Unit 3- Elections and Voting - American

Question 1

What is the invisible primary and what are the stages ?

Answer 1

The invisible primary is the period between candidates declaring an intention to run for the Presidency and the first contests of the primary season where candidates will attempt to gain name recognition and money for running office

Important events during the primary include …

• announcing their candidacy
• polls in specific states- more attention

During this stage , candidates will go to early voting states and put a campaign organisation so that a network of people can get the candidates message out to voters

Money during the invisible primary stage is significant as it is needed so candidates can uy TV airtime to put their adverts ok TV to promote their campaign and attack other candidates

Debates during the primary act as an opportunity for candidates to connect with voters and attacks the positions of other candidates

Question 2

Invisible primary is important ?

Answer 2

Candidates need to raise a lot of money to stay in the presidential race

A poor debate performance can be costly e.g Marco Rubio in 2016 and George Allen 2006 - Virginia

Establishing yourself as one of the front runners can stop other candidates from emerging e.g. Clinton and Joe Biden

Question 3

Invisible Primary not important ?

Answer 3

Candidates can still get the presidential nominee without doing well in the main event and a lack of organisation
e.g Donald Trump 2016?

Question 4

Criticisms of Caucasus’s

Answer 4

• turnout is often very low , usually at around 10%
• they attract only committed party supporters, which may disadvantage moderate candidates and result in more dogmatic and ideological candidates being selected
• because of the large number of meeting points (for example in Iowa- approaching 2000), candidates with extensive organisation may have an advantage

Question 5

Advantages of Caucuses

Answer 5

• they are a traditional form of civic engagement for local communities and an active and participatory form of democracy
• they give close control over proceedings and who can vote
• the win of Rick Santorum suggest that caucuses still reward candidates who have a strong presence in the state (Santorum was the first candidate to visit all of Iowa’s 99 counties)

Question 6

Presidential debates

Answer 6

These offer the candidates a national platform - and the audience an opportunity to see how they perform under pressure.
The dynamic of debates will depend to some extent on whether an incumbent in running.

Key points :
1960- first Nixon- Kennedy Debate
2000- Gore’s attempt to crowd Bush

However they are not always useful : Mitt Romney had a substantial victory in the first 2012 debate and it was thought at the time to be significant however it had very little impact on the final result

Question 7

Advantages of the current nomination process

Answer 7

• allows outsider candidates to emerge into politics e.g Trump and Sanders
• produces a large range of candidates ; give every voter a candidate
• the current nomination process encourages political participation - can be seen by 28.5% of eligible voters who voted in 2016 primary
• all states are given a voice as they all hold an electoral primary
• makes sure that candidates are vetted for and ready for the general election as it is a gruelling process and the media will investigate all possible candidates

Question 8

Disadvantages of current nomination process

Answer 8

• tension and polarisation can occur between the parties as they have contrasting views and the parties will fight over certain policies
• the media has too much influence over the primary process e.g SMG delta gave $2 billion worth of free primary media administration to Trump
• the current nomination process is too expensive and it is undemocratic as money should not be the determining factor in who gets nominated e.g Clinton $231 million and Sanders $219 million
• too much influence is given to New Hampshire and Iowa as both states are older, more white and rural ; candidates can be seen to be pandering to the two states as they have disproportionate influence
  — no candidate has received the nomination after not finishing 1st or 2nd in either state

Question 9

Mid- terms are significant

Answer 9

• they may result in a change of power in Congress e.g the 2010 election ; this means that there may be very different laws being proposed by the legislature
• may make it much more difficult for a President to get legislation passed due to the change in balance of power in Congress
• may undermine the legitimacy of the president as it may be viewed as a rejection of the voters
• pave a way for future political activity and reflect the views of the public and how it will influence politics e.g Barack Obama 2014

Question 10

Mid- terms lack significance

Answer 10

• rates of incumbency are high and candidates generally get re-elected during mid terms
• they are not a reflection of the President
• turnout is generally around 50% so it can be said that it does not given a true reflection of public opinion
• presidents are still able to achieve re-election or significant accomplishments despite mid-term defeats e.g Bill Clinton and Iranian Nuclear Deal

Question 11

Party conventions are important

Answer 11

• they give young politicians the best opportunity to connect with the activists , donors and pundits of the party e.g Barack Obama 2004 and Marco Rubio 2012
• help show that the party is united behind the presidential nominee e.g DNC after a brutal primary campaign
• after the conventions , a ‘polling bounce’ occurs for both parties due to the media’s complete attention being on the convention

Question 12

Party conventions aren’t important

Answer 12

• candidates are not decided at conventions anymore as the parties wish to avoid negotiation and arguing in public
• fewer people use the convention to see the nominee for the first time due to the rise of mass media
• candidates are on message and what is said at the conventions is pre-determined by the party beforehand e.g the 1968 Democratic Vietnam Policy

Question 13

Arguments in favour of electoral college

Answer 13

• it maintains the federal nature of the US and ensures that state identities are maintained as each state has an individual preference for President
• ensures that smaller states can have a significant outcome of the election ; their voices are heard
• it has provided a stable and successful democracy for more than 200 years
• it works to maintain the two-term system in US politics and provides stability for choosing the President and prevents extremists and wealthy donors from gaining office

Question 14

Arguments against electoral college

Answer 14

• candidates representing minor parties have little likelihood of winning electoral votes due to concentrated nature of votes required e.g Ross Perot 1992, 19% of vote
• smaller states are over represented with minimum 3 electors limit e.g. California has 55 however it should have 189 if Wyoming has 3
• some states are solidly Democrat or Republican and candidates will rarely campaign in these states ; this means that voters in these states are largely ignored and their vote it taken for granted
• the system created swing states that are given too much influence and importance - pandered to by candidates (Iowa, New Hampshire , Ohio, Michigan , Florida
• the candidate who wins the most votes nationally may lose the electoral college vote which is undemocratic

Question 15

Reasons for incumbent advantage

Answer 15

The ‘perks of office’ which include office budget allotment , staff, travel allowances for trips from DC to their constituencies and postage -free informational letters or announcements to their constituents on a regular basis

Time - this is a full time job nevertheless those running against an incumbent must generally figure out how to pay his or her bills whilst running for office

Visibility : members of Congress who have sat in for a term are universally recognised in their own district and they may vote for them again ‘out of comfort’

Campaign Organisation - the incumbent already has experience with creating and managing a campaign organisation

Money - the campaign contributions that they are able to earn

Redistricting - if a certain party wins a seat then they can re draw congressional boundaries in an attempt to guarantee election victory for a party or candidate

Question 16

How can incumbency affect the outcome of elections ?

Answer 16

Incumbents record on the economy : this was credited with the defeat of President Bush in 1992 and in some elections such as the 2004- the incumbents record in foreign policy may be important

Correlation between incumbents approval rating and the outcome of the election : identified that voting is more a retrospective judgement than something based on promises in the future e.g it would have been impossible for almost any GOP candidate in 2008 to overcome the association with the presidency of George W. Bush

NEVERTHELESS ….
incumbency fell below 90% in the House elections in 2010 for the first time in 30 years

Question 17

Other factors determining the outcome of elections in the USA

Answer 17

Quality of the opponent : if the opponent does not present a case , many voters will feel inclined to stick with an incumbent e.g. Clinton was viewed negatively in 2016 and she was unable to appeal to enough voters to win the presidency

Events : Storm Sandy hit a week before the election ; e.g publishing of a letter in 2016 by FBU saying Clinton was under investigation

Presidential debates : in a close election (Nixon-Kennedy 1960) they may play a crucial role

Individual candidates’ campaigns : may have a huge impact on the result e.g George Allen 2006, in campaign made racially abusive comments

Party : in the 1980’s the Democratic Party suffered in presidential elections as the party was seen to be too soft on national security issues and not competent on the economy
- losses by the presidents party may be attributable to the presence of coattails (able to do something because of someone else’s success and not because of their own efforts)

Campaign Strategy : Obama’s campaign heavy investment early in 2012 successful advertised Romney as ‘outsourcer in chief’ which was an image he struggled to shed e.g. Trump used campaign rallies in 2016 to motivate his supporters and speak over the heads of the media

Campaign finance : in 2008, Obama raised around $700 million , whereas John McCain’s campaign was limited to the federal grant of $84.1 million

• record of congressional leadership e.g Republican campaign against Pelosi- Reid agenda in 2010
• in 1998, the strategy of congressional republican leadership in pursuing impeachment against the President May have been a factor in Democratic gains

Question 18

Why have campaign restrictions failed ?

Answer 18

Enforcement - candidates are not officially allowed to coordinate their campaign with super PAC’s which are supporting them but coordination is hard to prove ; problems of enforcement are compounded by the ineffectualness of the FEC who six members are perpetually gridlocked

Lack of political will - congressional incumbents have almost always benefited from outspending their opponents and consequently have little incentive to introduce limitations on spending
LINK -
Incumbents - candidates and incumbents want to spend as much as possible to keep their seat and gain an advantage over their opposition ; with incumbency it is all about keeping the seat and they constantly look for loopholes and push the boundaries of legislation

Amendment process -‘ power without accountability’

Lobbyists and pressure groups - want to donate as there is widespread belief that donations buy influence - the bigger the donation ; the probable greater influence

Supreme Court and Strength of Constitutional Right : Buckley case made all limits on candidate expenditure (except federal subsidy grants) . Nevertheless, Citizens United made electoral activities of independent groups exempt from regulation which has lead to super PAC’s

Question 19

Reasons for low participation in US elections

Answer 19

Money in politics : lobbyists and the wealthy have undue influence in the political process so people may not cite as they think the process is corrupt and their vote won’t count

Democratic overload : too many elections which can lead to ‘voter apathy’

Lack of choice : this links to the two- party system

Gerrymandering - redrawing district boundaries means they will already know the result , so what is the point in voting ?

Sense of disillusionment : an idea of ‘distrust of the system’ and it is the idea of ‘my vote won’t make a difference so what should I vote?’

Voters not automatically enrolled : lack of registration shows lack of care and if an election happens that they do care about - it is too late and they are not able to vote

Question 20

Democratic features of US elections

Answer 20

• primary process allows the public to engage and choose the candidates rather than being told who to vote for by party bosses
• voters are free to express their opinions and spend money to advance a cause they believe in during the campaign
• the open nature of the electoral process means that anyone can enter and become the nominee of the party
• the public get to put the candidates to the test and ask them questions and see how they perform during the long campaign
• ballot initiative and recall elections make elected politicians more accountable for their decisions

Question 21

Undemocratic features of US elections

Answer 21

• undue influence of money in advertising and campaigning against candidates
• undue influence given to Iowa and New Hampshire in the nominating process - they are the first states to be involved and have a disproportionate influence in the process
• two- party system - there is a lack of choice and independent parties will find it harder to run
• unrepresentative nature of voters choosing candidates and primarily caucus ; link this to gerrymandering and 90% incumbency rate
• FPTP- winner takes all nature in states , the electoral college is also undemocratic as the person with the most votes can lose if they get less electoral college points
• well organised pressure groups may be seen to promote their own interests during elections at the expense of others ; this is particularly true in ballot initiatives