1. Winning the General Election

2. Anthony Downs Median Voter Theorem

3. Assumptions: Single dimensional issue space Pairwise vote Voters always vote (no abstentions) Voters have one unique preferred position Voters’ preferences “single peaked” Parties/candidates maximize chances of winning Preferences are normally distributed in electorate

4. Median Voter Theorem If all voters vote and their preferences are single-peaked and on a single dimension, then the median ideal preference can defeat all other positions in a pairwise vote.

5. Questions What are the incentives for general election candidates given MVT? How will candidate behavior change if you substitute a skewed or polarized electorate for a normally distributed one?

6. Critiques of MVT? Usefulness of MVT?

7. Changes in the campaign environment Professionalization Specialization Computerization Polling Communications technology

8. What role do parties play in these campaigns? Candidates hire partisan professionals to run campaigns In most races, the candidate is on her own In competitive races, the party can spend a lot of money –not always the way the candidate would like Campaign finance laws favor candidate- centered system

9. Campaign Finance Restrictions on party spending Contributions to candidates Coordinated spending with candidate Independent expenditures in favor of candidate Voter mobilization

10. Limits on party spending Limit for 2008, per election Contributions to candidates$5000 from state party $5000 natl party to House $35,000 natl party to Senate Coordinated spending with candidate House: $41,000 Senate: $81,000-$2M Independent expenditures in favor of candidate No limit, can’t be coordinated Voter mobilization State and local parties can spend as much as they want, as long as they raise it on their own

11. Limits on how parties can raise money National party committees can receive $15,000 from PACs per calendar year $25,000 from individuals per calendar year State party committees (that deal with federal elections) can receive $10,000 from an individual Party units can transfer unlimited amounts between themselves

12. Soft Money Unregulated contributions TO state parties State parties used to be able to use soft money for “party building” activities for federal elections “Issue ads” allowed What was so bad? –federal candidates helped raise it –issue ads advocated for candidates

13. McCain-Feingold Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act National parties can only raise money in regulated amounts (Hard money) State parties have to fund activities related to federal elections with hard money (mostly) All “electioneering communications” aired within 60 days of a federal election (or 30 days of a caucus/primary/convention) must be paid for with “hard” money Parties can’t make both coordinated and independent expenditures. Have to choose.

14. Effects of McCain-Feingold (BCRA) Strange bedfellows in debate Raises the importance of hard money

15. Advantages of BCRA, 2004? Amount raised from individuals, 2003-2004 Amount raised in small increments (<$200) Republican National Committee 350,368,90766,170,884 Democratic National Committee 334,531,23413,809,468

16. Soft money

17. Hard money

18. Effects of reforms on parties? Reduce importance to candidates 527 organizations

19. Top Ten Democratic 527s in 2004 America Coming Together - NonFederal Account79,795,487 Joint Victory Campaign 200471,811,666 The Media Fund59,404,183 Service Employees International Union Political Education & Action Fund48,426,867 AFSCME Special Account25,144,915 MoveOn.org Voter Fund12,558,215 New Democrat Network Non Federal Account12,726,158 Citizens for a Strong Senate10,853,730 Sierra Club Voter Education Fund87,271,27 EMILYS List Non Federal77,399,46

20. Top Ten Republican 527s, 2004 Progress for America Voter Fund44,929,178 Swift Boat Vets and POWs for Truth25,758,413 Club for Growth19,365,903 College Republican National Committee, Inc.16,830,651 Club for Growth.net4,115,037 National Association of Realtors 527 Fund3,215,263 The November Fund3,151,170 CA Republican National Convention Delegation 2004 Account4,393,055 Republican Leadership Coalition, Inc.2,365,550 National Federation of Republican Women2,201,533

21. Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission