Trump: Causes and Consequences

Bernhard, Michaël; O’Neill, Daniel

doi:10.1017/s1537592719000896

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, there is one respect in which the political climate in the United States has been distinctive. While the leaders of other established western democracies may have flirted with undemocratic behaviour in recent years, none so consistently acted in word and deed to undermine democracy as the 45th president of the United States (Bernhard & O'Neill, 2019; Kaufman & Haggard, 2019; Mickey et al., 2017; Levitsky & Ziblatt, 2018; Lieberman et al., 2019; Norris, 2017). If partisans take cues from party elites, this could also explain why partisanship would trump respect for democratic norms in the United States.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If the pursuit of an ideological agenda encourages partisans to overlook a candidate's support for executive aggrandizement, our second hypothesis should apply in both countries.The two countries diverge, however, when it comes to the behaviour of partisan elites. In the United States, former president Trump repeatedly demonstrated his willingness to violate democratic norms, not just in his tweets and media messages but in his actions as well(Bernhard & O'Neill, 2019;Kaufman & Haggard, 2019;Mickey et al, 2017;Levitsky & Ziblatt, 2018;Lieberman et al, 2019;Norris, 2017). While the Liberal government's record is certainly not unblemished, 2 Prime Minister Trudeau has clearly not proved as willing as Trump to undermine or ignore constraints on his power.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The partisan nature of support for democratic backsliding: A comparative perspective

Gidengil

Stolle

Bergeron-Boutin

2021

European J Political Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article asks whether the willingness of partisans to condone democratic backsliding is a uniquely American phenomenon and explores why partisans would tolerate a party leader subverting democratic norms. We focus on executive aggrandizement as a key mechanism through which democratic backsliding occurs and develop three potential explanations for why partisans would accept the weakening of checks on the power of the executive. First, in a context of affective polarization, partisans may condone executive aggrandizement in order to advantage their party and disadvantage the opponent. Second, partisans may be willing to trade off democratic norms in pursuit of their ideological agenda. Third, partisans may take cues from the behaviour of party elites. These explanations are tested using a candidate-choice conjoint experiment administered to Americans and Canadians in 2019 that involved respondents choosing between hypothetical candidates in intra-party contests. Regardless of party, partisans in both countries proved willing to choose candidates who would loosen legislative and judicial restraints on the executive. While the partisan advantage explanation only held for strong Republicans in the United States, partisans in Canada and the United States alike were apparently willing to weaken restraints on the executive for the sake of their ideological agendas, at least in the case of abortion. Finally, Republicans who approved of the Trump presidency were much less likely than other Republicans to punish undemocratic candidates, lending support to the cue-taking explanation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The partisan nature of support for democratic backsliding: A comparative perspective

Gidengil

Stolle

Bergeron-Boutin

2021

European J Political Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Trump pushed controversial social policies thanks to the Republicans controlling Congress, and the Supreme Court with a conservative majority. According to Bernhard and O’Neill (2019:321), right-wing politicians opted to turn a blind eye to Trump’s attacks and abuses against the independence of the rule of law.…”

Section: Crime Victimization and Presidential Rhetoricmentioning

confidence: 99%

Crime Victimization, Trust and Performance Evaluation of Donald Trump: Exploring Gender and Race Determinants

Solar

2023

Int. ann. criminol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two of Donald Trump administration’s most salient legacies are the high level of crime victimization and low popularity ratings among groups likely to be targeted by crime, such as females and race and ethnic minorities. To explore crime victimization and public opinion towards the president, the article tests whether gender and race determinants among crime victims were associated with trust in the president and job performance approval. Results indicated that females and female victims of crime were less likely to reward presidential performance and trust Trump. Blacks and Latinos were less likely to trust Trump and less likely to reward his job performance; however, there was no effect when moderating by whether they reported being victims of crime. Victims of crime in unsafe neighbourhoods were less likely to trust and reward presidential performance. More surprisingly, being a crime victim was a significant and positive predictor of trusting Trump and rewarding his job performance. The results tell us about the need to continue studying the public’s wishes for the authorities to respond to the problem of victimization, oftentimes rewarding populist approaches to punitive justice, incarceration and overall tougher criminal policies.

show abstract

“…His inflammatory rhetoric, which blended misleading facts, emotional appeals, and oversimplified ideas, showcased a populist disdain for elites that resonated with many Americans (Lee 2016). In addition to his populist leadership style (Thiers and Wehner 2022;Schneiker 2020) and effective communication strategy, Trump aligned himself with the populist and conservative tendencies of the far-right wing of the Republican Party (Bernhard and O'Neill 2019).…”

Section: Barack Obama: the End Of Unilateralism And The Renewing Of A...mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Dynamics of Change in United States Foreign Policy: Contexts, Leadership, and Hegemonic Legitimacy

Mendes

2023

Social Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the dialectical relationship between continuity and change in the foreign policy of the United States, a hegemonic power. The article begins by exploring the agent–structure problem and the factors that affect changes in foreign policy and the legitimacy of hegemony. It compares the hegemonic leadership styles of three former United States Presidents: George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump. The article aims to contrast the foreign policy approaches of the three presidents and present two main arguments. In order to gain a comprehensive understanding of foreign policy, it is imperative to analyse dynamic components such as contextual factors and leadership. This includes the leaders’ worldviews and their ability to adapt to unanticipated crises. The gradual decline of the United States’ hegemony in the international order can be attributed to structural transformations within the international order and the erosion of its social capital and its role as hegemon. Yet, the leadership styles adopted by American presidents have a significant impact on the erosion of the nation’s hegemonic leadership.

show abstract

Trump: Causes and Consequences

Cited by 8 publications

References 11 publications

The partisan nature of support for democratic backsliding: A comparative perspective

The partisan nature of support for democratic backsliding: A comparative perspective

Crime Victimization, Trust and Performance Evaluation of Donald Trump: Exploring Gender and Race Determinants

The Dynamics of Change in United States Foreign Policy: Contexts, Leadership, and Hegemonic Legitimacy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About