1 / 21

Winning the General Election

Winning the General Election. Anthony Downs. Median Voter Theorem. Median Voter Theorem. Assumptions: Single dimensional issue space Pairwise vote Voters always vote (no abstentions) Voters have one unique preferred position Voters’ preferences “single peaked”

terrel
Télécharger la présentation

Winning the General Election

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Winning the General Election

  2. Anthony Downs • Median Voter Theorem

  3. Median Voter Theorem • Assumptions: • Single dimensional issue space • Pairwise vote • Voters always vote (no abstentions) • Voters have one unique preferred position • Voters’ preferences “single peaked” • Parties/candidates maximize chances of winning • Preferences are normally distributed in electorate

  4. Median Voter Theorem • If all voters vote and their preferences are single-peaked and on a single dimension, then the median ideal preference can defeat all other positions in a pairwise vote.

  5. Questions • What are the incentives for general election candidates given MVT? • How will candidate behavior change if you substitute a skewed or polarized electorate for a normally distributed one?

  6. Critiques of MVT?Usefulness of MVT?

  7. Changes in the campaign environment • Professionalization • Specialization • Computerization • Polling • Communications technology

  8. What role do parties play in these campaigns? • Candidates hire partisan professionals to run campaigns • In most races, the candidate is on her own • In competitive races, the party can spend a lot of money • not always the way the candidate would like • Campaign finance laws favor candidate-centered system

  9. Campaign Finance Restrictions on party spending • Contributions to candidates • Coordinated spending with candidate • Independent expenditures in favor of candidate • Voter mobilization

  10. Limits on party spending

  11. Limits on how parties can raise money • National party committees can receive • $15,000 from PACs per calendar year • $25,000 from individuals per calendar year • State party committees (that deal with federal elections) can receive • $10,000 from an individual • Party units can transfer unlimited amounts between themselves

  12. Soft Money • Unregulated contributions TO state parties • State parties used to be able to use soft money for “party building” activities for federal elections • “Issue ads” allowed • What was so bad? • federal candidates helped raise it • issue ads advocated for candidates

  13. McCain-FeingoldBipartisan Campaign Reform Act • National parties can only raise money in regulated amounts (Hard money) • State parties have to fund activities related to federal elections with hard money (mostly) • All “electioneering communications” aired within 60 days of a federal election (or 30 days of a caucus/primary/convention) must be paid for with “hard” money • Parties can’t make both coordinated and independent expenditures. Have to choose.

  14. Effects of McCain-Feingold (BCRA) • Strange bedfellows in debate • Raises the importance of hard money

  15. Advantages of BCRA, 2004?

  16. Soft money

  17. Hard money

  18. Effects of reforms on parties? • Reduce importance to candidates • 527 organizations

  19. Top Ten Democratic 527s in 2004

  20. Top Ten Republican 527s, 2004

  21. Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission

More Related