| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
184523
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Introductory undergraduate courses in American politics often center the Constitution and focus on fundamental principles, structures, and processes. Unfortunately, this focus allows less space to discuss the role that norms play in supporting formal rules and institutions in the American political system. As a political science professor teaching an introductory course on American politics in 2019 and 2020, I became acutely aware of the limitations of this course design. This context showcased the ways in which many of these norms are taken for granted by many, including American politics scholars. Moreover, it sparked conversations among my colleagues about whether we should adapt to the moment and update our instruction to place greater emphasis on norms to contextualize the present political moment for our students. My answer was yes. However, doing so requires instructors to be attentive to issues of objectivity, authority, and partisanship. This article shares strategies that I plan to implement when I teach this course again. In particular, I discuss three guiding pedagogical principles when teaching about presidential norms. I then provide discussion questions that instructors can use to spark conversations about the relationship between adherence to presidential norms and the stability of American political institutions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
184514
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Although much of the United States undoubtedly was aware of the impeachment hearings and trial for President Donald Trump in 2019–2020, the extent to which information about those events influenced the public remains unknown. Building on scholarship about public opinion and democratic governance, we attempted to fill this knowledge gap through a unique survey. We asked half of our sample to answer three factual questions pertaining to Trump’s first impeachment trial. We ran a quasi-experiment on the other half, trying to influence their view of the trial by informing them of the same three facts that we asked the first group. The quasi-experiment demonstrates that support for acquittal was largely static and that partisanship strongly influences whether the public accepts the veracity and importance of political information. Consequently, civic knowledge today appears to have a limited—perhaps even nonexistent—effect on public attitudes about American politics.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
151254
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Party polarization is the new buzzword in American politics and yet partisanship seems to play such a small role in determining congressional votes on China policy. We still do not know much about how polarized politics in Washington actually exerts influence in the making of U.S. policy toward Beijing. Paying special attention to America`s response to China from 2001 through 2012, this article seeks to analyze the sources and processes of how party polarization affects foreign policymaking. I argue that with the U.S. president adopting a hands-off approach and parties being polarized, a coalition of ideologically extreme lawmakers is likely to take cross-partisan actions over China. In essence, individual rank-and-file lawmakers tend to step forward and speak out in a party-less manner in the era of polarized America and a rising China.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|