株式会社極東書店トップ > 商品一覧 > Attacking Judges : How Campaign Advertising Influences State Supreme Court Elections.
商品詳細
Attacking Judges : How Campaign Advertising Influences State Supreme Court Elections. 裁判官への攻撃 -いかにキャンペーン広告が州最高裁判所選挙に影響を及ぼすか-
・ISBN 978-0-8047-8795-6 cloth US$ 110.00
¥25,773.- (税込) ※(※)価格はご注文時の参考価格となります。
納品価格につきましては書籍の入荷時点で確定となります。
版元の原価改定、外国為替の変動等により異なる場合がございますので、予めご了承下さい。
・ISBN 978-0-8047-9308-7 paper US$ 28.00
¥6,560.- (税込) ※(※)価格はご注文時の参考価格となります。
納品価格につきましては書籍の入荷時点で確定となります。
版元の原価改定、外国為替の変動等により異なる場合がございますので、予めご了承下さい。
| 著者・編者 | Hall, Melinda Gann, |
|---|---|
| シリーズ | Stanford Law Books |
| 出版社 | (Stanford U. Pr., US) |
| 出版年月 | 2014 |
| ページ数 | 248 pp. |
| 言語 | ENG |
| ニュース番号 | <618-1045 618-L592> |
解説
Nasty, below-the-belt campaigns, mudslinging, and character attacks. These tactics have become part and parcel of today's election politics in America, and judicial elections are no exception. Attacking Judges takes a close look at the effects of televised advertising, including harsh attacks, on state supreme court elections. Author Melinda Gann Hall investigates whether these divisive elections have damaging consequences for representative democracy. To do this, Hall focuses on two key aspects of those elections: the vote shares of justices seeking reelection and the propensity of state electorates to vote. In doing so, Attacking Judges explores vital dimensions of the conventional wisdom that campaign politics has deleterious consequences for judges, voters, and state judiciaries.
Countering the prevailing wisdom with empirically based conclusions, Hall uncovers surprising and important insights, including new revelations on how attack ads influence public engagement with judicial elections and their relative effectiveness in various types of state elections. Attacking Judges is a testament to the power of institutions in American politics and the value of empirical political science research in helping to inform some of the most significant debates on the public agenda. This book's results smartly contest and eradicate many of the fears judicial reformers have about the damaging effects of campaign negativity in modern state supreme court elections.