elections

Misunderstanding voters’ feelings, the natural unreliability of polling and insufficient skepticism from journalists contributed to predictions showing Hillary Clinton would be president.

Stuart Gabriel notes that the unusual 2016 election cycle reveals the shortcomings of using such an indicator.

Lynn Vavreck notes that ads using someone’s own words against them register as more memorable and truthful to voters, a strategy Clinton has used several times.

UCLA research report shows the candidate’s voters live in communities less affected by immigration from Mexico and trade with China.

As part of the UCLA history department’s “Why History Matters” series, the panelists discussed demagogues, the media and gender dynamics in the contest between Clinton and Trump.

Lynn Vavreck, Matt Barreto and Bill Schneider discuss the campaigns and the American electorate. More events are upcoming.

A UCLA political scientist and an American University political historian talked about the key factors in the presidential election Tuesday night before a packed crowd at the Hammer Museum.

David Shulman outlines why he will reluctantly vote for a Democrat in November, how Donald Trump betrays American values and what Republicans need to do to regain their party.

Law professor Adam Winkler writes that even if Congress hasn’t really tightened federal firearm laws, the NRA has lost its chokehold on the debate.

University of California President Janet Napolitano writes that to help ensure America’s future, scientists must serve as ambassadors to the public.

UCLA’s Lynn Vavreck writes in The New York Times that people’s opinions about abortion tend to converge when they’re asked to evaluate specific situations rather than simply express support or opposition.

That most people have never heard of Hatshepsut — a pharaoh of ancient Egypt, who was the greatest female ruler of the ancient world — is emblematic of the challenges women have always faced in politics, writes UCLA Egyptologist Kara Cooney.

UCLA professor Lynn Vavreck writes in The New York Times that if the Democrats lose the Senate, it would follow recent electoral history for the party of an unpopular president. Also, watch a video of Vavreck speaking about political TV ads.