPACs spent unlimited amounts of money, candidates used Twitter and other social media to communicate with voters, and Democrats found themselves all but entirely cast out of federal office in the South. Other aspects of the midterm elections, such as primary elections, direct mail, and the hurdles faced by members of marginalized communities in making their concerns known, were more familiar. How did candidates and parties navigate these new and old realities of the campaign landscape? Top scholars examine the communications strategies of 2014 and their implications for future elections in this volume. The authors demonstrate that party branding, the social construction of group interests, and candidate rhetoric can have an important impact in midterm elections.

Scott Brown, the Carpetbagger: The Political Rhetoric Surrounding the U.S. Senate Race in the Granite State in 2014

In Races, Reforms, & Policy: Implications of the 2014 Midterm Elections

Complex political calculus would complicate a Maggie Hassan candidacy

MassPoliticsProfs

Add Maggie Hassan, New Hampshire’s junior senator, to the already-large list of Democrats doing the sorts of things people planning to run for president to. Hassan is headed to Dubuque, Iowa, to speak at a Democratic Party event on August 26. Iowa, of course, is home to the first-in-the-nation caucuses that kick off the presidential primary season, followed close behind by New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation primary. Others can assess Hassan’s record and chances and what constituencies she might appeal to in today’s Democratic Party. What interests me is the impact a Hassan candidacy might have on New Hampshire’s primary, and how hailing from New Hampshire might complicate a Hassan campaign for president.

Races, Reforms, & Policy: Implications of the 2014 Midterm Elections

University of Akron Press

The midterm elections of 2014 saw the culmination of long-term trends in American politics and laid the groundwork for Republicans' successes in 2016. To what extent were the results the product of shifting partisan and demographic trends, and to what extent did policy questions drive the results? What can 2014 tell us about midterm elections generally? In this volume, leading scholars look at this election in its broad strokes, in case studies of key races, and in terms of policy questions such as immigration, health care, the environment, and election administration itself.

Conventional Wisdom, Parties, and Broken Barriers in the 2016 Election

Lexington Books

The 2016 presidential election was unconventional in many ways. The election of President Donald Trump caught many by surprise, with a true outsider — a candidate with no previous governmental experience and mixed support from his own party — won the election by winning in traditionally Democratic states with coattails that extended to Republican Senate candidates and resulted in unified Republican government for the first time since 2008. This result broke with the pre-election conventional wisdom, which expected Hillary Clinton to win the presidency and a closer Senate divide. This surprising result led many political scientists to question whether 2016 truly marked a major turning point in American elections as portrayed in the media — a break from the conventional wisdom – or whether it was really the exception that proved the rule. In this volume, political scientists examine previous theories and trends in light of the 2016 election to determine the extent to which 2016 was a break from previous theories. While in some areas it seems as though 2016 was really just what would have been predicted, in others, this election and the new president pose significant challenges to mainstream theories in political science. In particular, prominent political scientists examine whether voter trends, with particular focus on groups by gender, age, geography, and ethnicity, and election issues, especially the role of the Supreme Court, followed or bucked recent trends. Several political scientists examine the unconventional nomination process and whether this signals a new era for political parties. The role of conspiracy theories and voter confidence in the administration of elections are also discussed. Finally, contributors also examine the indirect effect the presidential candidates, especially Trump, played in congressional election rhetoric.

New Hampshire Senate Race: Closest in the Nation

The Roads to Congress 2016, pp 321-337, Palgrave Macmillan

The New Hampshire Senate race between Maggie Hassan (D) and incumbent Kelly Ayotte (R) was the closest in the nation; Hassan won by just over a thousand votes. This was a closely watched race in 2016, as many believed it could decide the balance of the Senate. This meant significant outside money pouring into a small state. Reasons for Hassan’s victory include the increasingly Democratic lean of the New Hampshire electorate when it comes to federal offices, strong support for the Democratic candidate from women, young people, and minorities, Hassan’s high levels of popularity and name recognition, as well as the influence of the presidential campaign.

The Party Stands Aside: Elite Party Actor Endorsements during Presidential Primary and Caucus Voting, 2004- 2016

New England Journal of Political Science

Party elites influence the outcomes of presidential nomination contests through endorsements, financial support, encouragements to run, and other means. We compare the patterns of elite endorsements of presidential candidates in the Democratic races in 2004, 2008, and 2016, and the Republican contests in 2008, 2012, and 2016, with an eye toward the manner in which a set of elite party actors—governors and members of Congress—made their public endorsements of candidates. The results suggest that many elite actors in twenty-first century nomination contests, particularly in Republican contests, are more likely than not to choose to wait for the first caucuses and primaries to take place before choosing a candidate to support. This decision, while consistent with ideals of democratic participation, also reduces elite influence over nomination outcomes. Before voting begins, party actors can support a candidate for any number of reasons: Ideology, specific issue positions, experience, personal characteristics, as well as electability. Once voting has begun, however, the preferences of rank-and-file party members limit party actors' ability to slow down an undesirable candidate who wins early primaries and caucuses, and raises the importance of strong showings in the earliest primaries and caucuses.

Stranger in a Strange State: The Politics of Carpetbagging from Robert Kennedy to Scott Brown

State University of New York Press

Candidates normally run for office in the places where they live. Occasionally, however, a politician will run as a carpetbagger—someone who moves to a new state for the express purpose of running, or who runs in one state after holding office in another. Stranger in a Strange State examines what makes some politicians take this drastic step and how that shapes their campaigns and chances for victory. Focusing on races for the US Senate from 1964 forward, Christopher J. Galdieri analyzes the campaigns of nine carpetbaggers, including nationally known figures such as Robert F. Kennedy and Hillary Rodham Clinton and less well-known candidates like Elizabeth Cheney and Scott Brown. These case studies draw on archival research, contemporaneous accounts of each campaign, and scholarship on campaigns and representation. While the record reveals that it generally takes national political stature for a carpetbagger to win an election, some recent campaigns suggest that in today’s polarized political era, both politicians and state political parties might want to be more open to the prospect of carpetbagging. “Galdieri’s book brings both life and systematic analysis to his case studies. It also takes on the concept of political ambition, seriously engaging the role of political parties in shaping and mitigating ambition. Highly recommended for anyone interested in American parties and elections.” — Julia R. Azari, coeditor of The Presidential Leadership Dilemma: Between the Constitution and a Political Party “This will be the go-to book any time prominent politicians strike out for new territory.” — Ross K. Baker, author of Is Bipartisanship Dead? A Report from the Senate

50 Takes on Trump: New Hampshire

Utica College Center of Public Affairs and Election Research

Donald Trump has a complicated relationship with New Hampshire. His victory in the primary here last year revived his campaign after his loss to Ted Cruz in Iowa, and Trump made visit after visit to the state during the general election campaign. But he never made peace with the Republican establishment in the state, and his candidacy probably cost incumbent Kelly Ayotte a second term in the Senate. On Election Day, New Hampshire went for Hillary Clinton by just under 3,000 votes. How is Trump doing four months into his term?

Political Communication & Strategy: Consequences of the 2014 Midterm Elections

University of Akron Press

Some aspects of the 2014 midterm elections would have been unimaginable a decade earlier. SuperPACs spent unlimited amounts of money, candidates used Twitter and other social media to communicate with voters, and Democrats found themselves all but entirely cast out of federal office in the South. Other aspects of the midterm elections, such as primary elections, direct mail, and the hurdles faced by members of marginalized communities in making their concerns known, were more familiar. How did candidates and parties navigate these new and old realities of the campaign landscape? Top scholars examine the communications strategies of 2014 and their implications for future elections in this volume. The authors demonstrate that party branding, the social construction of group interests, and candidate rhetoric can have an important impact in midterm elections.

The Role of Twitter in the 2016 US Election

Palgrave Macmillan

This book assembles six chapters by respected and emerging scholars in political science and communication to produce a first sustained look at Twitter's role in the 2016 US Presidential Election. While much attention has already been paid to Trump's use of Twitter as a phenomenon—how it helps drive news cycles, distracts attention from other matters, or levies attacks against rivals, the news media, and other critics—there has been little scholarly analysis of the impact Twitter played in the actual election. These chapters apply an impressive diversity of theoretical explanations and methodological approaches to explore how this new technology shaped an American election, and what impact it could have in the future.