Barber's Pulse of Politics

Skowronek’s notion of political time

(the concept of political regimes as governing coalitions)

New groups emerge/ new issues emerge (see political parties in a nutshell link)

What is leadership like during the beginning, middle and end of these regimes?

How does this concept relate to the presidential power paradigm?

 

Since the presidential selection process is "regularized",
we can easily examine the cycle in which presidential elections take place
and explore dominant questions in each part of the cycle:

1) the recruitment phase

party recruitment and self-recruitment
trends in characteristics of those recruited?
when is decision made?

Comparatively Speaking

How is the leader of the party "recruited" in parliamentary systems?

 

 

2) the nomination campaign

party committees vs. party-in-the-electorate vs. open primaries

strengths and weaknesses of the primary system
should party control over the nomination process be strengthened?

 

Comparatively Speaking

Is there an equivalent process in
a parliamentary system?

 

3) strategic planning for the general election

pre-campaign planning
campaign strategy
money, organization, money, media, money

 

Comparatively Speaking

How long are the campaigns in our country?
What factors are most important in planning a campaign?
What is the impact of money?

 

4) the general election

general strategy
Electoral College strategy

Since these patterns or cycles are "locked in",
those seeking political office can fairly much plan in advance
their strategies (to attain the nomination, to attain office).
Such a timetable allows for outsiders to run.
Perhaps it even encourages those not tied to the party to run.
Advanced planning is assisted by a series of campaign "consultants"
--strategists, handlers, media specialists, etc.

 

Comparatively Speaking

Can/does advanced planning take place?
Are mavericks or "outsiders" possible?

 

1) recruiting candidates for office

one of the primary tasks of a political party is to get candidates to run for office
in most party systems, nominations are tightly controlled by party leaders
this is especially true in systems with mass-based parties,
multi-member districts and list systems

if there is competition for a seat (or a place on the list),
the "battle" in fought internally
party recruited candidates are thus the norm

in the US, with its single-member district system
and it caucus parties, individuals associated with the party
(but not necessarily the leadership) may seek the nomination
of the party with the battle fought in an open caucus,
convention, or in a primary election


there is thus, in the American system, more opportunity for self-recruited candidates
these candidates for the legislature may then not be "tied"
to the party's nominee for president

 

Comparatively Speaking

How do these variations in recruitment "fit" with the organizational styles of the caucus and mass-based parties?




2) nomination campaigns

 

While most of the American public and media are wrapped up in the presidential primary season,
you should know that primaries are a relatively recent phnomena!

Only 30 yars ago, a candidate could
secure the nomination without even entering the primaries!

 

Now that you’ve watched “The Making of the President 1968”,

 can you answer the following?


1. How can one apply the presidential power equation to the events which precede the 1968 campaign?

2. Are the events of 1968 "proof" that a "popular connection" between the President and "the people" is a prerequisite for presidential power?

3. Given the fact that we are now in the midst of an early presidential selection “season" do you think that the selection process has been strengthened or not by the changes wrought by the events of 1968?

 

open caucuses, conventions, and primaries have been
the major arenas in which party nominations have taken place.

Both the caucus and party convention have decreased dramatically
as demands for greater access to the process by the-party-in-the-electorate
(or the general electorate) have increased and as strong party organizations
at the state and national level have been replaced by
"candidate-centered" organizations at the national level.

Along with choosing nominees, conventions may also change
the rules of future nomination process actions.

Later, we will explore some of the changes which have altered the
nomination process at the national level.

 

Direct Primaries

 

The direct primary was a reform of the Progressive era designed to increase the participation of the general citizenry in the nomination process and thus to pull the nomination out of the hands of political bosses and political machines.

 

It is now, far and away, the most utilized of the nomination selection procedures used to make statewide nominations in viturally every stay and even in most local elections. It is also now the dominant procedure in the presidential selection process as well.

 

 

There are four basic types of primaries that have been utilized in the US:

 

closed primary: only individuals registered as party members may participate

 

open primary: individual may select the ballot of either party,
regardless of registration status

 

wide-open (blanket) primary: either party's primary for each office

 

cross-filing primary: candidate could file to run in either party's primary
(advisory preference primary)

 

Alleged Effects of Primaries:

 

on the parties:

 

weaken control of party in the nomination process in general (+)

weaken control of party in government, especially the legislature (+)

encourage/ reward candidates not reflective of party mainstream (+/-)

 

encourage one-partyism in states with closed primaries (-)
unbalances tickets (+)

 

on voters:

 

primary voters differ from party identifiers (+)

characteristics of primary voters( older, better educated, homeowners, male)

 

disenfranchises voters of other party in one-party states with
closed primaries (+)

increase turnout overall (-)

but reduce voter interest in general election in one-party states
with closed primaries(+)



Party Reforms of the Nomination/ Selection Process

 

Primaries began to have a major impact upon the presidential race in 1960 when Kennedy used the West Virginia primary to demonstrate that southern voters would vote for a Catholic nominee for president.
The primaries were to increase in power dramatically in 8 short years. In 1968, Senator Eugene McCarthy utilized the primaries as method of challenging President Lyndon Johnson and his conduct of the Viet Nam war. McCarthy's surprising showing in New Hampshire was one of the factors in Johnson's decision not to run for another term. Vice-President Hubert Humphrey and Senator Robert Kennedy entered the primaries in short order. Robert Kennedy's assassination on the night of his victory in California added to the turmoil of the Democratic national convention. During the convention many felt that "party elites" (represented by such figures as Mayor Daley of Chicago) were subverting "the people's" wishes. With the nomination at stake, many of the rules governing the primaries were challenged. Almost all of the challenges were unsuccessful. This led to the creation of a commission to clarify, streamline and "open-up" the party's nomination process.

A series of commissions after the 1968 Democratic Party convention have altered the candidate selection process of the Democratic Party and secondarily to the Republican Party. Each commission attempted to "correct" what were perceived to be problems with the preceding primary, convention, and general election. The changes have thus been a response to the failure to win.



3. strategic planning

 

running for political office in systems with regular elections
allows for the development of sophisticated planning

 

the level of planning and its sophistication increases exponentially
with the level of the office

 

in general, strategic planning involves the following decisions:

 

1) do I run

 

2) what are the financial resources that will be necessary

 

3) when do I declare my intention to run

 

4) who is my opposition in:

 

a) the primary;

 

b) the general election

 

5) what isues are likely to involved and what is my position

 

6) who are the traditional base, what independents are the key to success

 

To answer these questions, a sophisticated battery of consultants is now available:

 

a) media specialists

 

b) fundraising consultants

 

c) speech writers

 

d) strategists



Most of these consultants are hired early and are part of the candidate's own staff. During the primaries the party remains neutral. After the nomination process is over, the candidate generally retains his/her own staff. Thus, campaigns have:

candidate-centered campaign staffs


not party-centered campaign staffs.

The party is thus placed in a secondary postion. After these people are elected to office, they generally do not have much of a debt to the party for their success.

Another factor which lessens allegiance to the party is the increasing impact of money in campaigns. Many of the factors which lead to success--polling, media, etc. cost money. For most offices, the party cannot contribute the amounts of money necessary. Thus candidates employ fund-raising consultants. Often the money comes from major contributors. Their goals and the party's goals may often be at odds.



4. the general election
for most offices the general election strategy is deceptively simple:
a) energize your supporters and get them to the polls to vote
b) identify issues which win over independents and turn them out
the key is: TURNOUT
With little public attention to issues and politics in general a part of the electoral scene, media consultants are often utilized to identify "hot button issues" (ie., issues which energize people). Often these issues involve negative reactions to words, pictures, etc. This has led of course, to the growth of negative campaigning and most importantly, the negative ad.
Negative advertising becomes especially important in non-national elections, when turnout is far smaller and energizing a relatively small part of the electorate can dramatically affect the election result.