The 2000 Presidential Election: Why Gore Lost
Gerald M. Pomper asserts that the presidential election of 2000 represents a paradox of democracy, distinctive in the eventual victory of the candidate with fewer popular votes and the decisive intervention of the Supreme Court. The results show sharp divisions among the electorate, both geographically and socially, as well as a unique Republican advantage in the "gender gap." The election carries important implications for the future of the presidency, the electoral college, and the stability of American democracy.
It’s Even Worse Than It Looks: How the American Constitutional System Collided with the New Politics of Extremism, Norman J. Ornstein and Thomas E. Mann Reviewed by Gerald M. Pomper
Missed Opportunity: Gore, Incumbency, and Television in Election 2000, E. D. Dover Reviewed by Gerald M. Pomper
They Only Look Dead: Why Progressives Will Dominate the Next Political Era, E. J. Dionne Reviewed by Gerald M. Pomper
Hollow Mandates: American Public Opinion and the Conservative Shift, Howard J. Gold Reviewed by Gerald M. Pompermore by this author
Join the Academy of Political Science and automatically receive Political Science Quarterly.
Revisiting the New Deal
Publishing since 1886, PSQ is the most widely read and accessible scholarly journal with distinguished contributors such as: Lisa Anderson, Robert A. Dahl, Samuel P. Huntington, Robert Jervis, Joseph S. Nye, Jr., Theda Skocpol, Woodrow Wilsonview additional issues
Articles | Book reviews
PRESIDENTIAL SELECTION AND DEMOCRACY
The Academy of Political Science, promotes objective, scholarly analyses of political, social, and economic issues. Through its conferences and publications APS provides analysis and insight into both domestic and foreign policy issues.
With neither an ideological nor a partisan bias, PSQ looks at facts and analyzes data objectively to help readers understand what is really going on in national and world affairs.