Counter Realignment

Abstract

In Counter Realignment, Howard L. Reiter and Jeffrey M. Stonecash analyze data from the early 1900s to the early 2000s to explain how the Republican Party lost the northeastern United States as a region of electoral support. Although the story of how the 'Solid South' shifted from the Democratic to the Republican parties has received extensive consideration from political scientists, far less attention has been given to the erosion of support for Republicans in the Northeast. Reiter and Stonecash examine who the Republican Party lost as it repositioned itself, resulting in the shift of power in the Northeast from heavily Republican in 1900 to heavily Democratic in the 2000s.

The New Blue: Northern In-Migration in Southern Presidential Elections

“…However, a complete partisan reversal of these sectional strongholds transpired in the late twentieth century. At one time, Republicans dominated presidential politics in the Northeast (Rae 1989; Reiter and Stonecash 2011), whereas Democrats monopolized the electoral votes in the South (Black and Black 1992). Today, the South is reliably red and the Northeast is solidly blue.…”

Polarization and the Nationalization of State Legislative Elections

“…Increased national polarization means state parties cannot readily distinguish themselves from the national party brand, and so distinctive state party coalitions are eroding in favor of a uniform national set of party coalitions (Wright, 2016). Thus, our results arguably explain a portion of the realignment in the South (e.g., Black & Black, 2002; Hood, Kidd, & Morris, 2014; Lublin, 2004) as well as realignment in the Northeast (Reiter & Stonecash, 2010) and Pacific coast (Wright, 2016).…”

Optimising code generation with haggies

“…[1]. It is therefore not surprising that recently the automation of such calculations has become a very active field of research, leading to new tools and promising techniques [2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14]. The interested reader will find a more general overview over the current status of higher order corrections in particle physics for example in [15] or in [1].…”

“…The calculation of the virtual corrections requires the computation of one-loop Feynman diagrams. The two basic strategies are a fully numerical approach, which is mainly followed in the implementation of unitarity-based methods [2,7,12], and a semi-numerical/algebraic approach which appears to be well-suited for calculations based on Feynman diagrams [3,6,8,9,11].…”

“…In the case of the data type @int/@int the two fields of the pattern correspond to numerator and denominator of the fraction. 11 The @define statement (Lines 8-11) declares all symbols which are valid in the input expression and associates them with a type. In order to denote groups of symbols with a common prefix and/or suffix one can use the ellipsis; instead of 'y0, y1: T' we could also have written 'y ... : T'.…”