Search results

Search tips
Showing 1 – 23 of 23 results.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Afrobarometer Round 4.5: The Quality of Democracy and Governance in Zimbabwe, 2010 (ICPSR 36213)

Released/updated on: 2016-03-04
Geographic coverage: Africa, Zimbabwe, Global, Sub-Saharan Africa
Time period: 2010-01-01--2010-12-31
The Afrobarometer is a comparative series of public attitude surveys that collects and disseminates data regarding Africans' views on democracy, governance, the economy, civil society, and related issues. The data are collected from a nationally representative sample in face-to-face interviews in the language of the respondent's choice. Standard topics for the Afrobarometer include attitudes toward and evaluations of democracy, governance and economic conditions, political participation, national identity, and social capital. In addition, the Round 4.5 survey includes special modules on taxation; gender issues; crime, conflict and insecurity; globalization; social service delivery; and health. The surveys also collect a large set of socio-demographic indicators such as age, gender, education level, poverty level, language and ethnicity, and religious affiliation, as well as political party affiliation. This particular data collection was concerned with the attitudes and opinions of the citizens of Zimbabwe, and also includes "country-specific questions" designed specifically for the Zimbabwe survey. These topics included informal militia, the national election and reintroducing the local currency.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs

2000 Florida Ballots Project (ICPSR 36207)

Released/updated on: 2015-10-22
Geographic coverage: United States, Florida
Time period: 2000-01-01--2000-12-31

In the United States presidential election of November 2000, approximately 180,000 ballots in Florida's 67 counties were uncertified because they failed to register a "valid" vote for president. These ballots included those in which no vote was recorded (undervotes) and those in which people voted for more than one candidate (overvotes). The 2000 Florida Ballots Project examined the undervotes and overvotes. The goal of the project was not to declare a "winner," but rather to carefully examine the ballots to assess the relative reliability of the three major types of ballot systems used in Florida. The results of this assessment may help state legislatures, other decision-makers, and developers of ballot systems to work toward more reliable ballot systems in the future.

This collection contains seven separate data sets. The first data set is the "Raw Data File" which contains one record for each ballot examined. In addition to ballot information, each record includes county name, FIPS code, ballot system and other identifying information. The unique identifier for each record is recorded in the variable BALNUM, and can be used to link the data sets. The second data set is the "Aligned Data File." This data set matches the Raw Data File with the exception of the variables associated with the candidates. All chad-level data (including chads that represent a particular candidate) are presented in the raw file. In the aligned data file, only those data that apply to candidate chads are included - data from three coding systems are contained in the same variable for each candidate. The third data set is the "Recode Data File." At random intervals, after coding a group of ballots, the coders were instructed to recode the same ballots as a check on intra-coder reliability (or consistency within a coder). These second codings are contained in the recode data file. The difference between variables in the recode data and file and the aligned data file is variables with the suffix C1, C2, or C3 in the aligned data has R1, R2, and R3, respectively, in the recode data. The fourth data file is the "Comment Data File." The comments data file is a ballot-level file containing all comments made by coders during the coding of ballots. The data file contains one record for each ballot for which at least one of the three coders recorded a comment; 5,407 ballots had at least one coder comment and are contained in this file. The fifth data file is the "Coder Demographic Data File." The Coder Demographic data file contains the results of a questionnaire given to each coder employed by NORC for the Florida Ballots Project. This file contains one record for each coder and includes information such as the sex, marital status, age, income level, ethnicity, and political affiliation of each coder. The ID field contains the identification number of the coder which can be used as a link to the raw and aligned data files. The sixth and seventh data sets are the "Orange County Raw Data File" and "Orange County Aligned Data File." These two data sets are identical to the structures of the raw and aligned data files, respectively. Each file has 417 records. These data files are being made available because the 966 undervotes and 1,383 overvotes reported by Orange County on election day (that ultimately informed the tally of certified totals) could not be segregated by county officials responsible for producing the ballots for NORC review. The NORC coders were initially shown only 640 undervotes and 1,197 overvotes. At the time of initial coding, more than 400 of the ballots rejected by machines on election day simply could not be distinguished from ballots that were accepted and certified on election day.

Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Eurobarometer 79.5: One year to go to the 2014 European Elections - European Parliament and Institutions, European Identity, and Globalization Challenges, June 2013 (ICPSR 36243)

Released/updated on: 2015-10-21
Geographic coverage: Cyprus, Portugal, Global, Malta, Greece, Netherlands, Sweden, Great Britain, Austria, Latvia, Luxembourg, Ireland, Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia, France, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Croatia, Romania, Hungary, Europe, Northern Ireland, Spain, Czech Republic, Belgium, Finland, Denmark, Italy, Germany, Estonia
Time period: 2013-06-07--2013-06-23

The Eurobarometer series is a unique cross-national and cross-temporal survey program conducted on behalf of the European Commission. These surveys regularly monitor public opinion in the European Union (EU) member countries and consist of standard modules and special topic modules. The standard modules address attitudes towards European unification, institutions and policies, measurements for general socio-political orientations, as well as respondent and household demographics. The special topic modules address such topics as agriculture, education, natural environment and resources, public health, public safety and crime, and science and technology.

This round of Eurobarometer surveys is a European Parliament Eurobarometer, or "Parlemeter", and covers the following special topics: (1) Information on and role of the European Parliament (EP), (2) Knowledge about European institutions and the EP, (3) Present and Future of the EP - values and policies, (4) European Identity, and (5) Globalization challenges. Respondents were asked about their opinions, awareness, and understanding of European institutions, most notably the European Commission and European Parliament, as well as about upcoming election and the election process for the European Commission and European Parliament. Additionally, respondents were asked about policies, procedures, and functions of European institutions, elements of European identity and citizenship, benefits and negative effects imposed by globalization, speculations on the growth of various country's economies and their economic power in the world, and about the European economy and European Union budget.

Demographic and other background information collected includes age, gender, nationality, marital status and parental relations, occupation, age when full-time education ended, household composition, ownership of a fixed or a mobile telephone and other durable goods, difficulties in paying bills, level in society, and Internet use. In addition, country-specific data includes type and size of locality, region of residence, and language of interview (select countries).

Curated
Simple Crosstabs

Open Budget Survey, 2006-2012 (ICPSR 34932)

Released/updated on: 2014-03-31
Geographic coverage: Middle East, United States, Asia, Europe, North Africa, Caribbean, North America, Global, Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America
Time period: 2006-01-01--2006-12-31, 2008-01-01--2008-12-31, 2010-01-01--2010-12-31, 2012-01-01--2012-12-31
The Open Budget Survey evaluated whether central governments in countries around the world provided the public with access to budget information and opportunities to participate in the budget process. Beginning in 2006, the Open Budget Survey is conducted biennially in partnership with independent civil society researchers within each country. To measure the overall commitment of the countries surveyed to transparency and to allow for comparisons among countries, the International Budget Partnership created the Open Budget Index from the Open Budget Survey which assigned a score to each country based on the information it made available to the public throughout the budget process.
Curated

Institutional Influences on Turnout in Mixed Member Electoral Systems 1990-2010 (ICPSR 34972)

Released/updated on: 2014-02-20
Geographic coverage: Global
Time period: 1990-01-01--2010-12-31
What institutional factors influence turnout among mixed member electoral systems? This dataset includes institutional factors within mixed systems as well as co-existing electoral structures for mixed legislative elections from 1990-2010 labeled "Free" or "Partially Free" by Freedom House. In addition, this dataset includes two separate measures of turnout: registered and voting age population.
Curated

The Politicization of State Judicial Elections: The Effects of New-Style Campaigns on State Court Legitimacy in Kentucky, 2006 (ICPSR 31041)

Released/updated on: 2011-08-17
Geographic coverage: United States, Kentucky
Time period: 2006-01-01--2006-12-31
This study had three major subject areas covered by the data collection. These subjects included general political questions about the respondent's views on issues such as freedom, the respondent's personal voting habits, and political campaign advertisements respectively. Respondents were asked about the frequency of their political discussions with friends, dealing with opinions that are extremely different from their own, the value of freedom including free speech, the government's role in creating and implementing laws, and majority wants vs. minority rights. The respondent's personal voting habits section included questions pertaining to feelings asked Kentucky residents how they felt about the Kentucky legislature, Supreme Court, Christian fundamentalists, anti-abortion activists, and pro-abortion activists. These questions also asked about the Kentucky court system in general, the press in Kentucky, insurance companies and other large businesses. Additional questions asked about the three branches of government, specifically, if respondents knew how each branch worked and its role in checks and balances on the American government. Kentucky citizens were asked about lifetime appointment for judges, serving a specific number of years dictated by terms, and whether Kentucky judges had a lifetime appointment or were subject to terms. Citizens were further queried about their elected judges in terms of how they vote for their judges, and whether or not controversial issues and left-right self-placement plays a role in their decisions. Another topic was the importance and relevance of the Constitution and whose interpretation should matter (the people vs. judges). Political campaign advertisement questions asked about advertisements in terms of their fairness. Specifically, questions asked about advertisement effectiveness in terms of whether the advertisement made the respondent more or less likely to vote for a certain candidate. Demographic and other background information includes age, gender, ethnicity, highest grade or year of school completed, political affiliation, religious affiliation and participation, and television viewership.
Curated

Party Variation in Religiosity and Women's Leadership: A Cross-National Perspective, 2008-2010 (ICPSR 30742)

Released/updated on: 2011-08-12
Geographic coverage: Afghanistan, Egypt, Global, Middle East, Netherlands, Austria, Morocco, Bosnia-Hercegovina, Algeria, Jordan, Tunisia, Bahrain, Palestine, Albania, Lebanon, Djibouti, Bangladesh, Turkey, Mauritania, Belgium, Senegal, Comoros, Italy, Israel, Germany, Indonesia, Yemen
Time period: 2008-01-01--2010-12-31
This study was compiled with the goal of looking beyond the national domestic level into individual party-level explanations for women's political leadership. The study consists of two parts which analyze the party level for women's ascendancy to political leadership. Part 1 focuses on an aggregate of 25 non-randomly selected countries, Part 2 focuses on Lebanon. The study records the level of religiosity of political parties, where it refers to religious components in the party's political platforms or the extent to which religion penetrates a party's political agendas. Both datasets examine party variation in religiosity, party structure, respondents' station within a parties' decision-making inner structures, and other party-level characteristics that may impact women's leadership in various political parties. Additional variables include identifiers for Muslim, Arab, and European states, level of secularism, election design, party design, and age of party.
Curated

Prime Ministerial Power in 22 Countries, 1980-2000 (ICPSR 24341)

Released/updated on: 2010-07-08
Geographic coverage: Japan, United Kingdom, Portugal, Iceland, Global, Spain, Malta, New Zealand, Greece, Canada, Netherlands, Sweden, Austria, Belgium, Norway, Luxembourg, Ireland, Finland, Denmark, Italy, Israel, Australia, Germany
Time period: 1980-01-01--2000-12-31
This study offers a measure of prime ministerial power to set government policy in 22 countries with established parliamentary democracies. The collection comprises variables relating to the power of prime ministers including an index of prime ministerial power, which consists of a quantitative score of the power of individually named prime ministers in their different terms based on an expert survey conducted in 2001-2003. The expert survey included questions in regard to the prime minister's degree of freedom in selecting cabinet ministers, moving or removing the cabinet ministers, and calling an election when desired. In addition, respondents were queried about the prime minister's ability to influence the cabinet agenda and the policy output of the current government, and the degree of government control over the parliament agenda. Additional variables in the data examined the political and institutional resources available to the prime ministers, of which the following topics were explored: the composition of the cabinet and prime minister's party, rate of government survival, strength of prime minister's party in the parliament, impact of the opposition party on policy, score of leadership influence, policy diversity in government, and government's ideological complexion.
Curated

Comparative Study of Electoral Systems, 2001-2006 (ICPSR 3808)

Released/updated on: 2008-07-01
Geographic coverage: Hong Kong, United States, Portugal, Iceland, Global, Russia, Netherlands, South Korea, Sweden, Great Britain, Ireland, Brazil, Poland, Slovenia, France, Chile, Bulgaria, Kyrgyzstan, Romania, Hungary, Japan, Philippines, Switzerland, Spain, Albania, New Zealand, Canada, Czech Republic, Belgium, Norway, Taiwan, Finland, Denmark, Italy, Mexico, Israel, Australia, Peru, Germany
Time period: 2001-01-01--2006-12-31
This study is the full release of 2001-2006 data from Module 2 of the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems. The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems is an ongoing collaborative program of crossnational research among national election studies designed to advance the understanding of electoral behavior across polities. The project, which is being carried out in over 50 consolidated and emerging democracies, was coordinated by social scientists from around the world who cooperated to specify the research agenda, the study design, and the micro- and macro-level data that native teams of researchers collected within each polity. This collection currently comprises data from surveys conducted in the countries of Albania, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Great Britain, Hong Kong, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovenia, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, and the United States. Module 2 focuses on electoral institutions and political behavior, particularly on the fundamental principles of democratic governance: representation and accountability. It aims to examine how well different electoral institutions function as mechanisms by which citizens' views are represented in the policymaking process, and by which citizens hold their elected representatives accountable. This is accomplished by explicitly linking individual attitudes and behaviors to the political context across a variety of settings. The module added a new set of items on citizen engagement and cognition across demographic polities, and expanded the analyses of the first module to examine how voters' choices are affected by the institutional context within which those choices are made. The survey results have been compiled and supplemented with district-level information that provides insight into the respondent's political context, and macro-level data that detail the respondent's political system as a whole. At each level of data collection, the measurements used have been standardized to promote comparison. Demographic variables include age, sex, race, ethnicity, education level, marital status, employment status, occupation, household union membership, language, socioeconomic status, political party affiliation, political orientation, religious preference, frequency of religious attendance, household income, number of children and other members of the household, and type of residential area (e.g., urban or rural).
Curated

Comparative Study of Community Power Research, 1920-1964 (ICPSR 26)

Released/updated on: 2008-03-25
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1920-01-01--1964-12-31
This study contains data relevant to 166 community power studies conducted from 1920 to 1964. The goal of the data collection was to afford comparative analyses of these selected communities by any interested future researchers. Information is provided on the theoretical and methodological apparatus of the research, such as the major data collection techniques and the model of power utilized in the investigation. Additional information is given for the primary purpose of the research, the number of communities and the mode of entry into the communities studied, the number and scope of issues studied, the level of theoretical rigor, and the replicability of the study. Other variables provide information on the community power structure, formal structure, and characteristics of politics in the communities, such as the type of local government, electoral systems established, forms of formal and informal structures of power, political party dominating local politics, community conflict resolution, sources of innovation, and the place of experts, elite groups, masses, voters, and minorities in the community. There are also variables that provide information on the type of community and city, city rating, growth of the city, type of relationship between population growth and industrial growth, and population growth rate and population size of the city per square mile. Variables on the economic base of the community include the median income for the city in 1950 and in 1960, and the proportion of the population earning under $2,000 and under $3,000 in 1950, and over $10,000 in 1960. Demographic variables on the city's residents cover the education of the population in relation to the United States median, the median age from 1950 to 1960, the proportion of the population under 5 years, over 21 years, and under 65 years of age, and the proportion of the population that was non-white in any census year, of mixed parentage in 1960 in (where one parent was of foreign birth), and foreign-born between 1910 and 1960. Data are also provided on the researchers' sex, educational institutions attended, motivation for the research, and their publications based on the research findings.
Curated

Mexican Election Panel Study, 2000 (ICPSR 3380)

Released/updated on: 2008-01-28
Geographic coverage: Mexico, Global
Time period: 2000-02-01--2000-07-31
This survey assessed campaign influences on public opinion and voting behavior in Mexico's July 2, 2000, presidential election. The study consists of five separate surveys conducted over the course of the campaign and following the election, using a hybrid panel/ cross-sectional design. The Pre- and Post-Election Panel Data (Part 1) includes data collected from a national cross-section of 2,400 adults. All respondents were interviewed following the official start of the campaign, February 19-27, and following the election, July 7-16, while subsets of them were also interviewed April 28-May 7 and/or June 2-18. The Post-Electoral Cross-Section Data (Part 2) includes only data collected from a new and separate cross-section of 1,199 respondents, gathered to supplement the panel sample. Additional information regarding the design of the study may be found within the codebook. Respondents were queried on a wide range of issues relating to voting behavior, including exposure to media, political knowledge and engagement, opinions about salient political issues including privatization, employment, crime, the death penalty, and government services, attitudes toward the main political parties and candidates, impressions of the electoral process, voting intentions, faith in the electoral process, credibility of the media, exposure to the campaign, and opinions of current president Ernesto Zedillo and presidential candidates Cuauhtemoc Cardenas (Alliance for Mexico), Vicente Fox (Alliance for Change), and Francisco Labastida (PRI). Respondents queried following the election were asked for whom they voted and why, and whether they felt the election was clean. In addition, they were asked to assess their interest level in politics, their involvement and familiarity with the campaign media and activities, how frequently they discuss the issues, and the ability of the candidates to address important social issues. Background information on respondents includes age, gender, political party affiliation, voting history, religion, education, marital status, children, employment status, labor union membership, languages spoken, travel to the United States, socio-economic status, and household income.
External data

Lijphart Elections Archive (LEA) (ICPSR 118)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-31
Geographic coverage: Central America, Asia, Africa, North America, Latin America
Housed at the University of California, San Diego, the Lijphart Elections Archive (LEA) is a research collection of district-level election results for approximately 350 national legislative elections in dozens of countries, including Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Belize, Bolivia, Bosnia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, the United Kingdom, the United States, Uruguay, and Venezuela. The LEA Web site contains a catalog of holdings of both print and online data as well as access to data when it can be freely disseminated. The LEA attempts to collect election results down to the level of the individual election districts in which votes are converted into seats. The original scope of the Archive was to collect national election results in hard copy format for the lower or only house of the legislature and for any directly elected upper house in the 27 older democracies (i.e., the West European democracies, plus the United States, Canada, Costa Rica, India, Israel, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand) from 1945 on. The scope is now being expanded in several directions: more countries, a longer time span, sub-national as well as national elections, and, in particular, data in machine-readable format. The LEA Web site also contains Web links to many of the countries' constitutions and detailed descriptions of their electoral systems.
External data

Federal Election Commission (FEC) Web Site (ICPSR 115)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-15
Geographic coverage: United States
The Federal Election Commission (FEC) Web site provides access to data and information on campaign financing for presidential and congressional elections (1992-present), data on the financial activities of political parties and political action committees, as well as information about regulations governing campaign financing. In addition, this Web site also includes resources on voter registration and voter turnout (1960-present) and extensive information on the United States electoral process.
Curated

Southern Primary and General Election Data, 1920-1949 (ICPSR 71)

Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: North Carolina, Mississippi, United States, Texas, Tennessee, Louisiana, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Virginia, Arkansas, South Carolina
Time period: 1920-01-01--1949-12-31
These data were originally collected as part of a study of the electoral process in the South conducted by the Bureau of Public Administration at the University of Alabama. The collection contains county-level electoral returns for selected general and primary elections in 11 southern states (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Virginia) for the period 1920-1949. Data are provided for raw vote totals and selected percentages for candidates in gubernatorial, senatorial, and, occasionally, presidential elections. Information on these primary election returns was provided mostly for Democratic nominations, but some variables also provide information for a few Republican primaries. Additional information is provided for returns for selected referenda and poll tax payments.
Curated

Comparative Study of Electoral Systems, 1996-2001 (ICPSR 2683)

Released/updated on: 2004-03-10
Geographic coverage: Hong Kong, United States, Thailand, Portugal, Iceland, Global, Russia, Netherlands, South Korea, Sweden, Great Britain, Poland, Slovenia, Chile, Lithuania, Romania, Hungary, Japan, Ukraine, Belarus, Switzerland, Spain, New Zealand, Canada, Czech Republic, Belgium, Norway, Taiwan, Denmark, Mexico, Israel, Australia, Peru, Germany
Time period: 1996-01-01--2001-12-31
This study is the first module of an ongoing collaborative program of crossnational research among national election studies designed to advance the understanding of electoral behavior across polities. The data project, carried out in over 50 consolidated and emerging democracies, was coordinated by social scientists from around the world who cooperated to specify the research agenda, the study design, and the micro- and macro-level data that native teams of researchers collected within each polity. This collection currently comprises data from surveys conducted during 1996-2001 in Australia, Belarus, Belgium, Canada, Chile, Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Great Britain, Hong Kong, Hungary, Iceland, Israel, Japan, Korea, Lithuania, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Ukraine, and the United States. The format includes a common questionnaire module and background (demographic) characteristics of respondents, coded to agreed-upon standards. These data have been merged into a single crossnational dataset with a companion supplementary weighted data file. Measures included in the study focus on three main issues. The first topic explored is the impact of electoral institutions, with questions about parliamentary versus presidential systems of government (levels of accountability, responsiveness), the electoral rules on casting/counting of votes (issues of fairness, impact of voting), and political parties (identification, ideological distinction). The second major issue covered is the nature of political and social cleavages and alignments explored by questions such as left-right issue orientation of respondents vs. political parties. Lastly, the collection covers the evaluation of democratic institutions and processes through measures such as efficacy in political parties, elected officials, and respondents' satisfaction with democracy. Additionally, data were collected on voter turnout, voter choice, and respondents' age, sex, education, employment, and income.
Curated

ABC News Post-Election Poll #1, November 2000 (ICPSR 3116)

Released/updated on: 2001-05-09
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2000-11-01--2000-11-30
This special topic poll, fielded November 12, 2000, is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. This data collection focused on the presidential election that took place on November 7, 2000. Respondents were asked about the extent of their personal interest in and concern about the situation in the country five days after the election. Questions examined opinions on the way various groups were handling the election, including Vice President Al Gore's and Texas governor George W. Bush's campaigns, local officials in Florida, and the news media. Respondents were also asked whom they wanted to see become the next president. Opinions were elicited on the need for a new presidential election in Palm Beach County, Florida, in the entire state of Florida, in other states where election results were very close, and across the entire country. Additional topics covered whether George W. Bush and Al Gore should accept the recount in Florida or should ask courts to look into whether the voting was unfair and if they should ask for a recount in other states where the results were very close. Those polled expressed their views about electing the president by direct popular vote versus by the Electoral College, their confidence about the accuracy of Florida's recount, and whether the ballot that was used in Palm Beach County was fair. The survey also investigated what impact the unclear post-election situation would have, especially on the country's system of presidential elections. Background information on respondents includes age, gender, education, race, party affiliation, political orientation, and voter registration.
Curated

ABC News Post-Election Poll #2, November 2000 (ICPSR 3117)

Released/updated on: 2001-05-09
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2000-11-01--2000-11-30
This special topic poll, fielded November 16, 2000, is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. This data collection focused on the presidential election that took place on November 7, 2000. The poll queried respondents about the situation in the country nine days after the election. Respondents were asked for their opinions on how Vice President Al Gore, Texas governor George W. Bush, and Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris were handling the election situation, as well as whom they wanted to see become the next president. A major topic of the survey was the hand counting of ballots. Questions elicited respondents' views on whether the hand counts should be included in the Florida final vote total, how accurate hand and machine vote recounts were, and the extent to which the result with and without the hand recounts was acceptable to them. Respondents expressed their views about whether Al Gore should concede the election to George W. Bush in the event that Secretary of State Harris declared Bush the winner without including the hand recount, or if Gore should appeal to the courts. The survey also gathered respondents' opinions regarding whether they wanted to end the unclear situation quickly or give both campaigns a chance to make their full case in court, and how confident they were in the accuracy of Florida's recount. Background information on respondents includes age, gender, education, race, income range, party affiliation, political orientation, and voter registration.
Curated

ABC News Post-Election Poll #3, November 2000 (ICPSR 3118)

Released/updated on: 2001-05-09
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2000-11-01--2000-11-30
This election poll, fielded November 26, 2000, is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. This data collection focused on the presidential election that took place on November 7, 2000. The poll queried respondents about the situation in the country 19 days after the election. Respondents were asked about the extent of their personal interest in the post-election situation in the country, whom they wanted to see become the next president, the legitimacy of this election, and their confidence about the accuracy of Florida's recount. They also expressed their views about whether, after the Secretary of State in Florida had declared George W. Bush the winner, Al Gore should concede or if he should ask the courts to review the vote. Questions elicited respondents' opinions about whether the United States Supreme Court and the Florida state legislature should be involved in determining the winner of the election in Florida and whether ballots with dimpled or indented chads should be counted as votes. Respondents answered additional questions on whether the Secretary of State in Florida did the right thing in denying Palm Beach County officials' request to extend the deadline for a hand recount, and whether respondents wanted to end the unclear situation quickly or give both campaigns a chance to make their full case in court. Background information on respondents includes age, gender, education, race, party affiliation, political orientation, and voter registration.
Curated

JudgeIT: A Program for Evaluating Electoral Systems and Redistricting Plans (ICPSR 1047)

Released/updated on: 1996-01-03
Geographic coverage: United States
These data and/or computer programs are part of ICPSR's Publication-Related Archive and are distributed exactly as they arrived from the data depositor. ICPSR has not checked or processed this material. Users should consult the INVESTIGATOR(S) if further information is desired.
Curated

Unified Method of Evaluating Electoral Systems and Redistricting Plans: United States House of Representatives and Ohio State Legislature (ICPSR 1054)

Released/updated on: 1996-01-03
Geographic coverage: United States, Ohio
These data and/or computer programs are part of ICPSR's Publication-Related Archive and are distributed exactly as they arrived from the data depositor. ICPSR has not checked or processed this material. Users should consult the INVESTIGATOR(S) if further information is desired.
Curated

Black Africa Handbook (ICPSR 5019)

Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: Benin, Burundi, Cameroon, Guinea, Sudan, Chad, Somalia, Sierra Leone, Ivory Coast, Global, Gabon, Malawi, Mali, Gambia, Nigeria, Lesotho, Togo, Niger, Africa, Tanzania, Rwanda, Zambia, Ghana, Kenya, Liberia, Burkina Faso, Mauritania, Senegal, Democratic Republic of Congo, Botswana, Uganda, Central African Republic, Ethiopia
This study contains data on the political, social, economic, religious, ecological, and demographic characteristics of 32 Black African nations in the late 1950s and 1960s. Data are provided on political regime characteristics, such as the existence and nature of political parties, elections, the nature of the judicial system, the extent of government influence, and the occurrence of riots, civil violence, terrorist activities, civil wars, irredentist movements, and coup d'etats. Economic variables provide information on government revenues, government expenditures, gross domestic capital formation, public investment as a percentage of the gross domestic product (GDP), gross national product (GNP), defense budgets, energy, investment, labor, number of wage earners as a percentage of active population, industrial production, electricity production, per capita energy consumption, educational expenditures, economic welfare, consumer price index, international economic aid, total international trade, imports and exports, agriculture, and membership in major African multilateral economic organizations. Also included is information on the military and security systems, Africanization of the army officer corps, international relations, membership in nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), communication and transportation, and social welfare. Other variables provide information on population estimates and characteristics, population density, settlement patterns, cultural pluralism, language, religion, primary and secondary school enrollment, family organization, patrilineal kin groups, class stratification, and the number of physicians per population.
Curated

Dimensionality of Nations Project: Nation Attribute Data, 1950-1965 (ICPSR 5020)

Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: Benin, Cambodia, Sudan, East Timor, Paraguay, Portugal, Syria, North Korea, Greece, Morocco, Iran, Mali, Panama, Guatemala, Iraq, Chile, Laos, Nepal, Argentina, Tanzania, Zambia, Ghana, India, Canada, Turkey, Belgium, Taiwan, Finland, Trinidad and Tobago, Central African Republic, Jamaica, Peru, Turkmenistan, Germany, Yemen, Vietnam (Socialist Republic), Easter Island, United States, Guinea, China (Peoples Republic), Chad, Somalia, Madagascar, Ivory Coast, Thailand, Libya, Costa Rica, Sweden, Poland, Jordan, Nigeria, Bulgaria, Tunisia, Uruguay, Sri Lanka, United Kingdom, Switzerland, Spain, Lebanon, Brunei, Liberia, Cuba, Venezuela, Czech Republic, Mauritania, Israel, Australia, Soviet Union, Tajikistan, Myanmar, Cameroon, Malaysia, Global, Gabon, South Korea, Austria, Yugoslavia, El Salvador, Brazil, Algeria, Ecuador, Colombia, Hungary, Japan, Albania, New Zealand, Senegal, Italy, Honduras, Ethiopia, Haiti, Afghanistan, Burundi, Egypt, Sierra Leone, Bolivia, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Netherlands, Pakistan, Ireland, Slovakia, France, Romania, Togo, Niger, Philippines, Rwanda, Uzbekistan, Nicaragua, Norway, Democratic Republic of Congo, Denmark, Dominican Republic, British Virgin Islands, Mexico, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Indonesia
Time period: 1950-01-01--1965-12-31
This study contains data on the political, economic, religious, ecological, and demographic characteristics of 113 nations in the years 1950, 1955, 1960, 1963, and 1965. Originally collected by the Dimensionality of Nations (DON) Project at the University of Hawaii, these data provide information on political regime characteristics, such as the number of political parties, electoral system, political leadership, the nature of the political system, horizontal power distribution, communist party membership, the legitimacy of present government, the legality of government change, freedom of opposition, major government crises, bureaucracy, and the occurrence of assassinations, riots, general strikes, protests, domestic violence, demonstrations, threats and accusations, and purges. Economic variables focus on gross national product (GNP), aid received from the United States and Russia, national income, government expenditures, government balance of payment, investments, imports and exports, energy production and consumption, agricultural production, and the economically active population. Demographic variables include age, education, literacy, religion, ethnicity, marital status, immigrants, and migrants. Other variables provide information on the nations' bloc memberships, United Nations' assessment of the nations, air distance of the nations from the United States, number of nongovernmental organizations, number of the nations' diplomats expelled or recalled, age of the nations, and the nations' geography.
Curated

State Party Organizations, 1960-1980: [United States] (ICPSR 8281)

Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1960-01-01--1980-12-31
This two-part data collection examines the complex role of party organizational strength in electoral politics. Major areas of inquiry were the conceptualization, measurement, and identification of the determinants and consequences of party organizational strength at state and county levels. Responses were gathered from mailed questionnaires and personal interviews with various state party officials. Part 1 contains data collected from former Republican and Democratic state party chairs (1960-1978) in the 27 sample states of the data collection. In addition, questionnaires were sent to current state party chairs (1978-1980) in nonsample states. Topics covered include: the factors and motives leading the respondent to seek and accept the chairmanship, budgetary data for typical election and non-election years, an assessment of the state party organization's relationship with county party organizations, and the frequency of the state party's dealings with the National Committee on party matters such as fund-raising, gaining assistance for state candidates, and federal appointments and patronage. Part 2 contains results from personal interviews with both the current state party chairs (1978-1980) and the executive director for each party in the 27 sample states. As in Part 1, respondents were questioned on a variety of issues such as their party's relationship with the National Committee, an assessment of the most important aspects of their job as chairman, and the state party's role in recruiting and screening candidates for state and national positions. Additionally, the executive director for each party was asked a series of questions concerning the operation and strength of the party. Items in the series included a description of the party headquarters, services provided by the party such as public relations or issue research, and sources of funding.
Back to top