ИСТИНА

BACKGROUND Studies of US political preferences geography are traditionally targeted on research of areas with stable political preferences (J. Arnold, H. Gosnel, N. Gill, C. Paulin, F. Turner, J. Wright et al.), electoral zoning (C. Archer, S. Lavin, K. Martis, F. Shelley, P. Taylor, R. Johnson), classification of elections by their influence on geographic distribution of political forces support (C. Archer, F. Shelley, W. Burnham, A. Campbell, V. Kee, G. Pomper et al.). D. Elazar paid attention to cultural aspects of political life. Among Russian authors, L. Smirnyagin [1] conducted US zoning considering electoral differentiation of the country. Thanks to the rich tradition of the popular vote, the US was the main ground of geography of political preferences research. This studies established concepts and models, which played an important role in development of electoral geography. Formed on the US materials, a theory of formation of areas with stable political preferences was developed. American researchers have performed the first zoning of the country basing on the similarity of dynamics of voters’ political preferences. Concepts of electoral epochs and critical elections were created. Descriptive, cartographic, mathematical methods were designed. In the framework of a descriptive method the emphasis on interviewing and identifying the formation characteristics and dynamics of the political views were made. Cartographic techniques allowed to reach a new level of generalization, identify patterns, conduct more precise zoning. Using mathematical methods (correlation, factor, and regression analysis) allowed to parameterize the results of research and to make them more objective. RESEARCH USING THE COEFFICIENT OF REDISTRIBUTION AND CORRESPONDING METHODS L. Smirnyagin proposed adapting the method to the objectives of electoral research. The method is based on the variability of ranks in the table of values of normalized ratio of votes cast for Democrats and Republicans in two consecutive polls. C_redistribution= (∑▒P)/P_max , where ΣP - the sum of transpositions, i.e. the differences between the ranks in two consecutive voting for all territorial units, and Pmax - is the maximum possible number of transpositions, which is determined by the formulas: P_max=(n^2-1)/2 - for an odd number of territorial units and P_max= n^2/2 for an even number, where n - number of territorial units. The method has simple calculations and at the same time allows obtaining important data about the internal imbalances of the system, it is also convenient because it can be used for studying countries with a more complex party systems. C_shift= (∑▒〖[(D/R)]〗)/n, where (D/R) - the difference between proportion of votes cast for Democratic and Republican parties from the total number of voters for 2 consecutive elections, and n - the number of territorial units. V=/x ̅ , where  - standard deviation of the value of D/R as a whole, for which the accepted values of D/R for all the territorial units of the first order, members of the territorial unit for which the ratio is calculated, and x ̅ - sample average value of D/R in a given population. FINDINGS Four periods in change of spatial organization of US voters political preferences between 1912 and 2008 can be distinguished: The first period of active redistribution from 1912 to 1936 The first stable period from 1936 to 1956 The second period of active redistribution from 1956 to 1980 The second stable period from 1980 to 2008 The periods when there were active changes in "political mosaic" of states in most cases coincided with periods of strong transformations at the federal level. But the relative stability of political preferences of a state on the federal level is not accompanied by smoothing of spatial disproportions of political preferences inside the state, and often deepens them. Despite the fluctuations, political disproportions within the states during the period from 1912 to 2008 remained approximately the same level. The extent of changes in the territorial organization of political preferences vary greatly depending on the period and region: During F.D. Roosevelt presidency and in early 2000s, it was not more than 10% of the maximum possible. In the most turbulent years figure was half of the theoretical maximum. Before 1980s South US remained the generator of instability within the picture of the spatial organization of political preferences. Northeast and West regions had similar dynamics of population political views spatial distribution. Depending on the period and the region, the greatest changes have occurred in different parts of the state: in cities, suburbs and rural areas and at different speeds. Since the 1980s, the United States entered a period of greater stability of the political system in terms of the spatial organization of political support. Sectionalism in US geography of political support has lost its crucial role after the Second World War, equaling in order of importance to the internal imbalances within the states. NEW APPROACHES - ADAPTING "SHIFT SHARE" Adapting the "shift share" method, designed to determine the contribution of national, regional and local factors in the dynamics of economic sectors ( = NS + IS + LS), for use in the electoral geography will provide a tool for assessing the contribution of socio-economic factors in the voting results of each region. SOURCES Archer C., Shelley F. American electoral mosaics. Washington D.C.: Resource publications in geography, 1996. Elazar D. American federalism: A View from the States (3rd edition). N.Y.: Harper and Row, 1984. Smirnyagin L. Rajony SShA: gruppovoj portret Ameriki [Regions of the United States: a group portrait of America], Mysl', Moscow, 1989, 379 p. (in Russian). Varyushin P. Metody issledovanija geografii politicheskih predpochtenij naselenija SShA [Methods of studying the geography of political preferences of the US population] // Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta, seria 5, Geografiya, 2014, No. 4, pp. 42-47. (in Russian).