Did Eliakim The Cause Of The Coattail Effect?

The amount of times a candidate campaigns in a state could have an impact on the voters. Campaigns built on mobilizing and rallying up certain areas will in turn have an impact on who votes. While states are a good place to start analyzing who votes they cannot fully show who votes when it comes to general elections.

To use a recent example, Donald Trump gained loads of support by proclaiming he was not the “typical politician.” He constantly reminded the people that he was raised in America and a “man of the people.” He also repeated his famous slogan of

Celebrity politician thrive because a certain aspect of their character or style are highlighted and framed by the media in a way that is enticing and alluring to the

It is important that a candidate becomes well known in the area they are hoping to represent and to this end they will often undertake a great deal of publicity work, such as leafleting houses, displaying posters, and canvassing door-to-door for votes. Publicity costs money and so the more wealthy parties will have an advantage. In addition, during a general election you will often see party political broadcasts for the main parties outlining their policies. This is because they can afford publicity campaigns that include film-making.

Having certain well-known organizations will increase the likelihood of becoming president. An example of this was the 1984 election between Republican candidate Ronald Reagan and Democrat Walter Mondale. Buttons were created by minorities and certain organizations stating things such as, “Asian Americans for Mondale”.(Document A)The method of endorsements would cost $300,000 and will give voters an idea of your beliefs. Coat-tailing and attacking the other candidate are usually the counterproductive method of endorsements. During the year of 1992, Bill Clinton created an advertisement where statements such as, “Bush increased the tax rate by 56 percent...” were said. (Document

Candidates campaign to gain voters on their side by using the internet, TV, radio and they also post signs to persuade the public to their side.

All of these positions influence the people to consider the presidential minor parties, thus having an impact on the presidential elections. When a party wins a local office as a minor party, the name of whatever the minor party is spreads around all the way around the United States. Not only does winning a local office help the victor, but it also helps the member of the same party who runs for President.

There has not been a critical election in recent years because mass media has created a less passionate partisan atmosphere. Candidate-centered politics allows candidates to reach out directly to voters through televised campaign ads and relay their opinions on public issues. Thus, a candidate’s message may reach a broader audience, including those of the opposite party, because anyone could see a campaign ad on a television, as opposed to going to a political rally of solely Republicans or Democrats. These candidates do not require as much help from their party’s members to recruit voters with political rallies or door-to-door recruitment; however, political rallies and door-to-door recruitment have a natural tendency to excite and unite parties more than television campaign ads that voters watch from their living-room sofa. Candidate-centered

In the Presidential race of 2008, it is estimated that the combined spending of outside groups, political parties, and candidates totaled to over five billion dollars (Beneson and Tarr 2012). American politics has created a culture of “political elites” that requires every candidate to raise millions of dollars. Although organizations like the FEC tracks these large sums of money, the amount of money a person must spend publicizing and promoting themselves has become uncontrollable. Jeb Bush’s Super PAC has already raised over 103 million dollars and filmed countless hours of interviews of the Candidate, skirting regulations within McCain-Feingold that prevent outside sources from directly creating scripts and advertisements with the Bush campaign (Miller and Elliot 2015). Although Bush and his supporters may have the constitutional right to raise millions of dollars, and publish deceptive advertisements, their actions still promote a sentiment of power that should not be allotted to one person. Regardless of the strides that have been made to reduce corruption within campaign finance reform, and support citizen’s most basic freedoms to support whichever candidate they wish, the entire campaign process has become too politically elite. The necessity for million dollar campaigns and extensive financial backing prevents

As during any election cycle, nearly all types of media are currently flooded with campaign advertisements that viciously attack various candidates’ politics, character, or sometimes both. People are willing to go to extraordinary lengths in order to gain power over others. This is likely due to the fact that everyday citizens are so susceptible to influence from those above them. As demonstrated in World War II, individuals are extremely susceptible to impact from authority figures.

In the book The Gamble, John Sides and Lynn Vavreck write that a successful campaign takes advantage of the fundamentals, “national conditions that set the stage for the campaign,” (2). These fundamentals are conditions that the candidate has no control over, like the economy, their opponent, obstacles or opportunities, and how the candidate reacts to them affect their ability to be elected (Sides and Vavreck 2). It is upon these fundamentals that a campaign is built. They inform political stances and future decisions of the campaign, which makes them an important foundation. Though these fundamentals are key to the survival of a campaign, equally if not more so, as Professor David Parker has stated, unless the candidate has name recognition the campaign is a lost cause (Parker, 2016).

The growing connection between politics and Hollywood has happened for a number of reasons, in a somewhat cyclical fashion. Politicians need Hollywood stars to support their campaigns because celebrities are useful in fundraising attempts and recognition. They have the advantages of fame, wealth, and can easily command press attention. In return, celebrities endorse candidates whose policies are beneficial to their industry. For example, while Clinton was in office he argued for “industry self-regulation and a television rating system, as opposed to formal government regulation” (Ormand and West 38). For this and other reasons, Hollywood stars donated large sums of money to Democratic candidates in return. In 2000, Hollywood contributed $20 million to Democrats as opposed to the $13 million that was contributed to the less Hollywood-friendly Republican party (Ormand and West 40).

Political campaigns are very significant in American politics and elections. It is the period before the electorate makes political decisions in the form of elections. The attention of the citizens towards politics intensifies as the date of the elections draws near. The salience of voters improves as the election date draws near and could manifest in the form of increased media attention. Political discussions, campaign interest, strength of the intention to vote, and knowledge about the candidates are other manifestations of increased salience of voters. Another indication of improved intensity is the effort put by the candidates and their political parties in the campaigns. Parties increase their efforts in the

In campaigning, media coverage plays a large role for candidates. They use the media to make their name heard and image seen. “Nearly everything a candidate does is geared toward the media, especially television” (Stuckey, 1999, p. 99) Candidates make appearances on talk shows,

In this hypothesis, the logic presented is that, the more a politician can spend on his campaign, the more his name and ideas will get out to the public; therefore the greater his chance of being elected. The independent variable is the amount a politician spends on his campaign which affects the dependent variable, the greater the chance he has of being elected. When a politician’s name is presented often through means of television ads or signs, the more likely his constituents are to remember his name come Election Day. This increases his chance being elected over an opponent who is unknown