| Sumario: | We show that standard economic measures based on samples and richer newly available ones based on populations lead to different conclusions about democratic accountability. Previous research, which has primarily relied on sample-based measures, has mostly missed an important determinant of presidential election outcomes: the local economy. We detect the local economy's impact with two unique data sets, one of which includes data on all consumer loans made in California and the other a census of businesses. In contrast to measures subject to sampling error, these population-based measures indicate that economic conditions at the ZIP code and county level have an impact on presidential election outcomes. Presidents therefore face incentives to focus on electorally important geographic regions.
|
|---|