Chapter 9. The Evolution of Campaigning During election campaigns, political parties help structure...
-
Upload
reynold-sherman -
Category
Documents
-
view
220 -
download
2
Transcript of Chapter 9. The Evolution of Campaigning During election campaigns, political parties help structure...
Chapter 9
The Evolution of Campaigning
During election campaigns, political parties help structure voting choice
Successful campaigns need resources to acquire, analyze, and disseminate information Voter interests Campaign tactics Candidate message Voter turnout
The Evolution of Campaigning
Until 1950s, political parties ran most campaigns
Today’s candidates manage own campaigns Races more candidate-centered Must campaign for nomination as
well as election Parties help with funding and party
label
Nominations American political parties use
elections to choose party nominees In most other countries, party
leaders choose nominees In America, each state has own set
of laws regarding party nominations America puts large burden on
voters
Nomination for Congress and State Offices
All states use a primary election as all or part of the nomination process
Nomination process highly decentralized
Only half of regular party voters vote in a given primary
Many primary races have little or no competition
Primary Elections Four types of primary elections:
Closed primaries Open primaries Modified closed primaries Modified open primaries
Most scholars believe type of primary affects strength of party organizations
Nomination for President
Presidential candidates for each party chosen at national convention
Until 1960s, party delegates to national convention chose nominee
Since 1972, delegates have been chosen by complex process that includes the primary election and party caucuses
Selecting Convention Delegates
Different states and parties have different procedures for selecting delegates
States follow one of two basic formats: Presidential primary Presidential primary/caucus
Democratic selection proportional; Republicans “winner takes all”
Selecting Convention Delegates
Delegates selected openly back one of the presidential candidates
Primary elections and caucuses mean nominees’ names usually known before national conventions Early primaries and caucuses result
in “front-loading”
Changes in the Presidential
Nominating Process
Until 1968 Since 1972
Party Dominated Candidate Dominated
Few Primaries Many Primaries
Short Campaigns Long Campaigns
Easy Money Difficult Fundraising
Limited Media Coverage Media Focused
Late Decisions “Front-Loaded”
Open Conventions Closed Conventions
Campaigning for the Nomination
A complex, drawn-out process Invisible primary
Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary viewed as testing grounds
In 2008, narrowed field to five Republicans and seven Democrats
“Super Tuesday” resulted in one Republican and two Democrats with the most support by voters
Consequences of Presidential Campaigns
Races with no incumbents contested in both parties - Open Election
Incumbent presidents usually face little opposition
Iowa and New Hampshire do matter Candidates favored most by party
identifiers usually win nomination Winners owe little to national party
organization
Figure 9.1
From Many to Two: Presidential Hopefuls
Starting and Dropping Out
Elections By national law, all seats in House
of Representatives and 1/3 of seats in Senate elected every two years in general election State and local offices also on ballot President chosen every 4th year in
presidential election Non-presidential elections
congressional, mid-term, or off-year elections
Presidential Elections and the Electoral College
Presidency not automatically given to person with the most votes in the general election
General election selects electors who then select president
States receive one elector for each House and Senate seat Washington, D.C. also receives three
electors
The Electoral College Candidate must have a majority
of electoral votes (270) to win presidency
If no candidate receives majority, decision on president made by the House; Senate chooses vice president Each state has one vote Has only happened in 1800 and
1824
The Electoral College: Politics
Prior to 1860, most electors chosen by state legislatures
After 1860, electors chosen by popular vote
All states but Maine and Nebraska award electors “winner takes all”
Election in 2000 came down to Florida’s electoral votes
The Electoral College: Abolish It?
Over 700 proposals to abolish electoral college introduced in Congress over the years
Electoral vote system allows states to decide how electors chosen – a federal system
Many voters appear to prefer nationwide direct popular vote
Grover Cleveland (1888) and George W. Bush (2000) elected despite losing popular vote
Figure 9.4
The Popular Vote and the Electoral Vote
Support for the Electoral College
Generally, results from electoral vote system magnify popular vote results
Electoral college is a federal election system: Allows small states to have more
weight in process Campaigns carried out via personal
contact versus the large market media
Nationwide recounts not needed
Congressional Elections Candidates for president listed at
top of ballot, with other national, state, and local offices below
Voters can vote straight ticket or split ticket between 15% and 30% of voters
choose president from one party and congressional candidates from the other
Can result in divided government
Congressional Elections Democrats basically in power until
1994 Winners from single member
districts are candidates with the most votes “First-past-the-post” elections Districts drawn by the party in power
and usually benefit dominant party President’s party generally loses
seats in mid-term elections
Campaigns: The Political Context
Most important structural factors in campaign planning: Office sought Whether incumbent or challenger
Non-incumbents more successful in open elections
More populous and/or diverse districts mean more expensive campaigns
Party preference of electorate also important
Financing Quality of campaign organizations a
function of money However, money alone does not ensure
success “There are four parts to any campaign.
The candidate, the issues of the candidate, the campaign organization, and the money to run the campaign with. Without money, you can forget the other three.” -- former House Speaker Thomas (“Tip”) O’Neill
Regulating Campaign Financing
State and federal governments regulate campaign financing
Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) passed in 1971 Amendments in 1972 created Federal
Election Commission (FEC) Limits on political action committee
(PAC) contributions – both soft and hard money
After court challenges, 1974 FECA governed elections for about 30 years
Regulating Campaign Financing
Increases in campaign contributions and spending led to Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) in 2002 Limits on contributions by individuals Banned soft money contributions to
political parties Allowed 527 committees to spend
unlimited amounts for media, with some limits
2007 Supreme Court ruling struck down ban on issue ads before elections
2010 Supreme Court ruling overturned ban on corporate contributions to candidates Citizens United vs. FEC
Public Financing of Presidential Campaigns
Both FECA and BCRA provided for public financing for presidential campaigns Subject to spending limits
Until 1996, all eligible candidates used public funds for primary elections
Since 1996, more and more candidates refusing public funds for primaries
Funding for general election follows different rules; most candidates used until 2004
Private Financing of Congressional Campaigns Candidates for national office
raised over $3 billion during the 2007-2008 primary and general elections Obama raised almost $750 million McCain raised almost $370 million Congressional candidates raised
almost $1.4 billion
Future Trends in Campaign Finance
Public funding faces uncertain future
Major candidates can raise more money on their own Contribution bundlers Internet fundraising
BCRA limited soft money but not amounts raised for presidential campaigns
Strategies and Tactics Strategies are broad approaches
to campaigns Party-centered strategies Issue-oriented strategies Candidate-oriented strategies
Strategies must take into account political context
Pollsters and Political Consultants
Well-funded campaigns buy “polling packages” Benchmark poll Focus groups Trend polls Tracking polls
Information gathered then used to tailor campaign to current political situation
Making the News News coverage valuable because
it’s free and seems objective to the public Incumbents have advantage
News coverage frequently limited to “sound bites”
Horse-race metaphors limit attention to issues: bandwagons, losing ground, the front-runner, and the likely loser
Advertising the Candidate
Main objective for campaigns ads: name recognition Voters may not recall name but
recognize on a list, such as a ballot Must also point out virtues of
candidate Campaign ads also sometimes
attack opponent or play on emotions Majority of ads use electronic media
Advertising the Candidate
Recent years’ ads tend to mention personal characteristics rather than policy preferences
Negative ads can be either attack ads or contrast ads
Media sometimes report controversial ads as news
Candidates must “approve” message in their ads; independent groups do not
Using the Internet Use started in 1992 with e-mail to
supporters Democrats pioneered Internet
usage in election campaigns, both to raise funds and mobilize supporters Also use social networking sites,
blogs, and YouTube Internet inexpensive way to quickly
contact supporters, but TV still best way to reach average voters
Explaining Voting Choice
Long-term forces predispose voters to choose certain types of candidates Party identification most important
Short-term forces associated with particular elections Combination of candidates and
policy positions on current issues
Party Identification Over half of electorate decides
candidate before party conventions Early decisions generally vote based
on party identification Each candidate in 2008 received 90%
of vote of self-described partisans Independents generally favored Obama
Republicans have won more elections due to lack of Democratic voter turnout and other short-term factors
Figure 9.6
Effect of Party Identification on the Vote, 2008
Issues and Policies Candidates exploit issues that
seem to be important to voters Incumbent’s record versus
problems pointed out by challenger Even with no incumbent, that
party’s candidate may be tied to outgoing president
Candidates’ Attributes Attributes important because
most voters lack information about candidates’ past performance and policy stands
Stereotypical thinking may play into some voters’ decisions
Evaluating the Voting Choice
Party identification and candidate attributes not basis for voting according to democratic theory Citizens should vote based on past
performance and proposed policies However, all are factors when
developing statistical models to explain voting Historically, attributes and party
identification most important
Evaluating the Voting Choice
Recent studies show increase in policy-based voting
Relationship between party identification and voters’ positions on issues more distinct today
Alignment between party and ideology almost perfect in congressional voting
Campaign Effects While campaign may not cause
change in party identification, can influence enough votes to change outcome of election
Television ads main method for transmitting candidates’ message
Battleground states key Presidential campaign in 2008 most
expensive ever No major candidate took federal
matching funds in primary; only McCain in general election
The Presidential Debates
First televised debate in 1960 between John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon
In 1976, televised debates began airing regularly
Presidential and vice-presidential debates in 2008 election led to rise in support for Obama in election polls
Campaigns, Elections, and Parties
Party organizations not central to elections in America
Both parties follow majoritarian model by formulating different party platforms and pursuing announced policies when in office Weak connection between party
platform and voters during campaigns and elections
Party platforms do not play major role in elections, especially those for House and Senate seats
Parties and the Pluralist Model
The way parties operate in America more like pluralist model Function as two giant interest groups
Parties prefer candidates who support party platform However, candidates operate as
entrepreneurs, and may vote against party leadership
Stronger parties might be able to better coordinate government policies after elections