5. Electoral Process and Direct Democracy

Question 1

Requirements for a presidential candidate - constitutional requirements

Answer 1

Must be over 35 years old – youngest president was JFK at 43.
Must be a natural born American citizen – must be born in the US
Resident qualification of 14 years
Constitution limits Presidents to 2 terms (8 years max) – 1951 – 22nd amendment

Question 2

Requirements for a presidential candidate - extra constitutional requirments - poltiical experience

Answer 2

Ronald Regan 1981-1989 was previosuly an actor before coming president. Likewise, Trump in 2017-2021 had been a businessman.

In comparison, Joe Biden was a seantor from 1973-2009 (36 years) and was VP for Obama

Question 3

Requirements for a presidential candidate - extra constitutional requirments - major party endorsement

Answer 3

Ross Perot (1992/6) showed third party or independent candidacies do not lead to the White House. Ross Perot won 18.9% of votes in 1992 and 8.5% in 1996, but never won a single electoral vote as he had dispersed support.

Question 4

Requirements for a presidential candidate - extra constitutional requirments - personal characteristics

Answer 4

Traditionally, white males however the 2008 Democratic race was between a white woman (Hillary Clinton) and a Black man (Barack Obama)
2016 - Clinton became the first female major-party candidate

Being married is an advantage – only James Buchanan was a bachelor in 1856. Although, Reagan, McCain, and Trump had all divorced and remarried – in Trump’s case, twice

1992 Bill Clinton managed to secure the Democratic presidential nomination despite allegations surrounding Gennifer Flowers which surface in the early campaign

Question 5

Requirements for a presidential candidate - extra constitutional requirments - ability to raise funds

Answer 5

Only billionaire candidates like Ross Perot (1992) and Steven Forbes (1996/ 2000) have been able to finance their own campaigns on their own dime

Hillary Clinton raised over just $700 million during her unsuccessful bid in 2016

Question 6

Requirements for a presidential candidate - extra constitutional requirments - sound and relevant policies

Answer 6

Bill Clinton 1992 campaign – ‘It is the economy stupid!’
Howard Dean 2004 campaign – The war in Iraq

Question 7

Requirements for a presidential candidate - extra constitutional requirments - oratorical skills

Answer 7

Being a good speaker is crucial as they must be able to deliver speeches and be able to do it well- must carry themselves well to represent their nation
Increased presence of the media- good looks and being a strong speaker are crucial.
Regan 1980/ Clinton 1992+1996

Question 8

The invisible primary is important

Answer 8

Front runner - 2016 conventional - Clinton and Trump were confirmed as the eventual nominee. At the invisible primary Clinton enjoyed a 14-point lead over Bernie Sanders and Trump had a 15-point lead over his nearest rival, Ted Cruz - a critical stage in discerning who the likely presidential candidates would be even before a single vote had been cast.

Fundraising - if insufficiet funds can be raised then a candidate can be forced into withdrawing. For example, in 2016 Republican candidate Rick Perry withdrew fom a lack of finacial backing and Scott Walker for a lack of funds to support his campaign funding

Announcement - In 2015 Jeb Bush suffered criticism from Trump being atttatcked on Twitter far more than any of the other Republican candidates which led to him withdrawing in 2016.

Question 9

The invisible primary is not important

Answer 9

Front runner - not always the case (2008) - The USA Today/Gallup poll conducted on 1-2 Dec 2007 (end of the invisible) Clinton held a 15-percentage point lead over Obama. The same poll reported a 10-percentage point lead for Rudy Giuliani over John McCain in the R race. Yet it was Obama and McCain who went on to win their party nominations

Fundraising - in 2016 Trump came in 5th but he had donated just short of $18 million of his own money to his campaign when added to the $25.5 million he had raised put him in 3rd in the money raising table.

Announcement - whereas for well-known politiicans like Biden this is less important as people know who they are and a rough idea of what they stand for so for them this stage lacks significance.

Question 10

Primaries and caucus are positive

Answer 10

7 R candidates withdrew after the first primary in 2016 showing its significance in whittling down the number of candidates ensuring they are suitable for the role of president.

McGovern-Fraser Report introduced in 1972 made the process more democratic as party leaders no longer secretly selected convention delegates instead it was now an open process where the public had a say, Trump used this in 2016 to ride a popular wave of support to party endorsement despite party leadership opposition

Question 11

Primaries and caucus are negative

Answer 11

Primary voters are unrepresentative of the voting-age population (older, wealthier and more ideological). Possibly more true in caucuses as they attract more committed atypical party identifiers and so some ideological candidates do better than they should. The Christian Right has been known to effectively exploit this in states like Virginia and Texas.

IOWA AND NEW HAMPSHIRE: the first 2 so are saturated with candidates, events and media. However, they are not representative of the voting-age population so some criticise their significance. Winning one boosts a candidate’s likelihood of nomination and winning both usually secures it, making the rest irrelevant (Reagan 1984).

Frontloading: In 1988, only 11 states had them before the end of March but by 2008 it was 42.

Super Tuesday: several contests on the same day began in the 1980s when a block of Southern states tried to increase their influence. In 2008 there were 2 in which 52% of the Democratic and 41% of the Republican delegates were awarded

Question 12

National Party Convetions are significant

Answer 12

Party unity - 2016 it was neccessary for Clinton and Bernie Sanders to present a united front after a bitter rivalry in the primaries. Sander delegates booed the mention of Clinton’s name but Sander’s responded by showing his support for Clinton while also speaking to his own supporters

Increased popularity - In 1992 Bill Clinton (D) recieved a +16 bounce in contrat to George H. W. Bush (R) +5 who was the incumbednt president. Shows that the bounce can indiciate which one will most likley win the election.

Party platform - There may be debates at the convention on various parts of the platform known as ‘planks. Can also establish clear difference in views such as 2016 the Republicans reinfrocing their view that the unborn child has a fundamental right to life which cannot be infringed. Whereas, the Democrats stated that every woman should have access to quality reproductive health care services, including safe and legal abortion regardless of situaiton.

Choose the Presidential candidate - by the end it is clear which candidate is the party’s presidential nominee. If no candidate recieves enough delegates during the first round a brokered convention is called but between 1956-2016 there were no such occasions in the 16 elections

Question 13

National Party Convetions are not significant

Answer 13

Failure to promote party unity - in 2016 the R’s were less successful as a number of prominent Republicans failed to jump get behind Trump. For example, Senator Ted Cruz’s closing speech failed to endorse Trump.

Exaggerated bounce (inaccurate polling) - In 2016 Clinton recieved a 5+ bounce whereas Trump recieved a 1+ bouce yet he still went on to win the election so the bounce is not always accurate. Only signal the outcome correctly 1/2 of the time

Dont’s select the VP/confirm the Presidential candidate rather than choose - The VP has not been annonced or voted for at the convention since 1988 when the Republicans annouced a running-mate. Not since the R convention of 1976 has the choice really been in any doubt at the opening of either party’s convention (Ford or Reagan with Ford winning)

Party platform - is often not the talking point instead it is attacking the opposite party or saying how they will change America which doesn’t always go along with the party line. Additionally, candidates try to avoid heated debate in order to promote party unity

Question 14

Arguments for the Electoral College

Answer 14

Normally the right result/ two party race - 2012 Obama had the popular vote and won. In 2020 Biden had the popular vote and won which is important when electing a President as they should be a symbol of national unity. 2 party race has meant that in two-thirds of the last 40 elections, the winner has gained more than 50% of popular vote.

Reflect the federal nature of the US - ensures candidates campaign in a range of states, not simply the most populated. . States have some say over how to divide up their ECVs (e.g. Maine, Nebraska)????????

Faithless electors - have never had an impact on the election outcome. The issue can be remedied by passing laws requiring electors to vote for their pledged candidate.

Question 15

Arguments against the Electoral College

Answer 15

Popular vote winner can lose - In 2016 Trump got less of the popular votes but got more electoral college votes than Hillary Clinton- only happened twice since 2000. The result can also be distorted due to it being a winner-takes all system as in 1996, Bill Clinton won 49% of the popular vote but over 70% of EC votes.

Smaller states are overrepresented/focus on swing states - California has 1 ECV per 718,000 people, and Wyoming has one for every 192,000 people. States like Florida and Ohio are more important than states like Texas and California as. In the 2016 election Florida had 36 R campaigns and 35 D campaign. California had 0 campaigns from Hitlary Clinton and 1 from Trump

Faithless electors - The Supreme Court ruled in Chiafolo v Washington 2020 that states do have the right to replace their Electors if they try to vote for someone else. A record 7 in 2016 which meant that although the result ‘should’ have been 306-232 for Trump, it was 304-227.

Question 16

Strenghts to alternatives to the Electoral College

Answer 16

Direct election - ‘Power to the People’ E.g. 2016 was the 2nd time in 5 elections the keys went to the candidate who lost the popular vote. Washington Post had a national poll in 2007- 72% supported a popular vote with only 23% opposed

Congressional district system - Provides a more equal system of representation.

Proportional System - Equal allocation of electoral college votes to the popular votes. Would in effect abolish the Electoral College as votes would be decided through a mathematical computation rather than Electors casting ballots. More votes for independents and third-parties.

Question 17

Weaknesses to alternatives to the Electoral College

Answer 17

Direct election - More likely that a president could be elected with well below 50% of the vote so there would be a run-off election between the top 2 candidates. Require a Constitutional Amendment- smaller states would not give up their advantage.

Congressional District System - Would lead to disproportionate results. E.g. Mitt Romney would have won the 2012 election despite losing to Obama by 5 million votes. (Obama was winning fewer districts but by huge margins).

Proportional System - More likely that no candidate would gain an absolute majority of Electoral College votes- leading to Congress deciding a winner or a run-off election between the top two candidates.

Question 18

Factors determining electoral outcome - televised debates

Answer 18

Yes -President Carter vs Governor Reagan, 1980.
Had their only head-to-head less than a week before Election Day. At the end, they had 3 minutes to give a closing statement. Carter was 1st and made remarks that were well meaning but eminently forgettable. Whereas, Reagan closed with a series of questions “are you better off than you were four years ago?” knewing the majority would answer in the negative, allowing him to shape the way voters would make up their minds in these last days. Support for Carter fell following the debate and on Election Day won only 6 states, plus the District of Columbia- total of just 49 Electoral College votes

No - (impact of incumbency) 1st debate between President Obama and Governor Mitt Romney in 2012.
Romney was animated and coherent and seemed to be genuinely enjoying the moment whereas, Obama looked disengaged and bored. The Gallup Poll foud that those who watched, 72% thought that Romney had won with 20% making Obama the winner. However, Obama swept to a comfortable victory on Election Day

No - 2016 Clinton vs Trump
Clinton according to polls, won all 3 debates, yet this appeared to have minimal impact as Trump still won despite questionable actions. Trump was called out for his abrasive tone repeated interrupting Clinton saying she was wrong and a nasty woman. Additionally, towards the end of the 3rd debate he repeatedly refused to say that he would respect the result whether he won or lost

Question 19

Factors determining presidential electoral outcome - incumbency

Answer 19

Yes - Incumbents tend to do better since they raise and spend more money, they have greater name recognition and they have established campaign teams and staff. In 2012 Obama’s ability to raise almost double the funds at the start of the election in March gave him an advantage over Mitt Romney as it meant he could sway the public early

NO - Since the end of WW2, 4 US Presidents have lost an election and only served one term, compared to 8 have been re-elected for a second term, thus there is a 66% re-election rate for the President which is far less than the 90% and 98% in the House and Senate

Question 20

Factors determining presidential electoral outcome - the media

Answer 20

Yes - The media are traditionally important in raising the profile and name recognition of candidates which is very important in elections like 2008 with the little-known Obama and in 2012 with Republican candidate Mitt Romney, whereas it was irrelevant in 2016, as both main candidates were very well known

Yes - Increasingly, candidates spend and concentrate on new media- it is estimated that together, Trump and Clinton in 2016 spent $80 million on Facebook ads

No - Much of the broadcast media is already informally politically aligned, e.g. Fox News is predominantly watched by Republicans and CNN by Democrats which limits the ability of traditional media to sway political views. Just the same, on platforms like Twitter, Democrats mostly follow Democrats and Republicans mostly follow Republicans which again limits the ability of media to change voting behaviour and creating an echo-chamber

Question 21

Factors determining presidential electoral outcome - money

Answer 21

Yes - As a general rule, higher spending candidates have a greater chance of winning elections, the 2020 election was the most expensive in history at $14.4 billion in total showing money to be a fundamentally important factor in winning elections, also shown by Democrats winning while spending $3 billion more than Republicans

No - Money is no guarantee of success. Hilary Clinton raised and spent more than twice as much as Donald Trump in 2016 but lost the election

Question 22

Factors determining presidential electoral outcome - issues (October Surprise)

Answer 22

Yes - in 2016 just 11 days before Election Day, FBI Director Corney sent a letter to certain members of Congress stating that he was reopening his investigation into Clinton’s State Department emails- an investigation which he had announced was closing in early July- because of possible new information that ‘appeared to be pertinent’ to the investigation. The saga revolved around the fact that Clinton had used a private email server while secretary of state (2009-2013) and that classified material had been passed through this server. This was to the advantage of Trump who went on to win the election

No - 2000 press disclosure that George W. Bush had paid a $150 fine for a drink-driving incident in 1976. This was an advantage for Al Gore but Bush still won the election

Question 23

Camapaign finance - 527 groups

Answer 23

Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act 2002

A 527 Group is an organization that influences elections

They are not regulated under federal campaign finance laws as they do not expressly advocate for the election of a candidate or party

There are no limits on their contributions and no restrictions on who they can contribute to

e.g. the Republican Governors Association spend almost $170 million in the 2018 mid-terms which assisted in the Republicans gaining 2 Senators

Question 24

Camapaign finance - PACs

Answer 24

A Political Action Committees, or PACs, is a group that pools campaign contributions from members and donates those funds to campaigns for or against candidates or legislation which appeared in 2004

PAC activity increased for the 2004 presidential election as PACs raised $915 million, this direct addition in funds can be seen as the 2004 election cost $1 billion more than the 2000 election

Question 25

Camapaign finance - Super-PACs

Answer 25

Citizens United v FEC 2010 - Corporations were free, under the first amendment, to donate money without restrictions

This lead to the creation of Super PACs

Super PACs, may engage in unlimited political spending independently of the campaigns, but are not allowed to either coordinate or make contributions to candidate campaigns or party coffers

Unlike traditional PACs, Super PACs can raise funds from individuals (the rich), corporations, unions, and other groups without any legal limit on donation size

Early in the 2012 presidential election, Super PACs had already raised almost $100 million, something which would play a part in the election being the first to cross the cost threshold of $6 billion

Question 26

Trends in Congressional elections - significance of incumbency

Answer 26

Yes - Incumbents tend to do better since they raise and spend more money, they have greater name recognition and they have established campaign teams and staff. Incumbents have an advantage in all US elections and enjoy high re-election rates. In 2016, 90% of senators and 98% of House members were re-elected. In 2012 Obama won after being able to raise x2 the funds of Mitt Rommney

No - WW2 4 President have been defeated. 66% chance of re-election.

Question 27

Trends in Congressional elections - the limited coattails effect

Answer 27

In 2016 there may have been some coattails from Donald Trump’s right wing popularism as 3 Republican Senators won their elections after previously being behind in the polls

Question 28

Trends in Congressional elections - gerrymandering

Answer 28

The Congressional districts for the House are drawn within each state. The party controlling each state’s legislature has the opportunity to redraw these every 10 years after each census. This has led to the practice where a state’s governing party draws the boundaries of each constituency to give it an electoral advantage. this produces relatively few swing seats further advantaging the incumbent.

E.g. The 4th congressional district of Illinois creates a Hispanic majority district. In 2016, of the 347,000 eligible voters, 211,000 of them were Hispanic

Biden’s ‘For the People Act’ would have banned partisan gerrymandering but failed to pass through Congress

Supreme Court in Abbott v Perez 2018 was about alleged the 2013 maps unconstitutionally diluted the voting rights of racial minority groups. Ruled 5-4 that it did not apply to 3 of the districts in Texas but one district was an impermissible racial gerrymander.

Question 29

Trends in Congressional elections - split ticket voting in decline

Answer 29

-When the electorate votes for candidates of different political parties for different offices in the same election.

The increasing partisanship in US politics had led to a decline in this. In 2004, 4 states voted for Republican George W. Bush for President but elected a Democrat Senator, By 2016 all 4 states voted the same way in the presidential and senatorial race

-Congressional districts can vote in the presidential race for one party and the House race for another party, in what are called ‘split districts’ In the 2016 election there were only 35 split districts in the nation

-Related are Senators of different parties, By 1999 30 states had split Senate delegations, by 2017 just 12 states had split Senate delegations

Question 30

Trends in Congressional elections - fewer comeptitive districts

Answer 30

-A competitive district is where the House member won by less than 10%

-In 1992 there were 111 competitive districts, by 2016 there were only 31 competitive districts

This means that it is very difficult for party control of the House to change hands e.g. In 2016 the Democrats needed just 30 seats to win control of the House, however due to few competitive districts they only made a gain of 6 seats

-Members that represent safe districts are less likely to make deals with the opposition

Question 31

Trends in Congressional elections - tendancy of the presidents party to lose seats in the mid-terms

Answer 31

There is evidence that the president’s party usually loses seats in both houses

In the 6 midterms between 1994 and 2014, the president’s party lost an average of 25 House seats and 4-5 Senate seats

If a President has had a positive effect on his party in the presidential election, then the lack of presence in the midterms will mean candidates do less well eg. In 2002, this was the only midterm in 40 years which the president’s party gained seats in both chambers, mostly due to 9/11

Voters often see midterms as a chance to express their disapproval with the president e.g. In 2006 voters expressed their disapproval with W. Bush’s failure to conclude the military operation in Iraq when the Democrats took majority in the House and took 49-49 in the Senate

Question 32

Direct democracy at the state level - propositions/initiatives

Answer 32

A process that enables citizens to bypass their state legislatures by placing proposed laws in 24 states on the ballot. e.g. In 2020 voters in 14 states voted on 26 ballot measures addressing tax-related policies

Question 33

Direct democracy at the state level - referendums

Answer 33

A electoral device by which voters can effectively veto a bill passed by their state legislature which is available in all 50 states. In 2012, there were 115 referendums put on the ballot by state legislation

Varies from state to state- but many states require that a constitutional change requires a state-wide referendum for it to become part of the constitution. In other states tax must be approved in the same way.

24 states go further e.g. Alaska with Popular Referendums. This allows citizens to collect signatures to demand a referendum on a recently passed law (usually a 90 day period). If enough signatures are collected then the law appears on the ballot to be voted on- it will not become law until after the election.

Question 34

Direct democracy at the state level - recall elections

Answer 34

A electoral device by which voters in a state can remove an elected official from office before their term has expired. (Direct Impeachment)

There have been three recall elections of state governors. In 2003, the Democrat governor of California, Gray Davies, was defeated in a recall election by the Republican candidate Arnold Schwarzenegger who then served as state governor until January 2011.

A criticism of the Recall Election process is that it allows voters to indulge in ‘buyer’s regret’-changing one’s mind after short-term dissatisfaction.

However, the infrequency of its use is also a positive.

Question 35

Voting behaviour - age

Answer 35

Yes - Younger voters generally holding much more liberal positions on issues like gay marriage, immigration, and marijuana legislation. Significant as in the 2020 election Democrats saw a higher percentage of the vote within younger with a 65% majority of 18-24 year olds, clearly helping them to win the election

No - While it is true that younger voters have a clear Democrat sway, they were far from being entirely reliant on this vote as they also had a majority of people aged 25-49 in 2020

Question 36

Voting behaviour - gender

Answer 36

Yes - Women are generally more supportive of government intervention, gun regulation, abortion rights. Women have been a deciding factor in election outcomes, as can be seen in the 2020 election where 53% of men voted Republican but 57% of women voted Democrat, winning the election for the Democrats

No - The impact of gender is signifcantly decreased when both genders vote in majority the same way such as in 2008 where a majority of both genders voted for Obama, although there was still a larger proportion of women voting for Obama

Question 37

Voting behaviour - Race

Answer 37

Yes - After the Party realignment and the start of the Democrats arguing for civil rights they were heavily supported in the black vote. Since the beginning of the 2000s, Democrats have constantly gotten around 90% of the black vote On top of that in the 2020 election, the Democrats got 65% of the Latino and Asian vote

No - In the 2020 presidential election 5% more black Americans, 3% more hispanic and latinos and 9% more asians voted for Trump than in the 2016 elections. Despite him increasing his voter share in these categories he lost the election this time.

Question 38

Voting behaviour - income

Answer 38

Yes - Low and high income voters have very different economic priorities and the Democrat and the Republican parties have very different economics policies. This can be seen in the 2020 election where Democrats had a majority of voters with income of under $30,000 right up to $100,000

No - However, the economy is not the only issue people base their vote one, as seen by Democrats having the support of many wealthy liberals. This can be seen in the 2020 election where voters with incomes over $200,000 had their vote split equally between the Republican and Democrat parties

Question 39

Voting behaviour - religion

Answer 39

Protestants - Protestants are a staple support group for the R’s giving it 54- 59% of their votes in each of the last 5 presidential elections.

White evangelicals - 2016- Trump had 81% support among the group- one of the highest levels of support enjoyed by an R presidential candidate- which may have had more to do with their aversion to Clinton than their commitment to Trump.

Catholics - The support traditionally went to the D’s. Since the 70s, the support has wavered because of the D’ support for abortion- contrary to the Catholic Church’s Official teaching. Ds won the Catholic vote in ⅗ last presidential elections- not in 2016 when only 45% voted D- lowest figure in a 2-party contest since 1984