The electoral consequences of alienation: Nonvoting and protest voting in the 1992 presidential race |
| |
| Affiliation: | 1. Department of Tourism, Sport and Hotel Management, Griffith University, Australia;2. School of Mathematical Sciences, Queensland University of Technology, 2 George Street, Brisbane, QLD 4000, Australia;3. Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Memphis, United States;1. School of Economics, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China;2. Department of Economics, Carleton University, Ottawa, Canada;3. Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada;1. Griffith Institute for Tourism - GIFT, Griffith University, Nathan Campus , Brisbane QLD 4111, Australia;2. Griffith Institute for Tourism (GIFT) & Urban Research Program (URP), Griffith University, Nathan Campus, Brisbane QLD 4111, Australia |
| |
| Abstract: | This article focuses on the context of the 1992 national elections in order to determine why certain alienated individuals chose to stay home on election day while others responded by voting for a third party Presidential candidate. Two dimensions of alienation, internal and external political inefficacy, are linked to lower levels of voting, as is consistent with previous research on voting behavior. In addition, we find that, among those who voted, those individuals who expressed political cynicism or external inefficacy were more likely to vote for Ross Perot. We conclude that, while many alienated individuals do not vote, the Perot candidacy in 1992 led certain alienated individuals to engage in “protest” voting by casting their vote for an unlikely winner in the presidential race. |
| |
| Keywords: | |
| 本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录！ |
|
