https://getrevising.co.

uk/resources/elections_and_voting

Elections and Voting revision - Electoral system

Term Total Number Mechanisms

Legislature: Two year 435 1. Seats allocated to each state

House of No limit on Single-seat districts based on the size of the
Representatives number of population
terms 2. Reapportionment of seats
undertaken following a census
every 10 years.
3. FPTP in all districts

Legislature: Six year 100 1. Every state has two senators

Senate No limit on State-wide Senate 2. Staggered elections, with one-
number of seats third being elected every 2
terms years

Executive: Four year 2 1. Indirectly election via 538

President and Two-term Elected together on Electoral College votes
vice-president limit the same ticket 2. Each state is allocated votes
based on population
3. FPTP winner of a state takes
all votes, with 270 required to
win.

How are presidential nominations secured?

● Invisible primary
● Primaries and caucuses
● National conventions
● Presidential debate
● Election day

Invisible primary
This is the stage which runs up to the first formal primary in the USA,
effectively beginning as soon as the last election has ended. IT is the period
when party candidate position themselves to un for the presidency before
the formal series of primaries and caucuses starts.
 ➢ Media coverage - Candidates will look to achieve widespread name
recognition, attempting to gather media airtime and coverage in the
printed press. Following the 2008 election, Sarah Palin, then regarded
as a possible presidential candidate, looked to strengthen her foreign
policy position with trips to Israel and India in March 2011.
➢ Endorsements - After candidates have announced their intentions to
run, they will look to gather support from key individuals within the
Party. In 2000, Al Gore made sustained efforts to win over the
superdelegate vote, thereby neutralising the threat of his main
challenge, Senator Bill Bradley. Candidates also look for endorsement
from influential groups outside the party who will provide grassroot
support in mobilising a candidate’s campaign. For example, 7 months
before the first 2012 primary, Michele Bachmann joined almost every
other major Republican candidate in speaking at the Fair and Freedom
conference in Washington.
➢ Finance - The most important function of this phrase is to build up a
big enough ‘war chest’ to fight the long presidential campaign. This is
shown by the withdrawal of ex-Iowa governor Tom Vilsack, who was
forced to pull out of the 2008 Democratic race, citing financial
difficulties, after a campaign that lasted just 15 weeks. In particular,
candidates will look to PACS to provide them with funding. Although
candidates can self-finance their campaigns (Hillary Clinton did in
2008, spending $11.4 million from her own pocket), it is enormously
costly, and very few candidates have the personal assets to do this.

Primaries and caucuses

The first ‘official’ stage of the presidential election process is the nomination
stage which usually takes place between January and June of the election
year. The key element is in this process are the primary elections, in which
party supports in each state vote for delegates to go forward to the party
convention, which meets to formally select the party’s presidential
candidate. Each state is awarded party delegates according to the size of
the state population.
Overview of the key primary and caucus events in the nomination stage
Key date/event Why is it important?

Iowa Caucus ● Traditionally the first result of the process

● Widespread news coverage
 ● Seen as an early indication of which candidate
might win
● Can act as a springboard for candidates, as
with Obama in 2008.

New Hampshire ● Traditionally the first primary result

primary ● Widespread news coverage
● First major testing ground for candidates
● High rate of early dropouts

Super Tuesday ● More delegates can be won on Super Tuesday

than on any other single day
● Can ‘make or break’ candidates
● In 2008, it was nicknamed Tsunami Tuesday as
so many primaries were held

➢ Open Primaries - Any registered voter can participate in either the

Republican or the Democratic primary, but not in both, regardless of
the voter’s party affiliation. The open primary system is adopted in 16
states, including Texas.
➢ Closed Primaries - Only voters who have declared an affiliation to a
party can participate in that party’s primary. The closed primary
system is adopted by 14 states, including New York and Florida.
➢ Caucuses - These are state based series of meetings between key
party members and supporters, in order to select a party’s candidate
for the presidency. Caucuses are adopted by 13 states, most notably
Iowa.

Advantages and Disadvantages of the different systems in the nomination

stage

Nomination Advantages Disadvantages

system

Open ● Increases ● Can favour candidates

primary participation, with money and a high
including independent media profile
voters ● Raiding can occur to
● Encourages politicians choose the opposition’s
to have a wider weakest candidate
appeal ● Voters may be ill
 ● Usually more informed
moderate voters ,
filtering out the
extreme candidates
● Good preparation for
election

Closed ● Candidates chosen by ● Harder for party

Primary loyal electorate outsiders
● Favours candidates ● Lower participation
with strong grassroot
support in the party

Caucus ● Favours the well- ● Low participation and

organised candidate turnout
backed by the party ● Candidates may lack
● Greater political wider appeal
awareness of
electorate

Advantages of the nomination process

➔ Democratic - The system is open to the public and actively
encourages a much wider voter participation. The process is also open
to any aspiring candidate. In this way, little-known outsider
candidates, such as Obama in 2008, can rise to prominence and
secure a party’s nomination.
➔ Electoral preparation - The primaries are often used as a testing
ground for candidates to iron out political campaigns, establish a
network of grassroots support and gauge the demands of the
electorate.
➔ Policy debate - The process allows for rival policies to be discussed
and debated, enriching the level of political debate across the country.
The 2008 primaries included a series of online and televised debates,
organised jointly by CNN and YouTube, which pitted the leading
candidates from each party against one another.

Disadvantages of the nomination process

➔ Undemocratic aspects - Some argue that the frequency of elections
adds to the growing sense of voter apathy. Turnout at primaries is
often below 10%. In 2012 primaries, based on the 41 states which
held statewide primaries for both parties, turnout was 17.3 percent of
 eligible citizens. If the five states which held only Republican primaries
are added to this total, turnout was 15.9 percent of eligible citizens. In
all, 32,909,443 citizens voted out of an eligible citizen electorate for
the states which held statewide primaries (five did not) of
207,581,000.1
➔ Undermines party control - The lack of party control over the selection
process can lead to ill-qualified candidates achieving the nomination,
due to a lack of peer review. Thus candidates are chosen based on
their personal qualities and campaign skills rather than on their
presidential qualities.
➔ Frontloading - The scheduling of primaries has become vital, with a
good showing in early primaries considered crucial. Thus primaries are
being compressed as states compete to be in the early stages. This
has the effect of: Insufficient time is allowed for debate and too much
importance is attached to raising funds during the invisible primary.

How is the president elected?

National party convention
The traditional role of the national party convention is to formally select the
presidential nominee through a vote of pledged delegates and unpledged
superdelegates.

The formal and informal roles of the National Party Convention

Formal Roles Informal roles

Choosing the presidential candidate- Restoring party unity- Opportunity to

Formal vote of attending delegates in rebuild party unity following the divisive
which the winner must receive an primaries
absolute majority of votes.

Choosing the vice-presidential Enthusing grassroots support - The

candidate - Chosen by the presidential party faithful are important for foot
candidate and confirmed by a soldiers who need to be galvanised in
convention vote. preparation for the forthcoming election
battle

Deciding the party platform - Exciting the electorate - conventions

Agreement of the policies that the are important media events which sets
party’s candidate intends to pursue if out policies and engages ordinary
elected. voters, creating a crucial ‘bounce’ in the

1 http://bipartisanpolicy.org/library/national-primary-turnout-hits-new-record-low/
 polls.

Significance of National Party Conventions

In the formal sense, it is arguable that the traditional roles of the party convention
are insignificant, and serve no real purpose.
❏ Conventions are nothing more than a ‘rubber stamp’, especially given that
the party candidate is known in advance. In 2004, John Kerry has secured
all but four pledged state delegates, while in 2008 McCain’s nearest
competitor withdrew his nomination by March.
❏ Genuine policy debate, to create a party a party platform, has been replace
by the need for unity. Conventions rarely discuss controversial or divisive
policy issues as this can lead to party splits, as with the Republicans in the
1996 convention over abortion.
❏ Vice-presidential candidates are now chosen and announced by the
presidential candidate in advance of the convention, as with Kerry’s choice of
John Edwards 3 weeks before the Democratic convention in 2004.
❏ Conventions do play a key role of creating party unity. This was evident in
the Clinton and Obama battle in 2008, where there was a need to heal
wounds after 6 months of continual campaigning.
❏ It acts a springboard into the forthcoming elections. It gives a post-
convention bounce prior to the election campaign, as evident by the
Republican grassroots revitalisation and 6% in poll ratings following the
announcement of the fiscal and social conservative Sarah Palin as the vice-
presidential candidate.

President debates
The influence of the media in the presidential election campaign is much debated
subject, with claims that the media are more interested in who is winning, than in
the actual issues.

Significance
● Some argue the presidential debate is more about style than substance,
encouraging sound-bite politics, with little genuine debate or strong policy
lines being adopted by candidates, for fear of alienating important voting
groups
● It is rare for campaigns to turn on the results of presidential debates,
although Reagan used the debates well to challenge the incumbent President
Carter on his record in 1980, and to address concerns about his age in 1984.
● Presidential debates can be important in encouraging the turnout of the party
faithful or turning passive passive supporters into active voters, as was the
 case with Kerry in 2004 when Gallup polling showed he closed the 8% gap on
President Bush following the debates.
● Viewing figures vary a great deal but there is generally declining audience.
By 2008 this had fallen to around 50 million, although over 73 million tuned
into the vice-presidential debate.

What affects the outcome of presidential elections?

Issues
The candidates’ policy positions can affect the voting patterns of the electorate and
shape the result of the election. Although the election of 2004 was dominated by
the ‘war on terror’ and the war in Iraq, the most common issue is the state of the
economy. Indeed McCain’s comment that the ‘fundamentals of our economy are
strong’, in a week of financial crisis, was a significant turning point in the 2008
campaign.

Fundraising
With the increasing cost of campaigns and because very few candidates are able to
self-fund campaigns, as Ross Perot did in 1992, the ability to use a range of
different methods to secure campaign finances has become a crucial factor in the
election. Thus, in 2008 Obama became the first major party presidential candidate
to reject the federal grant, which would have capped the total amount he was
permitted to spend on the election; this allowed him to raise nearly $745, which
eclipsed the combined candidate total of $646.7 million in 2004.

Campaign strategy
The strength of a campaign is seen as crucial, especially given the Electoral College
system which has created the need for candidates to focus on crucial swing states
and voting groups which can affect the outcome. This was shown both by the
influence of Karl Rove in 2004, who Bush described as the ‘architect’ of his victory,
and by that of David Axelrod in 2008, who crafted Obama’s campaign theme of
‘change’ as well as his ‘50-state strategy’, forcing McCain to defend previously
regarded safe seats.

Electoral College system

The final stage in securing the presidency is the general election day, in which
candidates attempt to win a majority of Electoral College votes. This system,
designed by the Founding Fathers to indirectly elect the president as a safeguard
against ‘popular passion’, has come under renewed criticism by some in recent
years, especially since Bush’s victory in the Electoral College in 2000 despite losing
the popular vote. However, others are quick to advocate the advantages of the
Electoral College system.

Advantages
1. Upholding federalism: The system protects small state interests, which are
over-represented with three electors. Thus candidates must achieve success
across all states, as did Obama in 2012 when he won 28 states plus
Washington DC.
2. Ensures a strong government: The system encourages a two-horse race,
which usually provides the winner with a secure mandate to govern. Even in
the 2000 election, Bush achieved success in 30 states, with 271 Electoral
votes.
3. Ensures widespread support: Candidates must have depth and breadth of
support in order to win. This was shown by Perot’s failure to gain sufficient
state support in 1992 to win any electoral college votes. Another example is
the limited national support for the pro-segregationist candidate George
Wallace in 1968, which meant he failed to win any Electoral College voters
outside the South.

Disadvantages
1. Undemocratic: Too many elements of the system are said to be antiquated
and undemocratic, as shown by Al Gore’s loss in 2000 and the existence of
faithless electors who ignore the popular in their home state.
2. Over-representation of small states: The system causes huge disparities
in the level of representation between states, meaning larger states are
under-represented. Thus if California were represented on an equal scale to
Wyoming, it would have 205, rather than 55 electors.
3. Swing states dominate: Although it prevents populous states from
dominating the election, the system does give undue influence to swing
states. Thus the elections of 2000 and 2004 hinged on the result in Florida
and Ohio respectively. Consequently, these states receive a huge amount of
campaign finance and candidate footfail.
4. Minor-party failure: The system disadvantages minor-party candidates, as
seen with Perot’s failure to win any elections in 1992 despite polling 18.9% of
the vote.
 5. Voter Apathy: The existence of Safe seats such as Republican Georgia or
Democratic California can further encourage low turnout. Voter turnout has
consistently averaged around 60% in recent years.

Congressional elections
Congressional elections are sometimes dominated by a national agenda, such as
with the 1994 Contract with America, or can be overshadowed by the presidential
elections. These elections tend to have a more local focus, with many battles
taking place of local matters and the issue of Pork Barrel Politics. This is probably
as a result of a system which massively benefits incumbents, with re-election rates
hardly ever falling below 80% for the Senate and only rarely falling below 90% for
the House, with the Republican surge of 2010 still witnessing an 85% incumbency
rate.

Reason for incumbency advantage

❏ Gerrymandering: The redrawing of political boundaries to gain a political
advantage has created a system whereby very few seats are competitive.
❏ Finance: Incumbents enjoy huge funding advantage - in 2008, for example,
raising three times as much as challengers.
❏ Pork barrelling: Not only do incumbents have specific name recognition,
they are also able to point towards a proven track record in benefiting their
constituents. Congressman John Murtha became known as the ‘king of pork’,
securing nearly $200 million in 2008.

Gerrymandering
The 2012 election provides a number of examples as to how partisan
gerrymandering can adversely affect the descriptive function of states'
congressional delegations. In Pennsylvania, for example, Democratic
candidates for the House of Representatives received 83,000 more votes
than Republican candidates, yet the Republican-controlled redistricting
process in 2010 resulted in Democrats losing to their Republican
counterparts in 13 out of Pennsylvania’s 18 districts.
In the seven states where Republicans had complete control over the
redistricting process, Republican House candidates received 16.7 million
votes and Democratic House candidates received 16.4 million votes. The
redistricting resulted in Republican victories in 73 out of the 107 affected
seats; in those 7 states, Republicans received 50.4% of the votes but won in
over 68% of the congressional districts. While it is but one example of how
gerrymandering can have a significant impact on election outcomes, this
kind of disproportional representation of the public will seems to be
problematic for the legitimacy of democratic systems, regardless of one's
political affiliation.
In Michigan, redistricting was constructed by a Republican Legislature in
2011. Federal congressional districts were so designed that cities such as
Battle Creek, Grand Rapids, Jackson,Kalamazoo, Lansing, and East Lansing
were separated into districts with large conservative-leaning hinterlands that
essentially diluted the Democratic votes in those cities in Congressional
elections. Since 2010 not one of those cities is within a district in which a
Democratic nominee for the House of Representatives has a reasonable
chance of winning, short of Democratic landslide.

Midterm elections
As seen in 2010 and on a number of occasions since the 1990s, there is a growing
phenomenon of midterm elections being dominated by a larger national agenda.
Midterms, which take place in the middle of a presidential term, are increasingly
being seen as a referendum on the president, with the incumbent president’s party
losing seats in Congress. However, the significance of these elections, given a
number of recent results, has been the subject of some debate:
➔ 1994 Republican revolution: The Republicans swept to victory with their
Contract with America, gaining 54 seats in the House and eight in the
Senate.
➔ 2002: The midterm elections were held in 14 months after 9/11 and saw
unusual gains for Bush’s party, which picked up ten seats in total.
➔ 2006: On the back of the liberal 100-Hour Plan, the Democrats swept to
victory by taking control of both the House and the Senate for the first time
since 1994.

Results and effects of the 2010 midterms

➔ Republican resurgence: The Tea Party agenda of fiscal conservatism and
limited government dominated. Notable victories, such as Marco Rubio
securing the Florida Senate seat, show how this became the central issue.
Indeed with growing disillusionment among progressive Democrats, feeling
that the Obama administration had gone far enough, and vocal criticism
among conservatives of the OBamacare healthcare plan, the Republicans
made significant gains. Although the six Senate seats were not enough to
gain a majority, they did pick up 63 House seats.
 ➔ Referendum on Obama: With discontent over healthcare and economic
stimulus, Obama has been forced to adopt a more compromising tone, as did
Bill CLinton following the 1994 Republican revolution.
➔ Gridlock: Republicans have been emboldened to be more uncompromising
and forceful, as seen with the extension of Bush tax cuts in 2010 and in
achieving a tough federal budget cut of $38 billion in 2011.

Direct democracy
Direct democracy, in which decisions are made directly by the people rather than
by the federal government. The most common and effective method is the use of
propositions or initiatives. It was used widely in the US during the 2010 midterms,
including ballots such as Arizona Proposition 107.

Advantage of propositions

Disadvantages of propositions

Concerns about the US electoral system

Funding

Congressional term limits

Gerrymandering
Participation

Past Papers
June 2014
“Why has campaign finance reform had such limited success?” -
[15]

“‘Local factors are more important than national factors.’ To what

extent is this true of the congressional midterm elections?” [45]

June 2014
“To what extent do initiatives and propositions promote
democracy?” [15]

“Why are congressional elections so often uncompetitive?” [15]

June 2013
“How significant are presidential debates for election campaigns
and outcomes?” [15]

“‘The system for nominating presidential candidates is in need of

reform.’ Discuss.” [45]

January 2013
“To what extent do the major party conventions continue to have
a meaningful role?” [15]
“‘The record of the incumbent is decisive in determining the
outcome of presidential elections.’ Discuss.” [45]

June 2012
“Why has campaign finance reform proved difficult to achieve?”
[15]
“‘The Electoral College should be replaced by a national popular
vote’ Discuss.” [45]

January 2012
“What is the invisible primary, and how important is it?” [15]

“To what extent are caucuses an appropriate means of selecting

candidates?” [15]

June 2011
“Assess the extent to which incumbents have an advantage over
challengers in congressional elections.” [15]

“Does public participation in the presidential nomination process

advance or hinder democracy?” [15]

January 2011
“Explain the advantages and disadvantages of the use, by the
states, of initiatives/propositions.” [15]

“To what extent are mid-term elections merely a referendum on

the performance of the President?” [45]

June 2010
“Analyse the significance of mid-term elections” [15]

“To what extent did the 2008 presidential election prove that
campaign finance regulations are effective?” [45]
January 2010
“Why are US presidential elections campaigns so long?” [15]
“Assess the strengths and weaknesses of the Electoral College”
[15]