{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.012962962962962963, 'fraction_numerical': 0.022222222222222223, 'mean_word_length': 5.358823529411764, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Freshman Republicans and the 1996 Election

Freshman House Republicans running for reelection in 1996 outperformed predictions of vulnerability that were based upon their conservative roll call records and reputed lack of attentiveness to traditional constituency concerns. In this study, we find that perceptions of these freshmen’s ideology and ability to keep in touch with constituents were not, in fact, out of line with analogous perceptions of veterans in 1996 or of freshmen or veterans in other elections. Members of the class of 1994 did stand out, however, in how the determinants of voting behavior in their races compared with the determinants in races of these other groups. Constituent evaluations of the job performance of Congress were closely linked to ballot choice, whereas ideological proximity to the member made no difference. Thus, it seems that the Republican freshmen succeeded in shifting the 1996 reelection battle to electorally favorable terrain, because Congress evaluations that year had rebounded from the low levels existing earlier in the 1990s.