Every time a presidential election rolls around it seems as if America wakes up from a deep sleep. For months we are engulfed in a never ending wave of political rhetoric. We hear about it on the radio, watch it on TV, we see it on the internet, billboards, and bumper stickers. Huge amounts of money are spent during the presidential campaign by both sides in hopes of gaining an advantage. Although the campaign can be exciting, it will usually not determine the winner. The outcome is determined more heavily by other factors, many of which are out of the candidates control. The campaign must be run in a context that is structured by these factors or it will be unsuccessful.(13) The campaign, though important, does not determine the outcome of a presidential election, results are determined by other fundamental factors such as the health of the economy, possible incumbency advantage, and party ID.
The Economy is one of the biggest fundamental factors that determines the outcome of any presidential election.(12) It’s also one of the factors the president doesn't have much control over. One way we determine how well a country's economy is doing is a measurement called Gross Domestic Product(GDP). GDP is basically the money our country makes from goods and services produced over a specific period of time. Research strongly suggests that there is a correlation between GDP increase and incumbent party success. It is very difficult to win a incumbent party in a growing economy. For example President Barack Obama during the 2008 presidential election. At this time our economy was in bad shape, Obama used this to his advantage and ended up winning the election. But on the flip side, with the economy improving at the rate of a snail since his inauguration, his path to victory was much more challenging in 2012.(13)
Figure 7.1 on page 177 of The Gamble is a compelling graph that does an excellent job in illustrating the economy’s capacity to influence presidential elections. The graph compares voting results of past elections with percent change in GDP. When the results are analyzed it is apparent that a strong connection exists between the incumbents share of the majority vote and economic growth. If the economy is growing the incumbent party will most likely be re-elected.(177) This brings us to another fundamental factor, incumbency advantage.
Throughout history, the possibility of incumbency has always weighed heavily on the outcome of a presidential election.
With the presidential election drawing closer, you may be deciding to vote for your preferred candidate based on whether the economy is good or bad. However, analyzing data spanning the 6 presidential elections under the fourth republic shows that there is no significant relationship between the growth of the election year economy and the winner of presidential elections. Thus, the trend do not exhibit any correlation between the prior growth of the economy and electoral wins. For most economist
Analyze the Presidential election of 2004. What happened and why? Analyze the changing nature of the media and how that is affecting politics. The two questions identified above cannot be adequately answered alone without one influencing the other because a campaign that influences the election of the most powerful position in the world is a public event. However, after months of predictions of a too-close-to-call contest, Bush won nationwide balloting making him the 15th president elected to
Roosevelt won the 1932 election in a massive win with 22.8 million votes vs. Hoover's 15.7 million. Roosevelt had 42 states vs. Hoover's six. President Herbert Hoover's popularity was going down as voters felt he was not able to turn around the economy, or deal with exclusion. Franklin D. Roosevelt used Hoover's breakdown to deal with the problems as a policy for his election, capable improvement in his policy called the New Deal. The United States presidential election of 1936 was the most unbalanced
relief programs that tried to decrease the unemployment rate, Roosevelt garnered support from the large unemployed population. The economic implications of the Great Depression also impacted the issue of race especially for African-Americans. As the economy worsened, they experienced more hardship compared to whites since they were the first social group to be dismissed from their jobs in order to give way to unemployed whites, thus suffering from unemployment two to three times that of whites. Although
of Ferdinand Marco’s dictatorship in 1986 and transition to a new system of democracy, the country's low status of political system and economy developed greatly; however many of the political problems still remains unsettled. In determining the country’s poor, weak status, this investigation will focus on the extent of significance of democratic and presidential system in resulting the country’s economic and political development. Through research and examination of the history of Philippine’s government
used to be a democratic state in 1848, all the way through 1972 Texas voted for every democratic presidential candidate except in 1928. Blacks in that time period took up about 20% of the population
more reliable. The U.S. could not compete with the “Japanese miracle”. United States’ consumptions had more imports than revenues from their country. The economy declined from inflation but there was also a recession from the Vietnam War and international market resulting a stagflation. President Nixon placed a ninety-day freeze on the economy. President Nixon’s dirty tricks from the Watergate Scandal has the American citizens questioning him and the government’s authority. Intruding operatives were
In the year 1789, the first presidential election took place under the new constitution. The changes between then and now are too many to count. There have been amendments to the constitution, technology has enhanced, communication is better, strategies have grown and the world is a different place. In every election, each president had his or her own strengths and weaknesses of their time. In the presidential election of 2012 between Obama and Romney, many economic and personal characteristics
Social issues during the Election of 1968 were stirring; urban rioting, restlessness in college campuses, and the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. lead to an era of mass hysteria and chaos. On February 29, 1968, Kerner commission on the urban violence issues condemned the cause to be racism, as it states, “Our nation is moving toward two societies, one black, one white—separate and unequal.” Moreover, this great divide between the people caused a rise in black militant groups and civil rights
for the presidential election has changed since the 1960’s in the US. Since the reforms occurred in the candidates were either ideologically extreme or not experienced, the party leaders had less power over who ran from their party and the media had more power, campaigns were longer and way more expensive, giving Iowa and New Hampshire disproportionate power, and campaigning over governing. (8) We use two types of presidential elections, the primary and the general presidential elections. They form
ways of life. As time went on certain events happened that aided to the beginning of the Civil War. After the disputes on slavery, the Missouri Compromise, and the presidential election of 1860 the war between the North and South was inevitable. The biggest difference between the North and South would be slavery. The South’s economy thrived off the cotton and tobacco trade system. Southerners were successful because of African American slaves. The slaves worked in horrible conditions so that their
Analysis Paper 5 This week’s readings continued to the analysis, evaluations, and critiques of retrospective voting specifically focusing on why voters tend to focus only on election-year economic growth rather cumulative economic growth when going to the polls to reelect or vote out incumbent presidents. This paper will assess the implications of the reading by Achen and Bartels and Healy and Lenz, and what they say about the health of American democracy. Achen and Bartels critically examine the
The election of 1896 was between William McKinley and William Jennings Bryan. William McKinley was the republican candidate for president and William Jennings Bryan was the democratic candidate. Both candidates had different campaign styles and different supporters. Big businessmen supported McKinley and most common men supported Bryan. William McKinley’s campaign style was a front porch campaign while Bryan had a moving campaign. Mark Hanna played an important role as William McKinley’s campaign
Electoral College? http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/about.html The Electoral College is a process, not a place. The founding fathers established it in the Constitution as a compromise between election of the President by a vote in Congress and election of the President by a popular vote of qualified citizens. The Electoral College process consists of the selection of the electors, the meeting of the electors where they vote for President and Vice President, and the counting
The Presidential Election of 1992 In 1992 the incumbent president George Bush was seeking reelection. It was the general consensus that he would be the 'hands down, no contest winner'. When the smoke had cleared and the votes were tallied, many were shocked at the results. Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton had defeated the incumbent by a landslide! How could this be? How did the commander and chief of what could be considered the greatest victory in modern American history defeat the Iraqi army