Democrats may be hurt by anti-war divisions in 2008

July 13, 2007

Cooperation between diverse antiwar groups helped the Democratic Party in the 2006 congressional elections. However, the changing relationship between the Democratic Party and the antiwar activists could hurt the Democrats in the upcoming 2008 presidential election, according to research published in the current issue of American Politics Research from SAGE.

The study's authors, Michael T. Heaney (University of Florida) and Fabio Rojas (Indiana University), found that the antiwar movement is divided in its support for the Democratic Party. Roughly 40% of grassroots antiwar activists support the Democrats, 20% support a third party (such as the Green Party), 39% are independents and 2% support the Republicans.

The research revealed that the Democrats in the movement are more likely to work with organizations like MoveOn.org, the Progressive Democrats of America, and Code Pink: Women for Peace, while non-Democratic activists are more likely to work with organizations like United for Peace and Justice and International ANSWER (Act now to Stop War and End Racism).

When antiwar activists work closely with the Democratic Party, an informal political network of activists and organizations is created and those activists are more likely to engage in political activities that help the Democrats. The elected officials respond by helping sympathetic activists in the antiwar movement, however, that balance is unstable and could hurt the Democrats as much or more than it helps them, especially since the activists are increasingly concerned by continued Democratic support of war funding.

"Leading antiwar groups are planning to hold large protests at the 2008 Democratic National Convention in Denver, much like they did at the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York," Heaney reports. "The Democrats could find their party divided in 2008 much as it was in 1968, with many of its natural supporters camped outside the convention hall, definitely complicating the Democrats' electoral prospects."
-end-
The article, "Partisans, Nonpartisans, and the Antiwar Movement in the United States," published by SAGE in the July issue of American Politics Research, is available at no charge for a limited time at http://apr.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/35/4/431. Professor Michael T. Heaney is available to comment on the study and can be reached at (202)-236-3369 or at mtheaney@ufl.edu.

About American Politics Research

For over 30 years, American Politics Research has served as an integral forum for the dissemination of the latest theory, research and analyses in American political science. American Politics Research presents original works by distinguished authors from a wide range of fields concerned with American politics. Articles examine and explore topics in every area of government, from local and state to regional and national. http://apr.sagepub.com

About SAGE

SAGE Publications is a leading international publisher of journals, books, and electronic media for academic, educational, and professional markets. Since 1965, SAGE has helped inform and educate a global community of scholars, practitioners, researchers, and students spanning a wide range of subject areas including business, humanities, social sciences, and science, technology and medicine. A privately owned corporation, SAGE has principal offices in Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, and Singapore. www.sagepublications.com

SAGE

Related Presidential Election Articles from Brightsurf:

After election: making the endangered species act more effective
Following the presidential election, a leading group of scientists are making the case that a 'rule reversal' will not be sufficient to allow the Endangered Species Act to do its job.

Experts see substantial danger to democratic stability around 2020 election
The latest Bright Line Watch survey finds substantial risks to the legitimacy of the election, including potential problems in the casting and counting of votes, the Electoral College, and in the resolution of electoral disputes.

Disease-transmission model forecasts election outcomes
To simulate how interactions between voters may play a role in the upcoming presidential, gubernatorial and senatorial elections, a Northwestern University research team is adapting a model that is commonly used to study infectious diseases.

Voters unlikely to blame politicians for their handling of the pandemic at next election
Politicians are unlikely to be punished or rewarded for their failures or successes in managing the coronavirus pandemic at the next election, suggests an analysis of survey data from the US, the UK and India, published in the online journal BMJ Global Health.

Foreign election interference: A global response
The increasing threat of foreign interference in elections has driven six nations to take similar approaches to combat this pervasive threat.

Before the US general election, evidence of agreement -- and division -- on climate issues
A new survey finds that while partisan divides persist on certain issues, the majority of Americans want action on climate change and believe unchecked warming will be a serious problem.

2016 US presidential election associated with uptick in heart attacks and stroke
The hospitalization rate for acute cardiovascular disease (CVD) events in a large southern California health system was 1.62 times higher in the two days immediately after the 2016 presidential election when compared with the same two days in the week prior to the 2016 election.

Muslim young adult mental health before, after presidential election
How the 2016 US presidential election was associated with changes in the mental health of Muslim college students was assessed in this study.

'Game changer' for reporters: 2016 US presidential election coverage
The 2016 US presidential election is considered a 'game changer' for journalists covering the US presidential elections by causing them to dramatically reconsider how they view their role -- either as neutral disseminators of information or impassioned advocates for the truth -- according to researchers at the University of Missouri's School of Journalism.

Trump's election didn't cause a large increase in depression among US Democrats
''Broadly speaking, our data suggest that America did not get more depressed because of Trump, at least in the first year after his election,'' says Prof.

Read More: Presidential Election News and Presidential Election Current Events
Brightsurf.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.