1. Resources in the General Election

2. Money FECA provides FULL public financing for presidential election campaigns FECA provides FULL public financing for presidential election campaigns –2008: $84.1 million. Parties may make coordinated expenditures Parties may make coordinated expenditures –Pays for goods or services to benefit candidate –2008: $19.1 million –State and local parties can still do get-out-the- vote drives (no ads) Parties can spend money independently Parties can spend money independently

3. Does money buy outcomes?

4. Pros and Cons of the Electoral College

5. Rules Each state appoints “Electors” equal to the number of combined seats in the House and Senate Each state appoints “Electors” equal to the number of combined seats in the House and Senate Electors meet in own states Electors meet in own states Electors cast two votes (P and VP) Electors cast two votes (P and VP) MAJORITY (270 votes) to win MAJORITY (270 votes) to win If no winner, House of Reps. chooses among top candidates, one vote per state. If no winner, House of Reps. chooses among top candidates, one vote per state.

9. Problems with the EC? Anti-Majoritarian Anti-Majoritarian –Popular vote winner can lose presidency –Can have House of Reps, one state per vote, elect president –Can have “Faithless Electors” Unequal weighting of votes Unequal weighting of votes –Voters in small states mathematically overrepresented –Partisan minorities’ votes “don’t count” Campaign only targets some voters Campaign only targets some voters –Turnout is higher in battleground states –But rhetoric is national –But battleground states demographically representative –But no difference in voter efficacy

10. Positive aspects of EC? Forces candidates to create broad electoral coalitions Forces candidates to create broad electoral coalitions Exaggerates margin of victory, making governing easier Exaggerates margin of victory, making governing easier Encourages 2 party system Encourages 2 party system

11. Consequences for strategy? Focus on electorally rich (populous) states Focus on electorally rich (populous) states Focus on “swing” states Focus on “swing” states

12. Targeted States, 2004 StateVisitsAds? Difference in two-party percent of vote OH (20 EV) 45X2.1% IA (7 EV) 31X0.67% PA (21 EV) 30X2.5% WI (10 EV) 28X0.38% FL (27 EV) 23X5.0% MN (10 EV) 19X3.5% MI (17 EV) 17X3.5% NM (5 EV) 12X0.8% WV (5 EV) 11X12.9% CO (9 EV) 10X4.8% NH (4 EV) 10X1.3% MO (11 EV) 77.2% NV (5 EV) 7X2.4% NC (15 EV) 512.4%

13. Targeted States, 2004 StateBattleground Total US Income under $35 K 42.141.5 Income over $100K 10.612.3 High school diploma 72.870.1 Black8.311.4 Latino7.211.0 Mainline protestant 21.417.5 Evangelical protestant 24.523.4 Catholic24.324.5 Unaffiliated15.114.2

14. Turnout in targeted states Turnout rate 2000 Turnout rate 2004 Battleground54.662.2 US Total 50.055.3 Difference4.66.9

15. Simple popular vote: Effects on campaign strategy Greater cost Greater cost Media markets replace states as focus of resource concentration Media markets replace states as focus of resource concentration Favors Republicans? Favors Republicans?

16. What would happen if we elected the president by popular vote??