William G. Mayer

Continuing a tradition of excellence in postelection analysis, Gerald M. Pomper leads a distinguished team of experts offering timely and insightful assessment of the first presidential election of the 21st century. After a relatively uneventful campaign season, the American electorate divided evenly between two similar candidates who raised and spent record sums of money. Election Day was followed by an unprecedented period of uncertainty that was finally resolved in a controversial judicial decision. How all this happened and why is discussed by this dynamic lineup of election specialists. Gerald M. Pomper (Rutgers University), author of Passions and Interests: Political Party Concepts of American Democracy. Anthony Corrado (Colby College), author of Campaign Finance Reform and Paying for Presidents. E. J. Dionne Jr. (Washington Post), author of Why Americans Hate Politics and They Only Look Dead. Kathleen A. Frankovic, Director of Surveys and producer, CBS News. Paul S. Herrnson (University of Maryland), author of Congressional Elections: Campaigning at Home and in WashingtonMarjorie Randon Hershey (Indiana University), author of Running for Office. William G. Mayer (Northeastern University), author of In Pursuit of the White House 2000: How We Choose Our Presidential Nominees. Monika L. McDermott, Manager of Surveys for CBS News for 2000 Election. Wilson Carey McWilliams (Rutgers University), author of Beyond the Politics of Disappointment: American Elections, 1980-1998.

The Uses and Misuses of Politics is a detailed examination of the politics of George W. Bush's presidency, focusing on the work-and the mistakes-of presidential political advisor Karl Rove. In his role as political advisor Karl Rove stands apart from his numerous counterparts in modern American politics in three major ways. The first measure of Rove's distinctiveness is the totality of his direction over Bush's political career. Simply put, George W. Bush never won an election, of any kind, in which Rove was not the dominant, even sole campaign strategist. A second important difference between Karl Rove and other major presidential campaign strategists was the role that Rove played in helping formulate policy after Bush became president. In fact, Rove became the first presidential aide to both provide political advice to a sitting president while at the same time controlling the policy levers inside the White House, especially as an advocate for his own agenda in the areas of domestic policy. Finally, Karl Rove is noteworthy for the scope of his ambitions: his goal for the Bush presidency was to create a durable Republican majority that would dominate American politics for the next several decades.,br>Even though theories of party systems and realignments have received serious challenges, Karl Rove was a believer; providing a key insight into how he approached his work with the Bush presidency. Where previous realignments were the result of historical accidents and recognized only after the fact, Karl Rove believed he could engineer the next one. In The Uses and Misuses of Politics William G. Mayer analyzes Karl Rove's performance as presidential advisor: the roles he played, the advice he gave, and how the Republican Party fared with Rove as its principal strategist. By offering the reader a comprehensive assessment, Mayer provides valuable insight into the larger, enduring, and critical questions: What is the proper role of politics in the contemporary presidency? When does politics enhance a nation's long-term welfare, and what does it detract from it? And what positive contributions can political advisors make to a modern-day president?

Why have the Democrats lost five of the last seven presidential elections, even though polls consistently show that more Americans identify with that party than with the Republican party? And why are Democratic presidential nomination races usually so much more bitter and fractious than those held by the Republicans? The answer, argues William Mayer

"The race for the White House may seem like a marathon, but the nomination process is becoming a sprint, with the starting gun fired earlier each time. Where state primaries and caucuses were once spread out over a period of three or four months, most are now crammed into a four– or five–week interval at the very beginning of the delegate selection calendar. The compression and hastening of the nomination season are changing the nature of the presidential selection process, the most visible pillar of American democracy. Despite the importance of this issue in American politics, however, too little systematic analysis has been done on the topic. This is the first book to offer a comprehensive examination of the front-loading problem in all its facets. William Mayer and Andrew Busch define the parameters of the front-loading question as well as its impact. They trace the history that shaped the current system and explain why it is such a critical element of presidential elections. Most important, the authors present a detailed analysis of all the major proposals for coping with front-loading and of the political and constitutional obstacles for reform. While they conclude that there is no easy solution to this complex issue, they identify a general direction for reform efforts. They also feel that the political parties should be the prime movers in formulating and implementing changes."

Do Democrats have greater difficulty maintaining party unity than Republicans? William Mayer argues that they do, chiefly because the Democrats are a more ideologically diverse, less cohesive party. After extensively documenting the Democrats' traditional problems of division and disagreement, Mayer presents evidence suggesting that the Republican advantage over the Democrats has finally started to narrow—raising important questions about the future of the Republican coalition.

Have Americans become more or less tolerant of racial discrimination? More or less supportive of abortion? Is a new tax revolt underway? Did a "new conservative mood" dominate elections and policy discussions in the early 1980s? Popular and academic discussions about the past and future of American politics often turn on the question of whether and how public opinion has changed. Yet for all the talk about such matters, observes political scientist William G. Mayer, there is surprisingly little hard evidence on many of these questions. The Changing American Mind is designed to fill that gap, by presenting a comprehensive history of American public opinion over the last three decades: how it changed, why it changed, and what difference that makes for American politics. The Changing American Mind is important reading for all who are interested in American politics and public opinion. Its appendixes, which include the results of more than 250 survey questions that have been asked regularly of national samples over the last three decades, make it an indispensable reference source for everyone who studies or participates in American politics.