Published in

Cambridge University Press (CUP), Studies in American Political Development, 1(9), p. 117-186, 1995

DOI: 10.1017/s0898588x00001188

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Presidential Mandates in the Nineteenth Century: Conceptual Change and Institutional Development

Journal article published in 1995 by Richard J. Ellis, Stephen Kirk
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.
This paper was not found in any repository, but could be made available legally by the author.

Full text: Unavailable

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Red circle
Published version: archiving forbidden
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

A central paradox of the modern American presidency is that citizens regularly call for strong presidential leadership while at the same time their political culture predisposes them to be reluctant followers.1 One of the ways contemporary presidents resolve this paradox is by invoking an electoral mandate. By persuading others that he possesses a mandate from the voters to pursue a particular policy agenda, a president can disguise his leadership under the pretense of simply carrying out “the will of the people.” The presidential mandate thus enables presidents to lead while seeming to follow, to exercise power over people under the guise of empowering the people.

Beta version