No abstract

Does a state of emergency necessarily contract human behavior? In times of security crises, for instance, citizens overcome their divides. Our analysis explores the relationship between county‐level partisanship in the United States during COVID‐19 and mobility. We provide an original theoretical analysis to distinguish pandemic politics from politics in times of emergency as we had known them. Our framework helps reconcile previous contradictory findings about this type of emergency politics. Such a frame is needed as it has been a century since the last major global pandemic and COVID‐19 may not be the last. There are five reasons to distinguish COVID‐19 from previously familiar types of emergency politics: psychological, national sentiments, policy related, elite related, and time related. Our extensive mobility big data (462,115 county*days from March–August 2020) are uniquely informative about pandemic politics. In times of pandemic, people literally vote with their feet on government actions. The data are highly representative of the U.S. population. At the pandemic outbreak, our exploratory innovative analysis suggests political divides are exacerbated. Later, with mixed messages about the plague from party leadership, such exceedingly partisan patterns dissipate. They make way to less politically infused and more educationally, demographically, and economically driven behavior.

In the American system of government, courts are designed to operate within the legal sphere, with limited political interference. Is it possible, though, that a behavior that is at the heart of the political process can be influenced directly by a judicial decision? Focusing on voter registration big data for the universe of voters in North Carolina around the time of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the authors assess the roles of gender, political party affiliation, and age in voter registration. North Carolina is the only state whose voter registry has the necessary granularity over time and information needed. Women and Democrats were more likely to register to vote after information about the ruling was released, suggesting that Dobbs influenced their behavior. This effect on voter registration gender gap was unique to June 2022, unlike previous midterm election years (2014 and 2018). Interrupted time-series analyses lend further support to these findings.

No abstract

No abstract