12 datasets found
  1. Age of U.S. Presidents when taking office 1789-2025

    • statista.com
    Updated Nov 6, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2024). Age of U.S. Presidents when taking office 1789-2025 [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1035542/age-incumbent-us-presidents-first-taking-office/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Nov 6, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    Since 1789, 45 different men have served as President of the United States, and the average age of these men when taking office for the first time was approximately 57 years. Two men, Grover Cleveland and Donald Trump, were elected to two non-consecutive terms, and Donald Trump's victory in 2024 made him the oldest man ever elected as president, where he will be 78 years and seven months old when taking office again. Record holders The oldest president to take office for the first time was Joe Biden in 2021, at 78 years and two months - around five months younger than Donald Trump when he assumes office in 2025. The youngest presidents to take office were Theodore Roosevelt in 1901 (42 years and 322 days), who assumed office following the assassination of William McKinley, and the youngest elected president was John F Kennedy in 1961 (43 years and 236 days). Historically, there seems to be little correlation between age and electability, and the past five presidents have included the two oldest to ever take office, and two of the youngest. Requirements to become president The United States Constitution states that both the President and Vice President must be at least 35 years old when taking office, and must have lived in the United States for at least 14 years of their life. Such restrictions are also in place for members of the U.S. Congress, although the age and residency barriers are lower. Additionally, for the roles of President and Vice President, there is a "natural-born-citizen" clause that was traditionally interpreted to mean candidates must have been born in the U.S. (or were citizens when the Constitution was adopted). However, the clause's ambiguity has led to something of a reinterpretation in the past decades, with most now interpreting it as also applying to those eligible for birthright citizenship, as some recent candidates were born overseas.

  2. US President General - State and County Level Vote Data, 1964-2020

    • archive.ciser.cornell.edu
    Updated Dec 31, 2019
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Leip, David. Dave Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections. http://uselectionatlas.org (2019). US President General - State and County Level Vote Data, 1964-2020 [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.6077/dskr-cm17
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Dec 31, 2019
    Dataset provided by
    Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Electionshttps://uselectionatlas.org/
    Authors
    Leip, David. Dave Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections. http://uselectionatlas.org
    Area covered
    United States
    Variables measured
    GeographicUnit
    Description

    This study contains files of Presidential election votes by State, County, and Town for each U.S. Presidential election year from 1964-2020. From Dave Leip, Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections. Note: MIT posted similar publicly available data beginning with 1976 at https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/42MVDX

    Information available in each dataset

    If you want to know what each Presidential Election dataset contains before downloading it, for easy reference, the CCSS Data Services team prepared a spreadsheet summarizing the contents of each dataset. You can view them in this Summary of contents and codebooks spreadsheet.

    The summary spreadsheet contains the following: 1. A matrix table summarizing the information available in each Presidential election dataset 2. Codebook describing the variables in the Presidential Election vote data at the State level 3. Codebook describing the variables in the Presidential Election vote data at the County level 4. Codebook describing the variables in the Presidential Election vote data at the Town level 5. A matrix table listing the statistics and graphs included in each Presidential election dataset

    Labels of the variables in the State, County, and Town data, as well as a description of each tab in the dataset, are also available here: https://uselectionatlas.org/BOTTOM/DOWNLOAD/spread_national.html

    Dave Leip's website

    The Dave Leip website here: https://uselectionatlas.org/BOTTOM/store_data.php has additional years of data available going back to 1912 but at a fee.

    Sometimes the files are updated by Dave Leip, and new versions are made available, but CCSS is not notified. If you suspect the file you want may be updated, please get in touch with CCSS Data Discovery and Replication Services. These files were last checked for updates in June 2024.

    Note that file version numbers are those assigned to them by Dave Leip's Election Atlas. Please refer to the CCSS Data and Reproduction Archive Version number in your citations for the full dataset.

  3. Data from: SETUPS: American Voting Behavior in Presidential Elections,...

    • icpsr.umich.edu
    ascii, spss
    Updated Dec 20, 1995
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Prysby, Charles; Scavo, Carmine (1995). SETUPS: American Voting Behavior in Presidential Elections, 1972-1992 [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR06572.v1
    Explore at:
    spss, asciiAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Dec 20, 1995
    Dataset provided by
    Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Researchhttps://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/pages/
    Authors
    Prysby, Charles; Scavo, Carmine
    License

    https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/6572/termshttps://www.icpsr.umich.edu/web/ICPSR/studies/6572/terms

    Time period covered
    1972 - 1992
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    This Supplementary Empirical Teaching Units in Political Science (SETUPS) module, a cumulative file, permits analysis of elections and voting behavior in the United States across the general election years 1972 through 1992. The data are taken from AMERICAN NATIONAL ELECTION STUDIES CUMULATIVE DATA FILE, 1952-1992 (ICPSR 8475), conducted by Warren E. Miller and the National Election Studies. A subset of items, including behavioral, attitudinal, and sociodemographic data, were drawn from the full election survey. Variables in this dataset include which party the respondent voted for for president, senator, and representative, as well as the respondent's own party identification. Other items include political involvement, ideology, perceptions of candidate image, opinions about government performance, and attitudes on specific issues. Demographic information on respondents includes gender, race, age, marital status, education, employment status and occupation, income, religion and church attendance, and region of the country and type of community in which the respondent lived.

  4. H

    2020 General Election Voting by US Census Block Group

    • dataverse.harvard.edu
    Updated Mar 10, 2025
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Michael Bryan (2025). 2020 General Election Voting by US Census Block Group [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/NKNWBX
    Explore at:
    CroissantCroissant is a format for machine-learning datasets. Learn more about this at mlcommons.org/croissant.
    Dataset updated
    Mar 10, 2025
    Dataset provided by
    Harvard Dataverse
    Authors
    Michael Bryan
    License

    CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedicationhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
    License information was derived automatically

    Description

    PROBLEM AND OPPORTUNITY In the United States, voting is largely a private matter. A registered voter is given a randomized ballot form or machine to prevent linkage between their voting choices and their identity. This disconnect supports confidence in the election process, but it provides obstacles to an election's analysis. A common solution is to field exit polls, interviewing voters immediately after leaving their polling location. This method is rife with bias, however, and functionally limited in direct demographics data collected. For the 2020 general election, though, most states published their election results for each voting location. These publications were additionally supported by the geographical areas assigned to each location, the voting precincts. As a result, geographic processing can now be applied to project precinct election results onto Census block groups. While precinct have few demographic traits directly, their geographies have characteristics that make them projectable onto U.S. Census geographies. Both state voting precincts and U.S. Census block groups: are exclusive, and do not overlap are adjacent, fully covering their corresponding state and potentially county have roughly the same size in area, population and voter presence Analytically, a projection of local demographics does not allow conclusions about voters themselves. However, the dataset does allow statements related to the geographies that yield voting behavior. One could say, for example, that an area dominated by a particular voting pattern would have mean traits of age, race, income or household structure. The dataset that results from this programming provides voting results allocated by Census block groups. The block group identifier can be joined to Census Decennial and American Community Survey demographic estimates. DATA SOURCES The state election results and geographies have been compiled by Voting and Election Science team on Harvard's dataverse. State voting precincts lie within state and county boundaries. The Census Bureau, on the other hand, publishes its estimates across a variety of geographic definitions including a hierarchy of states, counties, census tracts and block groups. Their definitions can be found here. The geometric shapefiles for each block group are available here. The lowest level of this geography changes often and can obsolesce before the next census survey (Decennial or American Community Survey programs). The second to lowest census level, block groups, have the benefit of both granularity and stability however. The 2020 Decennial survey details US demographics into 217,740 block groups with between a few hundred and a few thousand people. Dataset Structure The dataset's columns include: Column Definition BLOCKGROUP_GEOID 12 digit primary key. Census GEOID of the block group row. This code concatenates: 2 digit state 3 digit county within state 6 digit Census Tract identifier 1 digit Census Block Group identifier within tract STATE State abbreviation, redundent with 2 digit state FIPS code above REP Votes for Republican party candidate for president DEM Votes for Democratic party candidate for president LIB Votes for Libertarian party candidate for president OTH Votes for presidential candidates other than Republican, Democratic or Libertarian AREA square kilometers of area associated with this block group GAP total area of the block group, net of area attributed to voting precincts PRECINCTS Number of voting precincts that intersect this block group ASSUMPTIONS, NOTES AND CONCERNS: Votes are attributed based upon the proportion of the precinct's area that intersects the corresponding block group. Alternative methods are left to the analyst's initiative. 50 states and the District of Columbia are in scope as those U.S. possessions voting in the general election for the U.S. Presidency. Three states did not report their results at the precinct level: South Dakota, Kentucky and West Virginia. A dummy block group is added for each of these states to maintain national totals. These states represent 2.1% of all votes cast. Counties are commonly coded using FIPS codes. However, each election result file may have the county field named differently. Also, three states do not share county definitions - Delaware, Massachusetts, Alaska and the District of Columbia. Block groups may be used to capture geographies that do not have population like bodies of water. As a result, block groups without intersection voting precincts are not uncommon. In the U.S., elections are administered at a state level with the Federal Elections Commission compiling state totals against the Electoral College weights. The states have liberty, though, to define and change their own voting precincts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_precinct. The Census Bureau practices "data suppression", filtering some block groups from demographic publication because they do not meet a population threshold. This practice...

  5. o

    American National Election Series: 1972, 1974, 1976

    • explore.openaire.eu
    • icpsr.umich.edu
    Updated Jun 19, 1984
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    University Of Michigan. Center For Political Studies (1984). American National Election Series: 1972, 1974, 1976 [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.3886/icpsr07607
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jun 19, 1984
    Authors
    University Of Michigan. Center For Political Studies
    Description

    This study is part of a time-series collection of national surveys fielded continuously since 1952. The election studies are designed to present data on Americans' social backgrounds, enduring political predispositions, social and political values, perceptions and evaluations of groups and candidates, opinions on questions of public policy, and participation in political life. This collection consists of a distinct panel across the three election waves, the cross-section samples associated with each election study, and a vote validation study. The panel component consists of a maximum of five interview points for each respondent (pre- and post-1972 election, post-1974 election, and pre- and post-1976 election) taken from the American National Election Studies of 1972 (ICPSR 7010), 1974 (ICPSR 7355), and 1976 (ICPSR 7381). The vote validation data were gathered in the spring and summer of 1977, through interviews with election registration officials and from examination of voting records of the respondents participating in these election studies. The collection also includes filter variables that allow for the retrieval of each of the distinct panel and cross-section samples. face-to-face interview; self-enumerated questionnaire; telephone interviewA total of 11 respondents who were "panel only" in the original 1976 cross-section study (AMERICAN NATIONAL ELECTION SERIES: 1972, 1974, 1976 [ICPSR 7381]) were corrected to "panel and cross section" in this data collection. Consequently, the frequency distribution for certain variables will differ slightly between the 1976 cross-section study and this version of the data.The codebook frequencies pertain to the 1972-1974-1976 Panel. Vote validation frequencies were generated using V764008 as a weight and filter.The variable breakdown by year is as follows: 720001-721112 are 1972 variables, 742001-742603 are 1974 variables, 763001-763969 are 1976 variables, 764001-764011 are cross-year variables, 765001-765073 are individual voter record variables from the 1976 vote validation study, 765101-765342 are election administration variables from the 1976 Vote Validation Study, and 765401-765417 are election items checklist variables from the 1976 Vote Validation Study.The SAS transport file was created using the SAS CPORT procedure. The data collection is a cross-section representative of persons 18 years of age or older as of November 7, 1972, who were living in private households in the coterminous United States. All citizens of voting age residing in households in the coterminous United States. Datasets: DS1: American National Election Series: 1972, 1974, 1976

  6. US General Election - County Level Voter Registration & Turnout Data,...

    • archive.ciser.cornell.edu
    Updated Dec 27, 2019
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Leip, David. Dave Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections. http://uselectionatlas.org (2019). US General Election - County Level Voter Registration & Turnout Data, 1992-2022 [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.6077/h0y1-q517
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Dec 27, 2019
    Dataset provided by
    Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Electionshttps://uselectionatlas.org/
    Authors
    Leip, David. Dave Leip’s Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections. http://uselectionatlas.org
    Variables measured
    GeographicUnit
    Description

    This data collection contains voter registration and turnout surveys. The files contain summaries at state, town, and county levels. Each level of data include: total population, total voting-age population, total voter registration (excluding ND, WI), total ballots cast, total votes cast for president, and voter registration by party. Note: see the documentation for information on missing data.

    Dave Leip's website

    The Dave Leip website here: https://uselectionatlas.org/BOTTOM/store_data.php lists the available data. Files are occasionally updated by Dave Leip, and new versions are made available, but CCSS is not notified. If you suspect the file you want may be updated, please get in touch with CCSS. These files were last updated on 9 JUL 2024.

    Note that file version numbers are those assigned to them by Dave Leip's Election Atlas. Please refer to the Data and Reproduction Archive Version number in your citations for the full dataset.

    For additional information on file layout, etc. see https://uselectionatlas.org/BOTTOM/DOWNLOAD/spread_turnout.html.

    Similar data may be available at https://www.electproject.org/election-data/voter-turnout-data dating back to 1787.

  7. g

    National Election Pool General Election Exit Polls, 2008 - Version 2

    • search.gesis.org
    Updated May 9, 2022
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    GESIS search (2022). National Election Pool General Election Exit Polls, 2008 - Version 2 [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR28123.v2
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    May 9, 2022
    Dataset provided by
    ICPSR - Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research
    GESIS search
    License

    https://search.gesis.org/research_data/datasearch-httpwww-da-ra-deoaip--oaioai-da-ra-de449096https://search.gesis.org/research_data/datasearch-httpwww-da-ra-deoaip--oaioai-da-ra-de449096

    Description

    Abstract (en): Election data for 50 states and the District of Columbia were collected through interviews conducted with voters as they left their polling places on election day, November 4, 2008. Part 1, National Data, contains data collected from a national sample. National sample respondents were asked a series of questions about their electoral choices, the issues surrounding the elections, and the factors that influenced their decisions. Questions focused on the direction of the country, national security, terrorism, the war in Iraq, the state and future of the nation's economy, gay marriage, and the George W. Bush presidency. Demographic variables of national respondents cover age, race, gender, Hispanic descent, sexual orientation, age of children in household, marital status, political party, political orientation, employment status, education, religion, sexual orientation, and family income. Parts 2-52 contain data collected from each state and District of Columbia surveys. Respondents were asked for their opinions of Republican presidential candidate Senator John McCain, Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama, and the United States Congress, as well as for their vote choices in the relevant gubernatorial, senatorial, and congressional elections. Those queried were also asked their opinions of the candidates' spouses, Cindy McCain and Michelle Obama. Demographic variables of individual state respondents cover age, race, gender, education, voter participation history, political party, political orientation, sexual orientation, and family income. Telephone interviews were the only type of interview conducted in Colorado, Oregon, and Washington. Telephone interviews were also used to poll absentee voters in Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Michigan, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, Tennessee, and Texas. National: A sample of exit poll precincts was drawn from each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. A subsample of these precincts was selected to form the national sample. The national survey was administered in a total of 300 sample exit poll precincts. Respondents in the national precincts were given one of four versions of the national questionnaire. The four versions were interleaved on pads that were handed out to respondents. Responses to the four versions are combined into one dataset. All versions have questions in common as well as questions unique to each version. State Data: As mentioned above, a sample of exit poll precincts was drawn in each state. A subsample of these precincts was selected to form the national sample. The remaining precincts in each state made up the state sample and were given questionnaires specific to that state. Because the national questionnaire has several items in common with the state questionnaire, national respondents are included in the state exit poll dataset for these common questions. To determine which questions are on the national questionnaire, simply crosstab each question by QTYPE (found in column 13 of the ascii dataset), indicating whether the respondent completed the state or national survey. If the corresponding item did not appear on that respondent's version of the questionnaire, it was coded as system missing in the SPSS file and will appear as a blank in the ascii dataset. Remember, as noted above, some questions on the national survey appear on multiple versions of the national and some do not. Note that in 2008 all respondents in California, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, and New York answered one version of the national questionnaires. The exit poll results are weighted to reflect the complexity of the sampling design. That is, the weighting takes into account the different probabilities of selecting a precinct and of selecting a voter within each precinct. For example, minority precincts that were selected at a higher rate receive a smaller weight than other precincts of the same size. An adjustment is made for voters who were missed or refused to be interviewed, which is based on their observed age, race, and gender. Respondents are also weighted based upon the size and distribution of the final tabulated vote within geographic regions of the state or of the nation. Voters casting a ballot in the 2008 United States general election. The samples were selected in two stages. First, a probability sample of voting precincts within each state was selected that represents the di...

  8. g

    Data from: CSES Module 1 Full Release

    • search.gesis.org
    • pollux-fid.de
    Updated Dec 15, 2015
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Rotman, David; McAllister, Ian; Levitskaya, Irina; Veremeeva, Natalia; Billiet, Jaak; Frognier, André-Paul; Blais, André; Gidengil, Elisabeth; Nevitte, Neil; Nadeau, Richard; Lagos, Marta; Tóka, Gábor; Andersen, Jørgen G.; Schmitt, Hermann; Weßels, Bernhard; Curtice, John; Heath, Anthony; Norris, Pippa; Jowell, Roger; Pang-kwong, Li; Tóka, Gábor; Hardarson, Ólafur T.; Arian, Asher; Shamir, Michal; Nishizawa, Yoshitaka; Lee, Nam-Young; Alisauskiene, Rasa; Liubsiene, Elena; Beltrán, Ulises; Nacif Hernández, Benito; Aimer, Peter; Aarts, Kees; Karp, Jeffrey A.; Banducci, Susan; Vowles, Jack; Aardal, Bernt; Valen, Henry; Romero, Catalina; Jasiewicz, Krzysztof; Markowski, Radoslaw; Barreto, Antonio; Freire, Andre; Badescu, Gabriel; Sum, Paul; Colton, Timothy; Kozyreva, Polina; Stebe, Janez; Tos, Niko; Díez Nicolás, Juan; Holmberg, Sören; Hardmeier, Sibylle; Selb, Peter; Chu, Yun-Han; Albritton, Robert B.; Bureekul, Thawilwadee; American National Election Studies (ANES), Center for Political Studies, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States; Balakireva, Olga; Sapiro, Virginia; Shively, W. Phillips (2015). CSES Module 1 Full Release [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.7804/cses.module1.2015-12-15
    Explore at:
    (3606453), (4515804), (5729184), (3010508), (4164222), (6088669)Available download formats
    Dataset updated
    Dec 15, 2015
    Dataset provided by
    GESIS Data Archive
    GESIS search
    Authors
    Rotman, David; McAllister, Ian; Levitskaya, Irina; Veremeeva, Natalia; Billiet, Jaak; Frognier, André-Paul; Blais, André; Gidengil, Elisabeth; Nevitte, Neil; Nadeau, Richard; Lagos, Marta; Tóka, Gábor; Andersen, Jørgen G.; Schmitt, Hermann; Weßels, Bernhard; Curtice, John; Heath, Anthony; Norris, Pippa; Jowell, Roger; Pang-kwong, Li; Tóka, Gábor; Hardarson, Ólafur T.; Arian, Asher; Shamir, Michal; Nishizawa, Yoshitaka; Lee, Nam-Young; Alisauskiene, Rasa; Liubsiene, Elena; Beltrán, Ulises; Nacif Hernández, Benito; Aimer, Peter; Aarts, Kees; Karp, Jeffrey A.; Banducci, Susan; Vowles, Jack; Aardal, Bernt; Valen, Henry; Romero, Catalina; Jasiewicz, Krzysztof; Markowski, Radoslaw; Barreto, Antonio; Freire, Andre; Badescu, Gabriel; Sum, Paul; Colton, Timothy; Kozyreva, Polina; Stebe, Janez; Tos, Niko; Díez Nicolás, Juan; Holmberg, Sören; Hardmeier, Sibylle; Selb, Peter; Chu, Yun-Han; Albritton, Robert B.; Bureekul, Thawilwadee; American National Election Studies (ANES), Center for Political Studies, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States; Balakireva, Olga; Sapiro, Virginia; Shively, W. Phillips
    License

    https://www.gesis.org/en/institute/data-usage-termshttps://www.gesis.org/en/institute/data-usage-terms

    Time period covered
    Feb 3, 1996 - Aug 4, 2002
    Variables measured
    A2001 - AGE, A2020 - RACE, A2002 - GENDER, A1001 - DATASET, A2003 - EDUCATION, A2021 - ETHNICITY, A2016 - RELIGIOSITY, A1022 - STUDY TIMING, A1015 - ELECTION TYPE, A5014 - HEAD OF STATE, and 294 more
    Description

    The module was administered as a post-election interview. The resulting data are provided along with voting, demographic, district and macro variables in a single dataset.

    CSES Variable List The list of variables is being provided on the CSES Website to help in understanding what content is available from CSES, and to compare the content available in each module.

    Themes: MICRO-LEVEL DATA:

    Identification and study administration variables: weighting factors;election type; date of election 1st and 2nd round; study timing (post election study, pre-election and post-election study, between rounds of majoritarian election); mode of interview; gender of interviewer; date questionnaire administered; primary electoral district of respondent; number of days the interview was conducted after the election

    Demography: age; gender; education; marital status; union membership; union membership of others in household; current employment status; main occupation; employment type - public or private; industrial sector; occupation of chief wage earner and of spouse; household income; number of persons in household; number of children in household under the age of 18; attendance at religious services; religiosity; religious denomination; language usually spoken at home; race; ethnicity; region of residence; rural or urban residence

    Survey variables: respondent cast a ballot at the current and the previous election; respondent cast candidate preference vote at the previous election; satisfaction with the democratic process in the country; last election was conducted fairly; form of questionnaire (long or short); party identification; intensity of party identification; political parties care what people think; political parties are necessary; recall of candidates from the last election (name, gender and party); number of candidates correctly named; sympathy scale for selected parties and political leaders; assessment of the state of the economy in the country; assessment of economic development in the country; degree of improvement or deterioration of economy; politicians know what people think; contact with a member of parliament or congress during the past twelve months; attitude towards selected statements: it makes a difference who is in power and who people vote for; people express their political opinion; self-assessment on a left-right-scale; assessment of parties and political leaders on a left-right-scale; political information items

    DISTRICT-LEVEL DATA:

    number of seats contested in electoral district; number of candidates; number of party lists; percent vote of different parties; official voter turnout in electoral district

    MACRO-LEVEL DATA:

    founding year of parties; ideological families of parties; international organization the parties belong to; left-right position of parties assigned by experts; election outcomes by parties in current (lower house/upper house) legislative election; percent of seats in lower house received by parties in current lower house/upper house election; percent of seats in upper house received by parties in current lower house/upper house election; percent of votes received by presidential candidate of parties in current elections; electoral turnout; electoral alliances permitted during the election campaign; existing electoral alliances; most salient factors in the election; head of state (regime type); if multiple rounds: selection of head of state; direct election of head of state and process of direct election; threshold for first-round victory; procedure for candidate selection at final round; simple majority or absolute majority for 2nd round victory; year of presidential election (before or after this legislative election); process if indirect election of head of state; head of government (president or prime minister); selection of prime minister; number of elected legislative chambers; for lower and upper houses was coded: number of electoral segments; number of primary districts; number of seats; district magnitude (number of members elected from each district); number of secondary and tertiary electoral districts; compulsory voting; votes cast; voting procedure; electoral formula; party threshold; parties can run joint lists; requirements for joint party lists; possibility of apparentement; types of apparentement agreements; multi-party endorsements; multi-party endorsements on ballot; ally party support; constitu...

  9. g

    Harris 1999 National Issues and Kosovo Survey, study no. 918633

    • datasearch.gesis.org
    • dataverse-staging.rdmc.unc.edu
    Updated Jan 22, 2020
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Louis Harris and Associates, Inc. (2020). Harris 1999 National Issues and Kosovo Survey, study no. 918633 [Dataset]. https://datasearch.gesis.org/dataset/httpsdataverse.unc.eduoai--hdl1902.29H-918633
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Jan 22, 2020
    Dataset provided by
    Odum Institute Dataverse Network
    Authors
    Louis Harris and Associates, Inc.
    Area covered
    Kosovo
    Description

    This study focuses on national issues and Kosovo. Topics addressed include issues and ratings, Presidential election 2000 (Bush vs Gore), Kosovo, national trends, 'Feel Good' index, and baseball teams. Background questions include presence of adults and children in the household, sex, age, education, presence of handicap among household members, ideology, income, Hispanic origin, race and number of telephone lines in the household.

  10. g

    Media Predictions and Voter Turnout in the United States, Election Day 1980...

    • search.gesis.org
    Updated Feb 26, 2021
    + more versions
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Jackson, John E. (2021). Media Predictions and Voter Turnout in the United States, Election Day 1980 - Version 1 [Dataset]. http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR09001.v1
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Feb 26, 2021
    Dataset provided by
    ICPSR - Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research
    GESIS search
    Authors
    Jackson, John E.
    License

    https://search.gesis.org/research_data/datasearch-httpwww-da-ra-deoaip--oaioai-da-ra-de444232https://search.gesis.org/research_data/datasearch-httpwww-da-ra-deoaip--oaioai-da-ra-de444232

    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    Abstract (en): The purpose of this study was to ascertain whether election night reporting of presidential election results affected voter turnout in the 1980 United States election. The study gathered information on what time of day respondents voted, whether they had heard early reports of election results, and when they heard such reports. The dataset also includes variables used to assess likelihood of voting, including education, region, partisan strength, and feelings of citizen duty, as well as vote validation variables indicating the respondent's registration status and whether he or she voted. This study used part of the sample from the AMERICAN NATIONAL ELECTION STUDY, 1980 (ICPSR 7763). A brief telephone interview was conducted in January 1981 with individuals who participated in that study's Minor Panel (C1-C4) and Traditional Time Series samples (C3-C3po), and who agreed to be reinterviewed and could be reached by telephone. Vote validation variables and variables used to assess the likelihood of voting were drawn from the Integrated File of ICPSR 7763. This dataset can be merged with the entire Integrated File to permit analysis using the full data gathered for these respondents. Merging instructions are included in the machine-readable documentation for this study. Demographic information collected on respondents includes age, educational attainment, and political party affiliation. 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: Standardized missing values.; Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.. Respondents from the AMERICAN NATIONAL ELECTION STUDY, 1980 (ICPSR 7763) who had agreed to be reinterviewed and could be contacted by telephone. The AMERICAN NATIONAL ELECTION STUDY samples were cross-sectional samples of United States citizens of voting age on November 4, 1980.

  11. d

    AP VoteCast 2020 - General Election

    • data.world
    csv, zip
    Updated Mar 29, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    The Associated Press (2024). AP VoteCast 2020 - General Election [Dataset]. https://data.world/associatedpress/ap-votecast
    Explore at:
    csv, zipAvailable download formats
    Dataset updated
    Mar 29, 2024
    Authors
    The Associated Press
    Description

    AP VoteCast is a survey of the American electorate conducted by NORC at the University of Chicago for Fox News, NPR, PBS NewsHour, Univision News, USA Today Network, The Wall Street Journal and The Associated Press.

    AP VoteCast combines interviews with a random sample of registered voters drawn from state voter files with self-identified registered voters selected using nonprobability approaches. In general elections, it also includes interviews with self-identified registered voters conducted using NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak® panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population.

    Interviews are conducted in English and Spanish. Respondents may receive a small monetary incentive for completing the survey. Participants selected as part of the random sample can be contacted by phone and mail and can take the survey by phone or online. Participants selected as part of the nonprobability sample complete the survey online.

    In the 2020 general election, the survey of 133,103 interviews with registered voters was conducted between Oct. 26 and Nov. 3, concluding as polls closed on Election Day. AP VoteCast delivered data about the presidential election in all 50 states as well as all Senate and governors’ races in 2020.

    Using this Data - IMPORTANT

    This is survey data and must be properly weighted during analysis: DO NOT REPORT THIS DATA AS RAW OR AGGREGATE NUMBERS!!

    Instead, use statistical software such as R or SPSS to weight the data.

    National Survey

    The national AP VoteCast survey of voters and nonvoters in 2020 is based on the results of the 50 state-based surveys and a nationally representative survey of 4,141 registered voters conducted between Nov. 1 and Nov. 3 on the probability-based AmeriSpeak panel. It included 41,776 probability interviews completed online and via telephone, and 87,186 nonprobability interviews completed online. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 0.4 percentage points for voters and 0.9 percentage points for nonvoters.

    State Surveys

    In 20 states in 2020, AP VoteCast is based on roughly 1,000 probability-based interviews conducted online and by phone, and roughly 3,000 nonprobability interviews conducted online. In these states, the margin of sampling error is about plus or minus 2.3 percentage points for voters and 5.5 percentage points for nonvoters.

    In an additional 20 states, AP VoteCast is based on roughly 500 probability-based interviews conducted online and by phone, and roughly 2,000 nonprobability interviews conducted online. In these states, the margin of sampling error is about plus or minus 2.9 percentage points for voters and 6.9 percentage points for nonvoters.

    In the remaining 10 states, AP VoteCast is based on about 1,000 nonprobability interviews conducted online. In these states, the margin of sampling error is about plus or minus 4.5 percentage points for voters and 11.0 percentage points for nonvoters.

    Although there is no statistically agreed upon approach for calculating margins of error for nonprobability samples, these margins of error were estimated using a measure of uncertainty that incorporates the variability associated with the poll estimates, as well as the variability associated with the survey weights as a result of calibration. After calibration, the nonprobability sample yields approximately unbiased estimates.

    As with all surveys, AP VoteCast is subject to multiple sources of error, including from sampling, question wording and order, and nonresponse.

    Sampling Details

    Probability-based Registered Voter Sample

    In each of the 40 states in which AP VoteCast included a probability-based sample, NORC obtained a sample of registered voters from Catalist LLC’s registered voter database. This database includes demographic information, as well as addresses and phone numbers for registered voters, allowing potential respondents to be contacted via mail and telephone. The sample is stratified by state, partisanship, and a modeled likelihood to respond to the postcard based on factors such as age, race, gender, voting history, and census block group education. In addition, NORC attempted to match sampled records to a registered voter database maintained by L2, which provided additional phone numbers and demographic information.

    Prior to dialing, all probability sample records were mailed a postcard inviting them to complete the survey either online using a unique PIN or via telephone by calling a toll-free number. Postcards were addressed by name to the sampled registered voter if that individual was under age 35; postcards were addressed to “registered voter” in all other cases. Telephone interviews were conducted with the adult that answered the phone following confirmation of registered voter status in the state.

    Nonprobability Sample

    Nonprobability participants include panelists from Dynata or Lucid, including members of its third-party panels. In addition, some registered voters were selected from the voter file, matched to email addresses by V12, and recruited via an email invitation to the survey. Digital fingerprint software and panel-level ID validation is used to prevent respondents from completing the AP VoteCast survey multiple times.

    AmeriSpeak Sample

    During the initial recruitment phase of the AmeriSpeak panel, randomly selected U.S. households were sampled with a known, non-zero probability of selection from the NORC National Sample Frame and then contacted by mail, email, telephone and field interviewers (face-to-face). The panel provides sample coverage of approximately 97% of the U.S. household population. Those excluded from the sample include people with P.O. Box-only addresses, some addresses not listed in the U.S. Postal Service Delivery Sequence File and some newly constructed dwellings. Registered voter status was confirmed in field for all sampled panelists.

    Weighting Details

    AP VoteCast employs a four-step weighting approach that combines the probability sample with the nonprobability sample and refines estimates at a subregional level within each state. In a general election, the 50 state surveys and the AmeriSpeak survey are weighted separately and then combined into a survey representative of voters in all 50 states.

    State Surveys

    First, weights are constructed separately for the probability sample (when available) and the nonprobability sample for each state survey. These weights are adjusted to population totals to correct for demographic imbalances in age, gender, education and race/ethnicity of the responding sample compared to the population of registered voters in each state. In 2020, the adjustment targets are derived from a combination of data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s November 2018 Current Population Survey Voting and Registration Supplement, Catalist’s voter file and the Census Bureau’s 2018 American Community Survey. Prior to adjusting to population totals, the probability-based registered voter list sample weights are adjusted for differential non-response related to factors such as availability of phone numbers, age, race and partisanship.

    Second, all respondents receive a calibration weight. The calibration weight is designed to ensure the nonprobability sample is similar to the probability sample in regard to variables that are predictive of vote choice, such as partisanship or direction of the country, which cannot be fully captured through the prior demographic adjustments. The calibration benchmarks are based on regional level estimates from regression models that incorporate all probability and nonprobability cases nationwide.

    Third, all respondents in each state are weighted to improve estimates for substate geographic regions. This weight combines the weighted probability (if available) and nonprobability samples, and then uses a small area model to improve the estimate within subregions of a state.

    Fourth, the survey results are weighted to the actual vote count following the completion of the election. This weighting is done in 10–30 subregions within each state.

    National Survey

    In a general election, the national survey is weighted to combine the 50 state surveys with the nationwide AmeriSpeak survey. Each of the state surveys is weighted as described. The AmeriSpeak survey receives a nonresponse-adjusted weight that is then adjusted to national totals for registered voters that in 2020 were derived from the U.S. Census Bureau’s November 2018 Current Population Survey Voting and Registration Supplement, the Catalist voter file and the Census Bureau’s 2018 American Community Survey. The state surveys are further adjusted to represent their appropriate proportion of the registered voter population for the country and combined with the AmeriSpeak survey. After all votes are counted, the national data file is adjusted to match the national popular vote for president.

  12. U.S. presidential election results: number of Electoral College votes earned...

    • statista.com
    • ai-chatbox.pro
    Updated Nov 12, 2024
    Share
    FacebookFacebook
    TwitterTwitter
    Email
    Click to copy link
    Link copied
    Close
    Cite
    Statista (2024). U.S. presidential election results: number of Electoral College votes earned 2024 [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1535238/2024-presidential-election-results-us/
    Explore at:
    Dataset updated
    Nov 12, 2024
    Dataset authored and provided by
    Statistahttp://statista.com/
    Area covered
    United States
    Description

    According to results on November 6, 2024, former President Donald Trump had received *** Electoral College votes in the race to become the next President of the United States, securing him the presidency. With all states counted, Trump received a total of *** electoral votes. Candidates need *** votes to become the next President of the United States.

  13. Not seeing a result you expected?
    Learn how you can add new datasets to our index.

Share
FacebookFacebook
TwitterTwitter
Email
Click to copy link
Link copied
Close
Cite
Statista (2024). Age of U.S. Presidents when taking office 1789-2025 [Dataset]. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1035542/age-incumbent-us-presidents-first-taking-office/
Organization logo

Age of U.S. Presidents when taking office 1789-2025

Explore at:
2 scholarly articles cite this dataset (View in Google Scholar)
Dataset updated
Nov 6, 2024
Dataset authored and provided by
Statistahttp://statista.com/
Area covered
United States
Description

Since 1789, 45 different men have served as President of the United States, and the average age of these men when taking office for the first time was approximately 57 years. Two men, Grover Cleveland and Donald Trump, were elected to two non-consecutive terms, and Donald Trump's victory in 2024 made him the oldest man ever elected as president, where he will be 78 years and seven months old when taking office again. Record holders The oldest president to take office for the first time was Joe Biden in 2021, at 78 years and two months - around five months younger than Donald Trump when he assumes office in 2025. The youngest presidents to take office were Theodore Roosevelt in 1901 (42 years and 322 days), who assumed office following the assassination of William McKinley, and the youngest elected president was John F Kennedy in 1961 (43 years and 236 days). Historically, there seems to be little correlation between age and electability, and the past five presidents have included the two oldest to ever take office, and two of the youngest. Requirements to become president The United States Constitution states that both the President and Vice President must be at least 35 years old when taking office, and must have lived in the United States for at least 14 years of their life. Such restrictions are also in place for members of the U.S. Congress, although the age and residency barriers are lower. Additionally, for the roles of President and Vice President, there is a "natural-born-citizen" clause that was traditionally interpreted to mean candidates must have been born in the U.S. (or were citizens when the Constitution was adopted). However, the clause's ambiguity has led to something of a reinterpretation in the past decades, with most now interpreting it as also applying to those eligible for birthright citizenship, as some recent candidates were born overseas.

Search
Clear search
Close search
Google apps
Main menu