Nominating the President

Congressional caucus between 1796 and 1824

By the 1840's both the Democrats and the Whigs were nominating by way of a national convention

Primaries began to dominate the process after the 1968 election; 41 states have them, delegates deliver the choice of the voters at the convention

The other 19 states have caucuses

Financing the nominating campaign

Prior to passage of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1974 (FECA), the financing of presidential campaigns was almost completely unregulated

Five major features of the legislation included contribution limits, matching funds, spending limits, self-financing rules, and disclosure requirements

The Invisible Primary

The period of campaigning before any primary or caucus takes place is called the 'invisible primary'

Potential candidates use this period to raise funds, hire staff, gauge the mood of the electorate, and develop a campaign strategy

Candidates spend a lot of time in the states with early primaries and caucuses

Network Coverage of Conventions

Evaluating the nomination process

Increased democratization, but at what cost?

Activists tend to participate more than the average voter (resulting in a race to the middle during the general election)

States with early primaries get more attention

Over a Billion dollars was spent on the nomination process in 2012

Winning Delegates

Who selects the Vice President?

Before the primary system became dominant, vice-presidents were selected by convention delegates

Now, the process is entirely in the hands of the presidential nominees (Cheney chose himself)

Candidates often choose strategically, someone that will help them get elected

The Electoral College

Electors actually elect the president and the vice- president

To win, a candidate must receive 270 electoral votes (half plus one of the 538 eligible electoral votes)

There have been instances of candidates winning the popular vote but losing the electoral vote

Since there is a winner-take-all process in most states, there is a large-state bias in the Electoral College

Electoral College Continued

The electoral college impacts how candidates allocate their time and money on the campaign trail

Most candidates focus almost exclusively on the 'battleground states' (states that are polling close enough that they could be won by either candidate)

Voting Behavior

Voters do not often switch how they vote

This 'electoral inertia' is why the media has such a limited effect on elections

About 1/3 have decided who they're going to vote for before the primaries

By the end of the conventions, ½ to 2/3 have made up their minds

How Americans Decide

About 2/3 of Americans identify with one of the two major parties

Minorities, union members, Catholics, Jews, women, and urban residents are the base for the Democratic party

Business-persons, small town residents, Whites, Plains states, southerners, and evangelical protestants are the republican base

Policy concerns are not a dominant factor in most elections

Voting Models

Michigan Model: Voters vote based on the following three criteria:

1) Party ID

2) Candidate Characteristics (intelligence, integrity, experience, character)

3) Issues

Prospective Voting: voting based on what is desired in the future

Retrospective Voting: voting based on past performance

Do campaigns make a difference?

Campaigns generate excitement and attention, but don't change many votes

In a very close election, however, changing even a small number of votes could make a difference between winning and losing

Recent Electoral History

1970s and 80s – Republican lock; Democrats won only one presidential election between 1968 and 1992

1990s – Democratic resurgence – Clinton beat Bush in 1992 and Dole in 1996

2000 and 2004 – it took five weeks to determine the winner in 2000, Bush v Gore Supreme Court case; Bush beat Kerry in 2004, 51% to 48%

2008 and 2012: Obama beat McCain then Romney, both around 53-47