CBS News and The New York Times were partners in a series of election surveys covering the 1976 United States presidential election campaign. The surveys were intended to provide another dimension to the political reporting of the two organizations. The surveys, using extensive coverage early in the primary campaign, were designed to monitor the public's changing perception of the candidates, the issues, and the candidates' positions vis-a-vis the issues. Parts 1-9 contain separate nationwide surveys conducted by telephone, with approximately 1,500 randomly selected adults. Five surveys were conducted monthly from February through June, and four more between early September and the general election -- one in September and one following each presidential debate. A final survey was conducted two days after the general election. Respondents were asked for their preferred presidential candidate, their ratings of the candidates' qualifications and positions, and their opinions on a variety of political issues. Part 10, the Election Day Survey, contains a national sample of voters who were interviewed at the polls. Respondents were asked to fill out a questionnaire that asked the name of the presidential candidate for whom they had just voted, and other questions about their political preferences. Part 11 contains data for respondents who were first interviewed in Part 9, Debate Three Survey, and recontacted and reinterviewed for the Post-Election Survey. Data include respondents' voting history, their evaluation of the nominees' positions on various political issues, and their opinions on current political and social issues. Parts 12-26 contain surveys conducted in 12 states on the day of the primary at the polling place, among a random sample of people who had just voted in either the Democratic or Republican presidential primary election. These surveys were conducted in the following primary states: California, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. There are separate files for the Democratic and Republican primaries in Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, and California, making a total of fifteen primary day "exit" surveys. Respondents were asked whom they voted for and why, the issues that were important in making their choice, and their voting history. Demographic information on respondents in all surveys may include sex, race, age, religion, education, occupation, and labor union affiliation. These files were processed by the Roper Center under a cooperative arrangement with ICPSR. Most of these data were collected by CBS News and The New York Times. The Election Day Survey was conducted solely by CBS News. Parts 1-11 were made available to the ICPSR by CBS News. Datasets: DS0: Study-Level Files DS1: February Survey DS2: March Survey DS3: April Survey DS4: May Survey DS5: June Survey DS6: September Survey DS7: Debate One Survey DS8: Debate Two Survey (Registered Only) DS9: Debate Three Survey (Registered Only) DS10: The Election Day Survey DS11: The Post-Election Survey (All) DS12: New Hampshire Primary Survey DS13: Massachusetts Primary Survey DS14: Florida Primary Survey DS15: Illinois Primary Survey DS16: New York Primary DS17: Wisconsin Primary Survey DS18: Pennsylvania Primary Survey DS19: Indiana Democratic Primary Survey DS20: Indiana Republican Primary Survey DS21: Michigan Democratic Primary Survey DS22: Michigan Republican Primary Survey DS23: California Democratic Primary Survey DS24: California Republican Primary Survey DS25: Ohio Democratic Primary Survey DS26: Ohio Republican Primary Survey DS27: Codebook Introduction (1) These files contain weights, which must be used in any data analysis. (2) There is no card image data for Part 3 and there is only card image data for Parts 11-19. Also, this collection does not contain data for Oregon as the machine-readable documentation indicates. Parts 1-6: Persons in households with telephones in the coterminous United States. Parts 7-9 and 11: Registered voters with telephones in the coterminous United States. Parts 10 and 12-26: Voters in the 1976 primary election.

This is a detailed campaign survey of the news covering in press, radio, and television during the last four weeks before the election day. Surveys similar to this have been conducted in connection with each parliamentary elections since 1979, and at the referendum on nuclear power in 1980. See Media election survey 1979 for more information about the research project.

Purpose:

To describe, identify and analyse media's reporting of the election campaign 1994.

The Expert Survey Election Campaigns in Indonesia is a dataset consisting of assessments of characteristics of election campaigns in 38 districts across Indonesia, given by 509 local observers (academics, journalists, campaign organizers, NGO activists). The aim of the expert survey is to study regional variation in the character of politics with a particular focus on assessing the character and pervasiveness of clientelistic electoral strategies. The survey contains questions on clientelistic practices (such as vote buying, as well the degree to which the distribution of various state resources – public services, welfare, contracts, jobs, licenses, social assistance - are perceived to be contingent on electoral support) as well as campaign organization (role of political parties, perceived influence of types of organizations and leaders, role of bureaucrats) and voter behavior (effectiveness of programmatic and clientelistic vote mobilization, ethnicity). The questions in the survey concern election campaigns for district head elections, governor, local parliaments as well presidential elections. This expert survey was executed among 509 academics, journalists, NGO activists and campaign organisers from 38 districts in 16 provinces across Indonesia between April and July 2014. The survey material was used in Aspinall and Berenschot, Democracy for Sale: Elections, Clientelism and the State in Indonesia (Ithaca: Cornell University Press 2018).

This study represents one component of a five-nation comparative data collection effort undertaken in Great Britain, Germany, Japan, Spain, and the United States during the early 1990s. The data were collected to study political communication and voting behavior during an election campaign. While the Main Respondent Data (Part 1) provide the central database, these data are supplemented by other data sources. The data collection combines three related surveys: a survey of 1,318 main respondents (Part 1), a survey of 271 spouses of the main respondents (Part 2), and a survey of 841 non-spouse discussion partners of the main respondents (Part 3). Part 4 supplies the text of open-ended question responses given by respondents to all three surveys. Part 5 provides information coded from articles in major local newspapers on issues dealing with the 1992 election campaign. Topics of investigation in this study concerned factors that influenced respondents' level of information about politics and public affairs, political awareness, and voting behavior, such as the kinds of newspapers and magazines respondents read, what national network news they watched, and whether they watched talk shows. Additional questions addressed candidate evaluations, general attitudes toward public offices and election campaigns, and participation in special interest groups, including political parties. The study also queried respondents about their feelings on topics such as affirmative action, foreign imports, using military force to overthrow Saddam Hussein, the budget deficit, medical insurance, abortion, minority aid, and the environment. Demographic characteristics of respondents include educational level, occupational status, income level, age, gender, race and ethnicity, marital status, religious preference, group affiliation, and social status.

The objective of this data collection was to study communication and influence in an election campaign, with special emphasis on social networks and social contexts as they relate to political behavior. The first wave (Part 1) of this three-wave panel survey provided baseline measures on respondents prior to the 1984 general election campaign. Topics covered general political participation history, primary election participation, general policy opinions, opinions regarding important national problems, and intended vote. Additionally, the instrument included a complete battery of demographic questions for the respondent and the respondent's spouse, as well as standard measures of political loyalties and preferences, such as political party identification and liberal-conservative identification. The second pre-election wave (Parts 2 and 3) was designed to locate respondents sociologically. The instrument included five batteries of questions regarding respondents' neighborhoods, work places, organizational involvements, recreational pursuits, and families. Questions regarding the political salience of each domain were asked, as well as a battery of questions concerning political discussion and the respondent's reliance upon informal, socially-derived information regarding politics. In addition to questions about the respondent's social environments, the instrument also included questions on candidate preference and perceptions of candidates, expectations regarding the economy and foreign affairs, and various policy concerns. The third wave (Parts 4 and 5) of the survey, conducted after the 1984 election, contained sections on media use, political party contacted by the respondent during the campaign, participation in the campaign, voting behavior in the election, and opinions regarding campaign issues. The standard post-election questions were supplemented by questions regarding local politics and local political figures, group attitudes, and respondents' social networks. The discussant survey interviews (Part 6) elicited information from respondents' discussion partners on campaign-related political involvement and behaviors, political opinions, basic demographic characteristics, and network questions. The network questions were included primarily to investigate reciprocity in network links for the main respondents. Demographic data collected on participants include information on marital status, educational level, employment status, income level, age, sex, religion, ethnic background, nationality, and ideological stance.

This data collection consists of a survey of elections agents from the Conservative Party, Labour Party, Liberal Democrats, Scottish National Party (SNP), Plaid Cymru (PC) and the UK Independence Party (UKIP) conducted immediately after the British general election of 2017. The survey covers details of the preparations for the campaign, organisation and strategy, and campaign and polling day activities. In addition, it covers an evaluation of the administration of the campaign. Surveys were sent to all agents and the dataset comprises responses from 180 Conservative Agents; 333 Labour Agents; 314 Liberal Democrat Agents; 23 SNP Agents; 28 Plaid Cymru Agents; and 114 UKIP Agents.

Constituency level campaigning has become crucial to the electoral strategies of all the major parties in Britain, and a significant academic literature has emerged (Denver and Hands, 1992,1993,1996,1997a,1997b,1998; Denver et al, 2002a, 2002b, 2003; Fisher et al, 2005, 2006a, 2006b, 2006c, 2009, 2011a, 2011b, 2014a, 2014b; 2016; 2017; Fieldhouse and Cutts, 2009). This work has revealed how campaigns have changed over time; how parties have responded to wider changes in society, the electorate, and within their own parties; the degree to which parties are able to harness their resources effectively to fight elections; how voters respond to cues from the parties, and the extent to which voters can be mobilized. The analysis of the constituency campaign is an integral part of studying elections by the electoral studies community, external stakeholders and the ESRC (Williams, 2007). The ESRC has funded this unique study, which the most comprehensive of its kind in the world, at each general election since 1992 (with the exception of 2005, which was funded at a much lower level by the Electoral Commission). There is therefore a unique and valuable time series which furthers our understanding of the impact, role, and nature of campaigns in the modern political arena. The proposed study will continue this valuable work as well as delivering significant added value.

The Swiss Election Study (Selects) 2019 consists of four complementary components: The Post-Election Survey (PES), the Panel Survey, the Candidate Survey, and the (Social) Media Analysis. The main difference compared to previous studies relates to the mode of data collection; the main emphasis was moved towards web questionnaires. The mode for the Post-Election Survey 2019 was web/paper whereas in 2015, it was web/telephone. As in previous election studies, novel thematic modules of particular salience to researchers were included in the different surveys, while keeping the necessary continuity in the core questionnaire of the Post-Election Survey for comparison with previous waves.

Post-Election Survey (PES): The Post-Election Survey consists of 6664 respondents. The survey was conducted in a sequential mixed mode with web offered as the first option: 82% responded in this way, while 18% responded by returning the paper questionnaire that was sent out later to those not having completed the web questionnaire. The sampling was based on a representative sample of around 2’600 Swiss citizens, with an oversampling of small cantons to have at least 50 respondents in every canton. An additional oversampling was done in the cantons of Zurich, Geneva, and Ticino thanks to additional funding from these cantons.

Panel Survey: The Panel Survey studies the evolution of opinion and vote intention/choice during the different phases of the election cycle. In 2019, three waves were conducted: the first before the main campaign period (Mai/June), the second during the election campaign (September/October), and the third after the elections (October-December). 7939 individuals responded to the first wave, 5577 to the second wave, and 5125 to the third wave. 4654 individuals responded to all three waves. This three-wave panel will be continued with annual follow-up waves until the 2023 elections. At the end of wave 3, 3'030 respondents gave consent to be contacted for the yearly waves. Wave 4 took place between September 28 and November 2nd, 2020 with 2'499 respondents. Wave 5 took place between September 27 and November 1st, 2021 with 2’323 respondents. Wave 6 took place between September 26 and November 6, 2022 with 2’178 respondents. The final wave 7 took place between October 23 and December 11, 2023 with 2'470 respondents.

Candidate Survey: The Candidate Survey was carried out among all candidates for the National Council and the Council of States in the framework of the international Comparative Candidate Survey (CCS) project, based on the Round III questionnaire. The survey collects data on the biography, campaign activities, and policy position of the candidates. Among others, the information gathered makes possible the study of underlying factors of candidates’ electoral success, as well as of issues of representation and linkage between voters and elites. In 2019, 2158 out of 4736 candidates participated in the Candidate Survey. This survey was conducted by Politools.net on behalf of Selects.

(Social) Media Analysis: On behalf of Selects, the Digital Democracy Lab of the University of Zurich conducted a Media Analysis. The Media Analysis is a supplement to the Panel Survey and makes it possible to analyse the election campaign in the media and its influence on the formation of voters' opinions. In addition to the content analysis of the coverage of traditional media (print and online), which has been carried out in the context of Selects since 2003, the Media Analysis 2019 also includes, for the first time, the election campaign communication of parties and candidates on social media. For this Social Media Analysis, the Twitter accounts of 1284 candidates, parties, and organizations were taken into account, as well as the Facebook pages of 261 candidates.

The Swiss Election Study (Selects) 2023 consists of four complementary components: The Post-Election Survey (PES), the Panel Survey, the Candidate Survey, and the Media Analysis. The study design is largely inspired by Selects 2019. The PES and Candidate Survey are mixed-mode surveys (online/paper), with a push-to-web design, whereas the Panel Study is an online survey. In April 2022, a call for questions/modules was opened to allow researchers from Switzerland and abroad to include novel questions into one or different components of Selects. Ten out of 14 submitted proposals were selected by the Selects Commission after a review process conducted by internationally renowned election researchers, and were fully or partially integrated into one or several components of Selects 2023. The Selects surveys were approved by the Ethics commission of the University of Lausanne.

Post-Election Survey (PES): The Post-Election Survey consists of 5033 respondents who answered the questionnaire in the period from 23 October 2023 to 12 January 2024. The survey was conducted in a sequential mixed mode with web offered as the first option: 90% responded in this way, while 10% responded by returning the paper questionnaire that was sent out with the second reminder to those that had not completed the web questionnaire. The sampling was based on a representative sample of around 2’600 Swiss citizens, with an oversampling of small cantons to have at least 50 respondents in every canton. An additional oversampling was done in the cantons of Geneva and Ticino thanks to additional funding from these cantons. The sample was drawn by the Federal Statistics Office from the SRPH. Sample members received an unconditional incentive (10 CHF in cash) that was sent out with the invitation letter. Module 6 Questionnaire of the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems was included into the PES.

Panel Survey: The Panel Survey studies the evolution of opinion and vote intention/choice during the different phases of the election cycle. In 2023, three waves were conducted: the first before the main campaign period (June/early August), the second during the election campaign (September/October), and the third after the elections (October/November). The initial random sample (stratified by big region/NUTS II) was taken by the Federal Statistics Office from the SRPH. 8197 individuals responded to the first wave, 6077 to the second wave, and 5579 to the third wave. Conditional incentives were used in all three panel waves (lottery of 5x300 CHF in wave 1, 10 CHF in cash in waves 2 and 3). The Panel Survey will continue with annual follow-up waves until the 2027 elections. Wave 4 took place between 23 September and 4 November 2024, with 4'919 respondents.

Candidate Survey: The Candidate Survey was carried out among all candidates for the National Council and the Council of States in the framework of the international Comparative Candidate Survey (CCS) project, based on the Round III questionnaire. The survey collects data on the biography, campaign activities, and policy position of the candidates. Among others, the information gathered makes possible the study of underlying factors of candidates’ electoral success, as well as of issues of representation and linkage between voters and elites. In 2023, 2527 out of 5997 candidates participated in the Candidate Survey. This survey was conducted by FORS in collaboration with Politools and the University of Bern.

Media Analysis: On behalf of Selects, the Center for Research & Methods at the University of Applied Sciences in Business Administration Zurich (HWZ) conducted a Media Analysis. The Media Analysis is a supplement to the Panel Survey and makes it possible to analyse the election campaign in the media and its influence on voters' opinion formation. A media study has been part of Selects since 2003. In 2023, 116 daily or weekly newspapers (print and online) were content-analyzed in the period between 1 May 2023 and 31 October 2023.

This is a detailed campaign survey of the news covering in press, radio, and television during the last four weeks before the election day. Surveys similar to this have been conducted in connection with each parliamentary elections since 1979, and at the referendum on nuclear power in 1980. See {Media election survey 1979} for more information about the research project. Purpose: To describe, identify and analyse media's reporting of the election campaign 1991.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.

The British Election Study, 2010: Face-to-Face Survey comprises the cross-section surveys conducted before and after the 2010 general election. The four major objectives of the BES 2010 as set out in the ESRC's Specification, and addressed in the project were to: explain the outcome of the General Election; determine why voters choose one party rather than another; understand why some people vote and others do not; and examine the effects of the election on British politics more generally.

To meet these objectives, the 2010 BES conducted representative national surveys of the British electorate which included:

• a two-wave national probability face-to-face panel survey conducted before and after the election campaign. The post-election survey had a 'top-up' sample to correct for sample attrition and Scottish and Welsh booster samples;
• a large three-wave Campaign Internet Panel Survey (SN 7531), with a baseline pre-campaign survey, a sample of respondents re-contacted each day during the campaign, and all respondents interviewed in a post-election survey; and
• a Continuous Monitoring Internet Survey (CMS) (SN 7530) of a national cross-section each month for 24 months (July 2008-Dec 2010).

For further information see the documentation and the BES 2009-2010 website.


Main Topics:

Topics covered within the pre- and post-election surveys included electoral issues, party identification and support, party positions on taxation and expenditure, voting intentions and behaviour, opinions on party leaders, trust in British institutions, contact with local politicians, attitudes to the European Union, attitudes to war, social trust, beliefs and value, social and political attitudes, and demographic characteristics.

This survey assessed campaign influences on public opinion and voting behavior in Mexico's July 2, 2000, presidential election. The study consists of five separate surveys conducted over the course of the campaign and following the election, using a hybrid panel/ cross-sectional design. The Pre- and Post-Election Panel Data (Part 1) includes data collected from a national cross-section of 2,400 adults. All respondents were interviewed following the official start of the campaign, February 19-27, and following the election, July 7-16, while subsets of them were also interviewed April 28-May 7 and/or June 2-18. The Post-Electoral Cross-Section Data (Part 2) includes only data collected from a new and separate cross-section of 1,199 respondents, gathered to supplement the panel sample. Additional information regarding the design of the study may be found within the codebook. Respondents were queried on a wide range of issues relating to voting behavior, including exposure to media, political knowledge and engagement, opinions about salient political issues including privatization, employment, crime, the death penalty, and government services, attitudes toward the main political parties and candidates, impressions of the electoral process, voting intentions, faith in the electoral process, credibility of the media, exposure to the campaign, and opinions of current president Ernesto Zedillo and presidential candidates Cuauhtemoc Cardenas (Alliance for Mexico), Vicente Fox (Alliance for Change), and Francisco Labastida (PRI). Respondents queried following the election were asked for whom they voted and why, and whether they felt the election was clean. In addition, they were asked to assess their interest level in politics, their involvement and familiarity with the campaign media and activities, how frequently they discuss the issues, and the ability of the candidates to address important social issues. Background information on respondents includes age, gender, political party affiliation, voting history, religion, education, marital status, children, employment status, labor union membership, languages spoken, travel to the United States, socio-economic status, and household income.

Postal Survey with online options (standardized questionnaire)

Heading into a presidential election year, a December 2023 survey found that a considerable share of U.S. citizens did not place a lot of trust in political campaigns to accurately report election information. About one-third of respondents reported that they did not trust campaigns at all in their reporting, compared to seven percent that placed a great deal of trust in political campaign reporting.

The Zambian Election Panel Survey (ZEPS) data allows for analysis of voter perceptions and choices in the August 2021 elections – and how these were affected by the tactics of the competing parties and candidates. The panel design provides an opportunity to study how, when and why former supporters of incumbent president Lungu ‘defected’ to support his rival, Hakainde Hichilema (HH) in 2021. This multistage panel survey, the first-of-its-kind in Africa, was implemented in three rounds; June 8 – July 3 (R1: n = 1665), July 15 – Aug 10 (R2: n = 1508), and Aug 25 – Oct 3 (R3: n = 1272). These time periods correspond to the early campaign period, late in the campaign period and immediate post-election period, respectively. The survey was conducted over the phone. Responses were disproportionately from urban/peri-urban voters in Central and Lusaka provinces and rural voters in Eastern and Muchinga provinces. 1764 unique responses were collected using SurveyToGo software from Dooblo. 1210 responses were collected for all three rounds.

Politische Einstellungen und Verhaltensweisen von Kandidaten. Meinungsbildung im Wahlkampf. Politische Fragen (Issues). Themen:Kandidat: Antritt Partei; Kandidat: Jahr des Parteieintritt; Kandidatur, 1994-2009; Politische Laufbahn des Kandidaten; Wöchentlicher Zeitaufwand für Parteiaktivitäten; Gründe für Nominierung als Kandidat/-in; Ermutigung zur Kandidatur; Einfluss auf die Nominierung; Umkämpfte Nominierung?; Wohnsitz im Wahlkreis; Vereinigungs-/Organisationsmitgliedschaft; Öffentliche Unterstützung während Kandidatur durch Vereinigung/Organisation; Wahlkampfbeginn; wöchentlicher Zeitaufwand für Wahlkampf; Teamumfang im Wahlkampf; Professionelle Beratung im Wahlkampf; Budget im Wahlkampf; Budgetanteile im Wahlkampf; Aktivitäten im Wahlkampf; Lokale Themen im Wahlkampf; Themenfokus im Wahlkampf; Betonung von Eigenschaften des Spitzenkandidaten im Wahlkampf; Anfängliche Einschätzung der Gewinnchancen im Wahlkampf; Schlussendliche Einschätzung der Gewinnchancen im Wahlkampf; Abstimmung mit Partei im Wahlkampf; Häufigkeit der Medienberichterstattung im Wahlkampf; Schwierigkeit Medienberichterstattung im Wahlkampf; Art und Weise der Medienberichterstattung im Wahlkampf; Einfluss der Medienberichterstattung im Wahlkampf; Einflussfaktoren für das Wahlergebnis; Einfluss Kandidateneigenschaften für Wahlergebnis; Wählerwettbewerb; Wichtigste Probleme in Deutschland; Einstellungen zu politischen Themen; Links-Rechts Selbsteinstufung; Links-Rechts Einstufung der Partei; Links-Rechts Einstufung der eigenen Wähler; Eigene sozio-ökonomische, libertär-autoritäre, Umwelt Dimension; Sozio-ökonomische, libertär-autoritäre, Umwelt Dimension der Partei; Sozio-ökonomische, libertär-autoritäre, Umwelt Dimension der eigenen Wähler; Europa: Bewertung Mitgliedschaft; Persönliche Einstellung zur europäischen Einigung; Demokratiezufriedenheit Europa, Deutschland; Verantwortlichkeit für europäische Finanzkrise; Maßnahmen zur Bekämpfung der Wirtschaftskrise; Repräsentationsstil, Wähler vs. Partei, eigene Meinung vs. Wähler, eigene Meinung vs. Partei; Repräsentationsnorm; Einstellungen zu Aussagen über Demokratie; Einstellungen zu Aussagen zu innerparteilicher Demokratie; Persönlichkeitsbatterie (Zurückhaltung, Vertrauen, Gründlichkeit, Phantasie, Unsicherheit, Meinungsbildung, Anstrengungen, Entscheidungsfreudigkeit, Risikovermeidung); Kirchgangshäufigkeit; Bedeutung "links" und "rechts"; zusätzlich vercodet wurde:Studiennummer (ZA-Nr.); GESIS Archiv Version; Erhebungsjahr; Erhebungszeitraum; GLES-Komponente; Laufende Nummer; Kandidaturtyp; Wahlkreisname; Bundesland; Listenplatz; Teilnahmeart; Erfolgreiche Kandidatur?; Wahlkreisgewinner 2013; Gewichte; Wahlkreisergebnisse des Kandidaten 2009, 2013; Wahlergebnisse der Partei des Kandidaten, Bundesland, gesamt, 2009, 2013; Wahlberechtigte Erst- und Zweitstimme Wahlkreis und Bundesland 2009, 2013; Wahlkreis, Bundesland Wähler 2009, 2013; Wahlkreis, Bundesland ungültige Erst-und Zweitstimmen 2009, 2013; Wahlkreis, Bundesland gültige Erst-und Zweitstimmen 2009, 2013; Wahlkreis, Bundesland Erst-und Zweitstimmen Parteien, 2009, 2013; Wahlkreis, Bundesland Erst-und Zweitstimmen Parteien in Prozent, 2009, 2013; Wahlkreis, Bundesland und gesamt Wahlbeteiligung in Prozent, 2009, 2013; Wahlkreis und Bundesland: Anzahl Gemeinden am 31.12.2012; Wahlkreis und Bundesland: Fläche am 31.12.2011; Wahlkreis und Bundesland Bevölkerung am 31.12.2012; Wahlkreis und Bundesland Bevölkerungsdichte am 31.12.2011; Wahlkreis und Bundesland: Zu- (+) bzw. Abnahme (-) der Bevölkerung 2011; Schulbildung im Wahlkreis und Bundesland; Wahlkreis und Bundesland: Kraftfahrzeugbestand am 01.01.2012; Wohnungssituation im Wahlkreis und Bundesland 2011; Wahlkreis und Bundesland: Anzahl der Betriebe im Bergbau- und verarbeitenden Gewerbe am 30.09.2011; Gewerbesteuerdaten im Wahlkreis und Bundesland 2011; Insolvenzverfahren im Wahlkreis und Bundesland 2011; Sozialversicherungspflichtig Beschäftigte im Wahlkreis und Bundesland am 30.06.2011; Arbeitslosenquote im Wahlkreis und Bundesland Dezember 2012; ALG II Empfänger im Wahlkreis und Bundesland; Demographie:Geschlecht; Geburtsjahr; Geburtsland; Deutsche Staatsbürgerschaft; Geburtsland der Eltern; Staatsbürgerschaft der Eltern; Wohnort; Schulabschluss; Berufliche Bildung; Erwerbsstatus (aktuell, früherer); Beruf; Religion; Familienstand; Alter der Haushaltsmitglieder; Alter der nicht im Haushalt lebenden Kinder; Aufsicht pflegebedürftiger Erwachsener;

Abstract (en): This data collection contains the results of a survey of the candidates who ran for United States Senate and the United States House of Representatives in 1976. By surveying such candidates, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) was attempting to collect systematically the views of those directly affected and regulated by the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) as it was amended in 1974 and 1976. Those amendments called for significant changes in the rules for campaign contributions and expenditures, restrictions on independent expenditures and in-kind contributions, and public disclosure of all federal campaign activity. The survey was conducted by Decision Making Information of Santa Ana, California, and Hart Research Commission in the first two months of 1976. In all, 850 respondents (candidates, campaign managers, and other campaign representatives) were interviewed by mail or in person. The survey questions focused on seven major topics: (1) actual characteristics of the campaigns and the candidates covered by the survey, (2) experiences during the 1976 election, (3) finances in 1976, (4) impact of the FECA on campaign organization, (5) the role played by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) as an information source for, and regulator of, campaigns, (6) which items dealt with by the FECA were favored or opposed by candidates and campaign managers who participated in the 1976 election, and (7) the respondent's overall feelings about what should be done in the future. ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.. The 2,150 United States House of Representatives and United States Senate candidates in 1976 whose names appeared on a primary or general ballot. Those candidates who filed a statement with the FECA but failed to run in 1976, as well as those who failed in 1976 to complete reporting requirements for an office sought in preceding years (1974 or 1972) were eliminated from the universe. Stratified random sampling was done. The 850 respondents represented an accurate cross-section of House and Senate candidates, chosen by random interval selection methods and stratified by several factors: Senate/House campaigns, primary/general campaigns, party affiliation, and geographic regions.

This is the fourth study of the political contents in press, radio and television within the research projects ´Mass media and the electorate´, ´Swedish election campaign´ and ´Parliament, elections and the representative democracy´ and it was carried out in connection with the 1985 general election. It is a detailed campaign study of news reporting in the press, radio and television during the last four weeks before the day of the referendum. See Media election survey 1979 for more information about the research project.

Purpose:

To describe, identify and analyse media's reporting of the election campaign 1985.

In a survey of U.S. adults conducted shortly after the election, almost 80 percent of Americans over the age of 65 paid a lot of attention to the 2024 presidential election, compared to 57 percent of those between the ages of 18 and 29. Among respondents between 30 and 44 years old, eight percent reported having paid only minimal attention to the 2024 presidential campaigns.

The British Election Study Nine-Wave Panel Survey, 2005-2010 contains panel data from nine surveys conducted between the 2005 and 2010 general elections.

The nine waves were collected as follows: three waves in 2005, conducted before the election campaign, during the campaign and post-election; one wave conducted in 2006, one in 2008 and one in 2009; and three waves conducted in 2010, before the election campaign, during the campaign and post-election.

Further information is available from the BES Panel 2005-2010 webpage and the ESRC Performance Politics: The Dynamics of Political Support in Britain award webpage.

For the second edition (August 2014) data from waves 7-9 were added to the study and the documentation updated accordingly.

The data comprises all the surveys published during the US2020 presidential campaign used in the article "Analyzing the polls of the US 2020 Presidential Election Campaign: A New Perspective".