Dealing with Defeat

2017 ◽  
pp. 229-249
Author(s):  
Andrew Priest
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Ronald Reagan ◽  
Election Campaign ◽  
Jimmy Carter ◽  
Election Cycle ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
The Difference

The election of 1976 took place in very unusual circumstances. Yet, in many ways, the election campaign itself was fairly conventional. Much of the election cycle, however, also revolved around the issues of presidential authority and credibility, and, in these areas, foreign policy was crucial. That Gerald Ford came so close to snatching the election in the finals days and weeks of the campaign suggests that foreign policy could have made the difference and that the president’s refusal or inability to exploit Republican foreign policy positions and divisions between his policies and those of his opponents, Ronald Reagan for the nomination and Jimmy Carter for the election, hampered his ability to develop a winning campaign.

Students' Pre-Election Perceptions of Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan

1981 ◽  
Vol 52 (2) ◽  
pp. 491-498 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elaine P. Gelineau ◽  
Peter F. Merenda
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Community College ◽  
Public Perception ◽  
Ronald Reagan ◽  
Vector Analysis ◽  
Jimmy Carter ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Difference ◽  
One Year ◽  
Activity Vector

As part of a continuing investigation into the public perception of national and international leaders, the Activity Vector Analysis (AVA) was administered to 176 community college students. Instructions were to check those words which are descriptive of Jimmy Carter and his major opponent, Ronald Reagan. The data yielded two distinct clusters, (1) around AVA Pattern 4529 for Carter, which correlated perfectly with an image observed for him one year prior in the same setting and (2) around AVA Pattern 7616 for Reagan, which correlated .81 with the “administrative pattern” of U.S. self-made company presidents. The correlation between the Carter profile and the Reagan profile was .59, suggesting some overlap in their respective public images. It is the difference between the two candidates, however, which serves as the focus for discussion.

scholarly journals The Effects of Electoral Concerns on Presidential Foreign Policy: The Case of Ronald Reagan

2006 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher S. Randolph, Jr.
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Foreign Relations ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
Ronald Reagan ◽  
Minimal Impact ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Policy Shift ◽  
The Impact

Although previous scholarship indicates that foreign policy has only a minimal impact on voter behavior, contemporary research suggests voters do act upon their foreign policy preferences. Recognizing voters’ policy concerns, political leaders have frequently modified their foreign policy positions to mitigate electoral vulnerability. Ronald Reagan’s policies offer an example of such a shift. Reagan maintained hawkish positions toward Central America and the Soviet Union for most of his first term but, sensing public concern over such policies, adopted more conciliatory foreign policy positions, especially towards the Soviet Union, to reduce potential vulnerabilities in preparation for his 1984 reelection campaign. Notably, Reagan did not return to more aggressive policies following his reelection. Reagan’s foreign policy shift demonstrates the impact that public opinion and domestic politics may have on foreign relations.

The Domestic Politics of War and Peace

2017 ◽  
pp. 250-270 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Mason
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
Ronald Reagan ◽  
Jimmy Carter ◽  
War And Peace ◽  
American Power ◽  
Hostage Crisis ◽  
The World ◽  
Soviet Invasion

Issues of foreign policy were central to presidential politics in 1980. Not only did the Iran hostage crisis and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan raise disturbing questions about America’s strength in the world, but, crucially, Jimmy Carter identified foreign policy as a way to salvage his political fortunes. The strategy, which reflected the bleakness of his domestic record, managed to score some successes. But these successes were incomplete. Impatience with limits on American power overseas was pushing public opinion toward hawkish skepticism of negotiation, assisting the late 1970s Republican revitalization, and allowing Ronald Reagan to unlock an anti-Carter mandate in which malaise about America’s standing overseas was as significant as the malaise about the domestic situation.

scholarly journals Russia’s Foreign Policy Evolution in the New Balkan Landscape

2020 ◽  
Vol 56 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 179-199
Author(s):  
Ekaterina Entina ◽  
Alexander Pivovarenko
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Regional Security ◽  
Southeast Europe ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Current Trends ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
The Difference

The article reflects on the issue of the foreign policy strategy of modern Russia in the Balkans region. One of the most significant aspects of this problem is the difference in views between Russia and the West. Authors show how different interpretations of the events in former Yugoslavia in the 1990s and the beginning of the 2000s predetermined the sense of mutual suspicion and mistrust which spread to other regions such as the post-Soviet space. Exploring differences between the Russian and the Western (Euro-Atlantic) views on the current matters, authors draw attention to fundamental differences in terminology: while the Western narrative promotes more narrow geographical and political definitions (such as the Western Balkan Six), traditional Russian experts are more inclined to wider or integral definitions such as “the Balkans” and “Central and Southeast Europe”. Meanwhile none of these terms are applicable for analysis of the current trends such as the growing transit role of the Balkans region and its embedding in the European regional security architecture. Therefore, a new definition is needed to overcome the differences in vision and better understand significant recent developments in the region. Conceptualizing major foreign policy events in Central and Southeast Europe during the last three decades (the 1990s, 2000s and 2010s), authors demonstrate the significance of differences in tools and methods between the Soviet Union and the modern Russia. Permanent need for adaptation to changing political and security context led to inconsistence in Russian Balkan policy in the 1990s. Nevertheless, Russia was able to preserve an integral vision of the region and even to elaborate new transregional constructive projects, which in right political circumstances may promote stability and become beneficial for both Russia and the Euro-Atlantic community.

How government-controlled media shifts policy attitudes through framing

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Jennifer Pan ◽  
Zijie Shao ◽  
Yiqing Xu
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Authoritarian Regimes ◽  
Policy Positions ◽  
Policy Issues ◽  
Composite Measures ◽  
Policy Attitudes ◽  
Tv News

Abstract Research shows that government-controlled media is an effective tool for authoritarian regimes to shape public opinion. Does government-controlled media remain effective when it is required to support changes in positions that autocrats take on issues? Existing theories do not provide a clear answer to this question, but we often observe authoritarian governments using government media to frame policies in new ways when significant changes in policy positions are required. By conducting an experiment that exposes respondents to government-controlled media—in the form of TV news segments—on issues where the regime substantially changed its policy positions, we find that by framing the same issue differently, government-controlled media moves respondents to adopt policy positions closer to the ones espoused by the regime regardless of individual predisposition. This result holds for domestic and foreign policy issues, for direct and composite measures of attitudes, and persists up to 48 hours after exposure.

The Helsinki Accord: A Growth Industry

1990 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 53-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Korey
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Ronald Reagan ◽  
The United States ◽  
Jimmy Carter ◽  
Mikhail Gorbachev ◽  
Negotiation Strategies ◽  
Security Issues ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Growth Industry

Despite conservative opposition, in the late 1970s, Jimmy Carter turned the tide in favor of the Helsinki Accord by taking a strong stand in fostering U.S. participation in it. Korey focuses on the U.S. delegation to the Commission on Security and Cooperation (CSCE) in Europe and credits the success of the Helsinki Accord to U.S. adroit negotiation strategies, beginning with the Carter administration. By 1980, U.S. President Ronald Reagan and Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev came to embrace the “humanitarianism” of the treaty. The Vienna review conference's (1986–89) effort peaked when a milestone was reached in the human rights process, linking it directly to security issues equally pertinent to the East and the West. The author contends that the United States' ardent participation in the monitoring of compliance was particularly effective in putting pressure on the Soviet Union to uphold the agreement within its territory, yielding enormous progress in human rights

What Biden may bring to the Eastern Mediterranean Region

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Winter 2021) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Soliman Al-Zawawy
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Policy ◽  
International Organizations ◽  
Mediterranean Region ◽  
Eastern Mediterranean ◽  
Eastern Mediterranean Region ◽  
Election Campaign ◽  
Bilateral Approach ◽  
Policy Objectives ◽  
The Impact ◽  
The U.S

This paper aims to forecast the route that Joe Biden, will take in his foreign policy toward the Eastern Mediterranean, by trying to analyze the content of his speeches and rhetoric before and shortly after taking office. In this context, America’s relation to Turkey will be pivotal in order to gauge the impact of any change in U.S. course. After four years of Trump’s doctrine of ‘America First’ and his bilateral approach, there are many expectations that the newly elected president will follow a more multilateral approach and will put more importance on international organizations and alliances across the Atlantic. Those expectations are more like wishes, however, when it comes to the Eastern Mediterranean, which is on the verge of a critical standoff between Turkey and its neighbors. There are some speculations that Biden will take a more affirmative stance against Turkey. Indeed, Biden has stressed the value of cooperating with allies to achieve foreign policy objectives. But despite the harsh language, Biden used during his election campaign to describe Turkey’s leadership, it is still unclear whether Biden will place the U.S. on a collision course with Turkey.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document