It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
This dissertation estimates voting behavior by race and ethnicity in Georgia’s 2020 presidential election, one of two long-time Republican states ‘flipped’ by Democratic candidate Joe Biden. The purpose is to evaluate media claims that demographic change and minority voter mobilization clinched the victory. Developing empirical evidence elevates public discourse by challenging the public misconception that the political dividends of race/ethnic diversity flow uniquely to the Democratic party. Parties, in turn, can be more responsive to their constituencies. State-level research can guide policies on election security, redistricting, and minority rights. Two methodological approaches are implemented that have not previously been directly compared. The first is the aggregation technique of ecological inference, which is the current standard used for Voting Rights Act litigation concerning racially polarized voting. The second is the disaggregation technique of multilevel regression and poststratification, an increasingly popular approach for producing statistical estimates for sociodemographic subgroups at lower-level geographies. The findings challenge the conventional wisdom that a combination of increased race/ethnic diversity and grassroots voter mobilization activity secured Democratic candidate Joe Biden’s electoral triumph. The empirical evidence supports the hypothesis that the defection of majority White voters to the Democratic party tipped Georgia’s partisan balance. In addition, White voters with post-secondary educational attainment of a four-year degree or greater displayed the largest shift. The results align with previous research on the secular realignment of college-educated White voters with the Democratic party. Future research directions are discussed in the context of the role political demography could play in promoting high-quality information related to race/ethnic change in the electorate.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer






