Elections  

1)  theoretically-- "What do the theories say about elections?" 2)  empirically-- "What have social scientists discovered about elections? What can we discover about elections?" 3) comparatively-- "What are elections like in Ruritania?"

  Theoretically
elite theory Elections are meaningless rituals that are designed to tie the masses to the elite political system.

plural theory Elections are a vehicle by which those who are motivated to participate in politics can make choices as to who will facilitate the plural political system.  Elections are thus a personnel choice where voters decide who will occupy political position and, at best, can hold politicians accountable for their actions. In that instance, voting is a retrospective judgement.

democratic theory Elections are one of the arenas in which people participate meaningfully in the decisions that affect their lives.  Inorder to do this, elections must provide meaningful choices for voters, the candidates must differ on the issues, their stands must be clear and citizens must understand the differences between the candidates.  

Empirically
What evidence can be examined to test the competing theories? possible evidence to explore:

1) the nature of the electoral system 2) turnout rates in elections 3)  the nature of electoral campaigns 4)  why individuals vote the way they do   What can we learn from MicroCase? From other social scientists?

  Characteristics of the American Electoral  System
1)  regularity elections occur at specific intervals

2) unit rule there is one representative per district

3) plurality a first-past-the post system majority of votes cast is not necessary in order to win only  more votes than anyone else (when election involves more than 2 candidates, likelihood of majority of votes cast is small)  
 
  Burnham's Theory of Critical Elections  

	party in power WINS	party in power LOSES
issues remain  THE SAME	MAINTAINING	DEVIATING
issues CHANGE	RECONFIRMING	REALIGNING