Log in to StudySoup
Get Full Access to GWU - Study Guide - Midterm
Join StudySoup for FREE
Get Full Access to GWU - Study Guide - Midterm

Already have an account? Login here
Reset your password

GWU / Political Science / PSC 2219 / How party identification affects voting?

How party identification affects voting?

How party identification affects voting?


School: George Washington University
Department: Political Science
Course: Political Parties and Interest Groups
Term: Spring 2019
Tags: psc2219, Politics, and political science
Cost: 50
Name: PSC 2219 Study Guide Exam 2
Description: Study guide for exam 2
Uploaded: 03/28/2019
26 Pages 175 Views 4 Unlocks

PSC 2219- EXAM 2 

How party identification affects voting?

How party identification affects voting 

- People can develop ties to a party

- Parties often provide policy cues for their members

- People get signals from parties on how they should respond to certain events - Party affiliation is quite stable overtime

- Party changes with party affiliation takes place around the age of 19-21 - Party identification is often the best predictor of how people will vote - 90% people vote for the candidate of their party

- Strong party identification contributes to more party involvement

- People who have a strong identification with a party are more motivated to be part of the political process


Most of the people who call themselves an independent (40%) are generally a closeted Democrat(15%) or Republican(13%) and for some reason don’t want anyone to know - 12% are pure independents; not necessary that these are well-thinking people - These are people who are not really well-informed and have least knowledgeable and least motivated and generally do not vote

What factors influence voter turnout?

- How did this start?

- Age: Younger people are more likely to call themselves an independent than someone older (by 1968, 21-29 year olds had 54% independents) If you want to learn more check out What is the smallest angle that you can see on the sky?

- Why did all these people call themselves independent?

- Vietnam War (anti-establishment movement)

- Civil Rights Act (legislation was passed but there was no evidence

that it worked)

- In the early 70’s, it was Nixon (broke the perception and myths of

the President)

- Education: Don't forget about the age old question of What do you call the numerical summary of population?

- We see among those people who claim to be independent, a higher

percentage of college graduates

- 38% of college graduates said they were independent : however,

What are the key components of the american political system?

only 6% were pure independents

- Those with less than a high school degree, 34% claimed they were

independent; 15% were actually pure independent

Voting Behaviour 

- Campbell examines to what degree US citizens are ideological and whet

4 categories of voters 

1- Ideologues 

- They know their own views and those of their party and have We also discuss several other topics like What is another term for volcanic dome?

- 39% of all college graduates were ideologues

- Grade school or less, only 5% were ideologues

2- Group benefits 

- Indv who id. with certain groups in society(org, religious, or social); the group represents their views

- 38% of college graduates

- 40% grade school or less

- Overall 42%

3- Nature of the times 

- Indv make decisions/affiliation based on their perception on how things are going now

- 24% people looked at the nature of the time

- 25% of college graduates If you want to learn more check out How are chemical equations understood through molecular equations?
If you want to learn more check out Are flashbulb memories detailed?

- 29% grade school or less

4- No issue content 

- Indv who were unresponsive to political cues and didn’t understand the political process

- 22% of the electorate fit into that

- 10% college graduates

- 2% grade school or less

Changes overtime to the categories from 50’s to the 90’s: 

1- Number of people in ideologues increased 

- Due to the GI bill, there are more people going to college

2- Groups benefits number decreased 

3- Nature of the times increased from 24% to 30% 

4- No issue content

Voter turnout 

- Low in the US compared to other countries (may be because in some countries it is compulsory)

- States have different voter turnout rates (Wyoming have a lower turnout while Wisconsin and North Dakota have a higher)


1- Registration (as it requires a step; fill out a form and submit it to vote)

- Closing date (may not start paying attention until it is too late)

- Frequency with which the voter roles are purged (if you haven’t voted in the last 5 years in a specific state then they remove you as they think you have moved; however, some people may have just not voted) We also discuss several other topics like Are most mutations passed on to the next generations?

- Accessibility (ease to vote; location,hours…)

2- Residence requirements 

- Some states require that people have to live in a specific state for a

specific amount of time to be able to register and vote(ruled by Supreme

Court is max. 30 days)

3- Citizenship requirements 

- Have to be a citizen to vote

- Million people live in the US who are not citizens

Factors that can influence turnout 

1- Excitement of the election (candidate or issue people like or are passionate about) 2- Competitiveness of the election (if the outcome is unknown)

3- Stake in the system (personal gain by participating/voting; could just be ideological as well) 4- Campaign mobilisation (if campaigns and to what extent they actively go out and seek voters)

Factors of voters that determines turnout 

1- Education (BEST determinant)

- Higher education means more likely to vote

- 75% college graduates vote

- 40% with a high school degree or less vote

2- Age 

- Young people are less likely to vote

- 49% of 25 and under voted for Obama in 2008 and was down to 41% in 2012

- People over the age of 65 are 71% more likely to vote (more old people issues are given more importance)

- Where you are in the life cycle

3- Public sector employees vote more 

4- Socially engaged/ more active in the community people vote more (more stable) 5- Marital status 

- Married people vote more (20% difference)

6- Race 

- Whites vote more; however, for those with higher socioeconomic status, it levels out - Minority groups have majority of people with a lower socioeconomic status than whites 7- Gender 

- Women vote at a higher percentage than men may be because women have a higher education

Party organizations 

- Backbone of political party

- Structure is dependent on where you reside ( in the US, you just have to say you are part of a particular party)

- Entity that exist between elections

- Consistency among parties on what they stand for

- Power and decision-making was previously at the state and local parties - Increasingly to the 20th century, power started to shift to the national level

Key factors that nationalised American politics 

1- Emergence of mass media 

- Advent of TV; people could visualise/get images of what is going on around that world from the same place

2- Government 

- It has a huge impact on our lives (Medicare, Medicaid, Social security, Clean Air Act..etc)

3- Emergence of national leaders 

- Now, partly due to mass media, we can see or hear people directly and evaluate ourselves who we like

4- Greater focus on issues and ideologies

Democrats created DNC 1848 and Republicans created the RNC in 1856 

- Each one is overseen by a chairperson chosen in theory by the 50 states in a district - Party nominee has a great say of who will be the chair of the party

- National Party Chair for the current President, will be retained and will be the spokesperson of them and do their bidding

- Chairperson of the losing party, the state parties have to choose somebody through the normal process

- Each party had to taken different paths to get where they are today

Around the 1960’s: 

Republicans took the service path 

- Grassroot organizational process to build Republican party from bottom-up - Build up base of the party

 Bill Brock (Republican Senator of Tennessee) became Head of RNC from 1977 to 1981 - wanted a National Party structure

1- Aggressive fundraising 

- He was able to build up the Republican database from 250,000 donors in 1976 to 1.2 million in 1980

2- Organizational improvements 

- To compete/improve at the state level, they have to make sure there are people at the state level who will do the work for the Republican party

3- Better candidate recruitment 

- 1977 to 1981- Republicans train candidates to build a better infrastructure 4- Change the party image 

- Funded a publication called “Common Sense” that promoted new/ modern ways of thinking; charter schools, welfare reform, vouchers for schools, Star Wars system in mid 80’s

Democratic took the procedural reform path 

- Had a party structure that was dominated by certain individuals (weren’t from where the larger Democratic constituencies were coming from)

- Groups excluded from decision-making were African Americans, women and young people

- By 1968, it was the young people voting for candidates who were concerned about Vietnam

- Civil Rights Act was passed but African Americans felt they didn’t have representation/delegates in the conferences

- Purpose was to open the process up and make sure these constituencies had a greater role in decision-making

Democrats had to open their process and make it more transparents (were the dominant party at that time) while the Republicans had to build a party structure

Gradually as both parties move forward in the 80’s onwards, both do a hybrid of both (Republicans open their process up to make sure their constituencies have more of a say and Democrats have built up their party through fundraising and recruitment)

One of the failings the Democrats had when they made changes (procedural reform) was that they lost multiple elections 

- 1972 election: George McGovern was Democratic party nominee

- 1977: Jimmy Carter was able to take advantage of these changes and barely won against Ford

- 1980: Carter loses against Reagan by 10 points

- 1984 Election: Democrats decided to alter their changes a little and introduced ‘superdelegates’(elected officials can come to convention and sway it if they feel the nominee is not a good one to make sure they have a more establishment background) - First beneficiary was Walter Mondale

By the 80’s, each party adopts elements of the other party 

60’s and 70’s, the parties were changing and adapting

State and local parties 

- Previously power was held with these parties but increasingly in the 80’s most of the power was held at the national level

- Variation in power amond state parties as well

- Race and ethnicity can represent divisions in parties

- Each state determines political party regulations/function within its jurisdiction - POLITICAL PARTIES ARE NOT REGULATED AT THE NATIONAL LEVEL (ONLY FEDERAL CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAWS ARE) 

- Degree of regulations also vary by state (in the coast and Northeast, extensive regulations compared to the South)

- States assign certain responsibility to political parties (more responsible for calling and organising party conventions)

- Parties are responsible for drafting party platforms

- Parties are responsible for raising/spending campaign funds

- Select party’s Presidential electors

- Choose their representative for the national committees to the state

- Can choose some delegates to the national conventions

- Certain rights and obligations at the state level but varies

Strong state machine 

 Ruled Virginia from early 1930’s till around 1970 was the Byrd Machine (after Harry Byrd who found it in the early 1930’s; was a Governor and then a Senator)

- Was a Democrat who was not so supportive of the things FDR did

- Put together a loose organization of friends who believed in the same idea of a small, fiscally responsible government

- Machine was built on backs of locally elected officials

- Wanted the Sheriff (saw the way laws were implemented),school boards, local courts, local treasurer, and the election boards to be part of the machine [Tried to control those 5 in each of those counties]

- So that, Byrd and his friends could choose who the Democratic party nominee and essentially who got elected

The Byrd Machine was known for: 

- Fiscally responsible management 

- Restricted electorate (only wanted the supporters to vote)

- Rule based type of organisation

- Against unions and integration and changes progressive democratic were undertaking 

In the 1960’s, the Bird machine is brought down:(transition into becoming a more competitive and Republican state)

1- Supreme Court decision of 1962, Baker vs Carr- one person, one vote 

- More equal representation and less focus/dependability on rural areas to govern as they held more seats

2- Voting Rights Act 

- Ensures racial minorities were able to register and vote; they have reason to oppose the machine as it wasn’t in their best interest

3- National Democratic Reforms moving forward 

- In 1968, it opened up the process to ensure voters had a say as in the selection of delegates who chose the President and rules were put in place as to who could and how to vote

- Up until the 1960’s, the party controlled the delegates (Hubert Humphrey had no voter support but won only because of the delegates selected by the party)

4- Change in electorate 

- People were more educated and economically secure

- Byrd’s simple ideas were not as appealing to this electorate

- Strengths of machines and states was giving patronage out (at the state level, it was state jobs at the local level; things that this new electorate was not interested in) 5- Conservative alternative (Republican) to the Democratic party in Virginia - In the 50’s, both times they went for Republicans

- Gave people an alternative to the Byrd machine

- Byrd resigns in 1965 as Senator and wants to transfer his position to his son, Byrd Jr. who was appointed by a Byrd loyalist to be his replacement

- Byrd Jr. has to run in 1967 and wins but Dem party primary is competitive - In 1970, Byrd Jr. wants to retain his seat in Senate but thinks if he runs for Democratic party primary, will he win?

- He runs as an independent and wins

- 1976, he runs as an independent again and wins

- Retires in early 80’s

Local party 

Sponsors voters registration drives, gives info, hold local events/fundraisers

- Urban machines was a big party political apparatus that ruled the major cities - Hierarchical structure (people in the party at the top and the masses at the base) - Relied on material incentives (jobs and favors)

- Most effective was by Richard Daley Sr.

- Ruled Chicago from mid 50 to mid 70

- Mayor who controlled a lot

- During his peak, his machine controlled 35K patronage jobs in the city and could influence 10K more in the private sector through contracts

- 350K voters owed their income and living to some relation to the party Daley machine thus they had a strong opinion on it

- Machine was more than that, it was there to meet the needs of the individual at a given time

- Particularly dependent on new immigrants as they needed to help to navigate themselves around; less to offer to people higher up

- If you deal with the machine, since the machines do nice things for the people, the people do nice things back by voting for them and their candidates

- Urban machine was not based on ideology but was based on relationship and material benefits back and forth benefits

- Sometimes in major urban areas they would take the party tickets and divide the people running for different offices based on the composition of the electorate

- Whatever group comprised the coalition was made sure to have representation

Urban machine faced problems as times changed: 

1- Political reforms 

- Jobs they were able to give freely, now had civil service protections so they had to be qualified to get the job

2- Economic changes 

- People are doing better, making more money, have higher aspirations and the jobs the machine offered were just not up to that level

3- Emergence of a federal social safety net

- The federal government starts to help the people in need through programs and they asked for nothing in return (when the machine used to offer/do something for the person, they asked for something in return(votes))

- Access to federal programs/healthcare

4- Decline in immigration 

State and party machines that were big in the late 1800 and 1900 were weakening as American society was becoming increasingly more broader (more exposed to different things, more educated, higher incomes)


- We generally know the views of parties at the national level, however they may differ at the state level

- Republican and Democratic party are not necessarily homogeneous

Example of how a few Democratic party state platforms differ on a state and national level: 

1- Abortion 

- Mississippi: Party of Inclusion and believe in sanctity of life

- Massachusetts: Affirm support for provisions of Roe vs. Wade and oppose weakening or overturning it

2- Gun Rights 

- Mississippi: Affirmation of 2nd amendment as an individual right

- Massachusetts: Support strong state and federal gun laws to help keep firearms away from criminals

3- Marriage 

- Mississippi: Sanctity of marriage between a man and woman

- Massachusetts: Support of same sex marriage as is in the Massachusetts Constitutional Guarantee as well as parental obligations and oppose any attempt to weaken or revoke

Party activists 

Help party put forward their agenda

- Division between professionals and amateurs/ issue-oriented purists

- Professionals: People whose loyalty is to the party first

- Make sure they win the elections

- More pragmatic

- May have set views on things but ultimately want to win even if they have they have to moderate some of their views

- Amateurs: Don’t care about politics/party but they care about the issues and the party views and thus, push for that

- View the party as a vehicle to achieve their policy objective

What motivates individuals to be a party activist: 

1- Material incentives 

- Expect to get something in return if party wins

2- Social incentives 

- Want to work and collab with people who have the same values as the individual 3- Issue based incentives 

- A policy(ies) that the individual wants implemented and is motivated to work for that change

4- Mixture of all (material, social, and issue) 

Characteristics of people who are party activists: 

1- From political families 

- Easier transition (not new to this area and have someone to guide them) 2- Higher socioeconomic status 

- Understand process and know how things operate

- More wealthier so more resources available

3- People with agendas 

4- People with ideological views

Party coalitions 

To attain 50%+1, need a wider base of people to win

Parties look to bring people in who have more similar views/agendas as them - Socioeconomic divisions have always been a part of American history - Federalists are more educated and wealthier and Democratic Republicans were more farmers

- Regional divisions 

- Certain areas of the country tend to vote for one party over the other; maybe economically, religiously, culturally

- Republicans do well in the South and mountains

- Shifts exist where Northeast used to be Republican but increasingly became more Democratic

- Religious divisions 

- Historically, Catholics and Jews were Democrats and Protestants were more Republicans

- Within the religious groups it varies based on religious observances; those with higher religious observances/services are more Republicans

- White Evangelicals are mostly Republicans but it can vary within it

- More of a division in the aggregate among Catholics; those who go to church regularly are Republicans (win 59 to 41) while those who rarely go are

Democratic (win 59 to 41)

- Jews vote primarily for Democrats

- Racial divisions 

- After Civil War till the Depression, African Americans were consistently voted for Republican party but then Democrats start to get an advantage

- After 1964, Civil Rights Act, around 90% African Americans vote Democrats - White people vote more for Republicans (in the last election if only white women voted, Trump would win)

- Gender gap 

- 1980- Reagan was first the Conservative nominee and he lost; people thought the Republicans were losing because of women (maybe because the party was against abortion…)

- Problem actually started in 50’s- concluded that the gap was a benefit for Republicans, not a negative:

- Changes in voting pattern in 1952 

- Party identification 

- Trend away from Democratic party from 1952 to 2004

- Number of Democratic men 59 to 43% while women reduced by


- Race 

- White women moved towards Republican

- 12% drop in white Democratic women and 20% drop for white

Democratic men

- Regional 

- Northern white Democratic males from dropped from 52% to 44%

- In South, 52% down to 37% Democratic men (43 points down),

and 77 %to 56% (23% down) for Democratic women

- Ideology 

- Democratic shift showed a decrease of support from women and men an increasing rate for men

Use of issues to define party coalitions: 

1- Way to mobilise and organise supporters 

2- Expand their base of support 

3- Project a desired image 


Key groups of Democratic coalition:

- Environmentalists

- Pro-choice/women


- Unions

- Gun-control activists

- Minorities

- Young people

- Coast

- Urban

Issues associated with Democrats: Healthcare, Climate change, gun control, progressive taxes, open immigration, public education

Key groups of Republican coalition:

- Religious

- Business (corporations and small-business)

- Military

- South

- Rural

- Restricted immigration

- Pro-life

- Liberal economy

Issues associated with Republicans: Gun rights, pro-life, tax cuts, defense spending, deregulation

- Coalitions help to define who you are as a party

- Issues are a mechanism to build, form, and motivate coalitions

- Need to be able to reach out ot a broader part of population that you can reach out through issues/coalitions

Party factions 

Parties within the party; groups within the Democratic and Republican party that compete with each other for power

- Certain common party agenda

- People working together to get leverage

- Number of factions within a party can differ overtime

- Progressives in Democrats; Blue Dog Democrats are coming back; New Democrats who are more supportive of businesses and technology

- Republicans, they have Social Republicans, business oriented republicans, Progressive Republicans (very little/rare)

2 mechanisms to negotiate for factions: 

1- Voice negotiation option 

- Go to party leadership and voice their concerns

- Then, they have negotiations

- So, party can do whatever but there is a quid pro quo/ compromise

- Faction and party agree upon something then the party get the vote from the faction 2- Exit option (very rarely used)

- Faction is very dissatisfied with party views on an issue

- Either go along or the faction leaves

- More common in elections but can also happen legislatively

- Jim Jeffords (more Progressive Republicans) was a Senator from Vermont and Head of Education committee in the 2000’s

- At the time, it was 50 50 in the Senate

- Republicans felt he did not back them on some very important issues so they wanted revenge to show they were not happy with they way he was

running things

- So, he wasn’t invited to an important Education Bill signing that was passed however, no one thought of the repercussions

- He bolted to the Democratic party creating a change in the Senate (the first time this happened without an election)

- It was now 51 Democrats to 49 Republicans so the Democrats controlled the Senate

- Factions matter to move forward in order to pass an agenda (unless the party determines that it will no matter whether a certain faction supports them or not and are able to lose them if necessary)

1948 election: Truman beat Dewey 

- Democratic party was so fractured that it’s surprising Truman won

- End of WWII; paying to rebuild Japan, re-integrating vets, placing protections against communism (change domestically and internationally)

- Democratic party has to face these issues too

- During the war, FDR said that we are at war and have to focus on winning the war in EU and Asia

- After the war, constituencies now want what they were promised before the war that FDR said to put on hold until the war was over

- Truman got hit with all these demands

- They pushed Wallace to the side and made Truman VP

- Wallace led the Progressive party (civil rights, labor legislation)

- People were willing to back him as a 3rd party candidate if Truman didn’t give him his demands

- Dixiecrats: Southern Demo who opposed Democratic party advancing Civil Rights act.

- Thurman and Wright (Mississippi) marched

- Truman gets hurt by having these two 3rd parties competing against him but he still won

- Wallace got 2.4% of the vote; 3 states (New York, Maryland and

Michigan) that usually go Democratic but went Republican because of

how different Truman and Wallace were)

- Dixiecrats got 2.8% of the votes and won 4 states (Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina)

Conventions are used to try to bring factions together

Realigning elections 

They have consequences on party power; affects voting behaviour and one party may gain and dominate over the other

[1800-1828, 1828-1860, 1860-1896, 1896-1932, 1932-1968, 1968- present]

1800, 1828, 1860, 1896, and 1932 are realigning elections. 

- 1800: First time that power in America passed from one party to another - 1828: Party integrated locally and nationally by van Buren 

- 1860: Civil War and the Republican party becomes party of the 2 party system - 1896: Gold standard and increasingly start to look at the economy, Republican party was rejuvenating 

- 1932: First election after the Depression begins 

(1968 does not fit this model) 

Bo Key: “Theory of critical election” 

American elections enjoy long periods of stability

Characterised by 6 elements: 

1- Higher voter interest 

2- Stark differences between parties on key issues (slavery and the gold standard) 3- Changes in voting patterns and party coalitions 

4- Long period of unified party control 

5- Change in the ballots power 

6- Occured to some degree of regularity (32-36 years)

What do we call the other elections? (Campbell comes up with a theory) - If you are the dominant party and win, it is a maintaining election (1960) - If the out party during that election wins, it is a deviating election (Wilson’s wins, Eisenhower)

 Also outlines a “secular realignment” (1968)

- Times when electoral change is not a dramatic change

- Changes in electoral coalitions that takes place slowly overtime and can contribute to a type of party realignment

Another theory is the “dealignment”

- Doesn’t happen a lot

- Party loyalty has declined

- People don’t have the same views as before and are ‘loose canons’ with weak affiliations - Problem is that a lot of these independents are closeted D or R


Decisions are made by the party in the state conducting it

- Closed primary: Only those who are registered with that party can vote in that party Advantages:

- Allows party to pick its own candidate

- Good list of acknowledged supporters


- More likely to pick an ideologically nominee who might not go as well in the general election

- Lose the opportunity to expand your base and attract new voters

- Open primary: Any registered voter can vote ( can only vote in one party primary; either Democratic or Republican)


- Opportunity for a candidate with a broader appeal

- May generate interest in non-traditional party voters


- May nominate someone who does not reflect the party base

- Other parties may try to take advantage of the situation and influence the outcome

Certain candidates do better in certain primaries (Hillary Clinton had a problem in open primaries in 2008 and 2016)

- Blanket primary: Everyone is on the ballot regardless of party (not at Presidential level, mostly at Senate office)


- Allows voters to choose their candidate of choice with any intermediary - Elect a candidate in a single election if they get enough votes


- Fails to provide voters with a clear choice of the candidates

- Can get two candidates from the same party in the run

Reasons political parties do not like primaries: 

1- Primaries can often be divisive 

- Dig up dirt, say personal stuff about each other, trash talk others, rumours - Splits party into different factions

- Hillary and Obama, ‘76 with Ford and Reagan, Kennedy and Carter

2- Charges raised against the nominee during the primary can be used against them in the general election 

- Many times other people running in the primary try to dig up dirt on their opponents 3- Can be costly 

- Takes a lot of money and resources to run

- $600m spent between Clinton and Obama running

4- Can change or influence the electors point of view on the party 

5- Can result in nominees whose views/ideologies are more extreme than the general election - Goldwater and McGovern

6- Limit the influence of parties 

Parties occasionally try to influence primaries but usually stay out of it

Ways parties may try to influence primaries: 

1- Persuading someone to run or not to run 

- 2010 Senate race in Pennsylvania; Arlen Specter (Republican turned Democrat) against Joe Sestak (Member of the House)

- Democratic party publicly endorsed Specter publicly but he the lost in the primaries 2- Endorse a candidate 

3- Provide some kind of tangible support (ads)

- Presidential primaries started in 20th century; the people wanted a more open and transparent system to pick the individual who will represent them

- In the early 1920’s, 20 states had primaries

- By 1936 and by the 60’s, only 14 states were doing it

1968 Democratic convention 

- Chaotic convention and political process was changing

- People wanted political system to reflect the change taking place at the time with protests against the Vietnam War, riots, demonstrations.

- Hubert Humphrey was given the Democratic party nomination (didn’t run in primaries) without a single delegate elected by the public

- Humphrey wanted to bring peace among people and convention

- He created a commission to open the Presidential primary process for the Democrats in the 1972 Democratic convention

- Initially chose Senator McGovern to run the commissions but he wanted to run for President in 1972 and determined it would look to good if he broke the rules - So Donald Frasier, Minneapolis Mayor, took over the commission

- Changes in how the Democratic party select delegates to the national convention (shift from state to the national party)

Changes to open the process: 

1- Made sure delegates were selected based on proportional representation - However, a concern was that if they drag the process longer it would take longer to get to the majority

- Make it more inclusive

2- Adopted affirmative action that served as quotas 

- African American were 20% of actual vote but were only 5.5% of delegates 3- Delegates should be selected in the calendar year of the convention 

- So people knew who was running

4- Selection process was made transparent and open 

- Had to tell people how they were selecting delegates and opening it for people to run as delegate

5- Delegates were free to vote for whoever they wanted without restriction - Unit rule: Delegates can caucus with a vote and if the states permitted that and if the majority of them selected one delegate, then they require all to vote for the one delegate as a single block.

Changes after/with 1972 election: 

1- Have to start early 

- Cannot wait to run campaign because you need to build up delegates

2- Must be perceived as a legitimate candidate 

- People must believe in you and that you have a shot in winning or doing something

3- Must win or do well early 

- Not like Juliani in 2008, where he sits out the first few and

- Must win in Iowa or New Hampshire in order to do well

4- Must sustain doing well and winning overtime 

5- Party has a different interest than the candidates 

- Party wants to bring closure as soon as possible

Criticism of the nomination process (caucuses and primaries) by people: 1- Current system gives disproportionate attention to early caucuses and primaries - Have to do well in Iowa or New Hampshire or you’re out usually

2- Politicians have to take time out of their duties to run for office 

- Seems like 2 full-time jobs; can seem hard and stressful

3- Money plays too big a role in caucuses and primaries 

- A lot of the time they spent so much time raising money than talking to the people 4- Participation is often low and unrepresentative 

- Low turnout; usually only those who are more active and knowledgeable about the process show up

- 5% vote in caucuses and about 20% vote in primaries

- Takes a lot of time and effort

5- Can exaggerate regional factors 

- Want to maximise the interests of regions as they want to differ from other areas 6- System gives too much power to the media 

- Interprets who is the winner; it is the one people perceive as doing better than expected - Media helps shape people’s perception and interpretation

- Edmund Muskie; supposed to be the Democratic nominee in 1972- Media makes accusations about his wife and when he was asked about it, what appears to be a tear falls down his face. The media claims that he cried when asked about his wife. This raised questions about whether he was fit to run for President

Conventions have changed overtime 

- Coverage would start 1pm till 1am; every detail was shown on the only 3 networks available

- Nowadays, it is done in snippets (from 8pm to 11pm) and the network hosts are doing most of the talking about it; very narrow and focused

- In response, the conventions are trying to package everything in a small amount of time

Functions of conventions: 

1- Approves party platforms 

- Spell out officials views of party on the country and what the party would do if it came into power

- Candidates will negotiate by giving the losers some word in the platform 2- Formalise the Presidential nomination 

- Go out there and have the official vote

- Formal sanction of the nominee

3- Approves the Vice Presidential nominee 

- Go through the whole nomination process

- Sends a signal to the party and public in that it is the first real important decision the nominee has made; Good or bad choice? Why they chose that person?

4- Launches the Presidential campaign 

- The reset button for the candidate; they get to go up and give a speech for everyone is watching for the first time

- At this time, they rebrand themselves to the electorate, to get to the middle ground.

Comparison between pre-1968/1972 reforms and post reforms 

1960 Democratic Party (pre-reforms)- campaign for Presidency - 16 primary states (38% of entire Democratic electorate)

- ⅓ Democrats had a chance to vote for their party’s potential nominee - There were not actually 16 real primaries as there were ‘favorite son’ candidacies - Primaries were an opportunity for the candidate to demonstrate the party and the public

their campaigning skills, their knowledge of the issues, and how they interact with the public

- To create a good image so people could see them as a potential


- Run in those primaries where the candidate could highlight themselves and even those that were a bit competitive so that they could show their potential

Observations from the 1960 Democratic nomination process: - There are a few primaries, most were caucuses

- Primaries were win or take all 

- State party leaders played a key role in the selection process, who got chosen and how they voted 

- No limit on campaign spending 

- Media role was limited but starting to grow 

- Few women and minorities were involved in the process 

- Unknown candidacies had little chance of success 

1976 Democratic Party (post reforms) 

- 29 primaries (accounting for 72% of democratic voters)

- Idea of favorite son was gone

- New campaign finance laws (limit to how much people could give, transparency in spending)

- Candidates had to raise money but also run a national campaign

- Could not pick and choose a few states

- Voters decided the outcomes

- Media became an important strategy to spread their message

- Unknown candidates actually had a chance (Jimmy Carter)

- backlash called the ABC movement (Anybody but Carter)

Observations from the 1976 Democratic nomination process: - More primaries 

- Campaign finance limits 

- Decline in power of party regulars (people make the choice) - More open and transparents nomination process 

- National party replaces the state party as the dominant rule maker - Shift to proportional representation 

- More diversified delegates (more women and minorities) - Media and earlier primaries play a greater role

Page Expired
It looks like your free minutes have expired! Lucky for you we have all the content you need, just sign up here