CAMPAIGN POLITICS NOTES

NOTICE: Any updates in these class notes during the class will be indicated here.

TOPIC ONE: THE ENVIRONMENT- PUBLIC OPINION

DOMESTIC ECONOMICS ISSUES

Americans are progressive on domestic economics issues, placing a high priority on issues that affect their everyday lives, and desiring more government spending to deal with those problems. Yet they also favor many conservative reforms in education, welfare, and other issues.

High priority items are domestic economic issues. Two recent poll results follow:

A Quinnipiac University poll, July 23-28, 2015. N=1,644 registered voters nationwide. Margin of error ± 2.4.
"Which of these is the most important issue in deciding your vote in the 2016 general election for president: the economy and jobs, terrorism, immigration, the federal deficit, health care, foreign policy, climate change, or taxes?"

• Economy and jobs= 37%
• Health care= 13%
• Terrorism= 12%
• Foreign policy= 9%
• Immigration= 9%
• Climate change= 6%
• Federal deficit= 6%
• Taxes= 3%
• Unsure/No answer= 4%

A CNN/ORC Poll on July 22-25, 2015. N=898 registered voters nationwide. Margin of error ± 3.5.
"Which of the following issues will be MOST important to you when you decide how to vote for president: foreign policy, illegal immigration, health care, terrorism, or the economy?" Options rotated

• The economy= 44%
• Health care= 20%
• Terrorism= 12%
• Illegal immigration= 11%
• Foreign policy= 10%
• Other (volunteered)= 3%
• Unsure= 1%

A note on terrorism. The September 11, 2001 terrorist attack temporarily elevated this issue above all others. Terrorism, fear of war, or national security were the number one issues of 59% of Americans in a November 2001 Gallup poll (Gallup Poll Monthly, November 2001 p.35). The economy or jobs were mentioned by 22%. All other issues were mentioned by 4% or fewer Americans.

The recent terrorist attacks in Paris and in California have elevated this issue, but it is unclear how long lasting this will be. See a recent ABC News/Washington Post poll, November 16-19, 2015, which was worded as follows: "Which of these is the single most important issue in your choice for president? Is it the economy, health care, immigration issues, tax policy, or the threat of terrorism?"

• Economy = 33%
• Terrorism = 28%
• Health care = 13%
• Immigration = 10%
• Tax policy = 5%
• Other responses = 11%

A note on Iraq. When America is involved in a war, that also tends to be an important priority. Indeed, Republicans lost control of both chambers of Congress in the 2006 midterm elections. Note the following December 2007 poll:
CBS News/New York Times Poll. Dec. 5-9, 2007. N=1,133 adults nationwide. MoE ? 3.
"What do you think is the most important problem facing this country today?"
War in Iraq- 25%
Economy/Jobs- 12%
Health care- 7%
Immigration- 4%
Environment- 3%
Gas/Heating oil crisis- 3%
Poverty/Homelessness- 3%
Terrorism (general)- 3%
Other responses- 36%
No Opinion- 4%

When the economy is bad, economic issues become most important. Indeed, Republicans lost the presidency in 2008 in the face of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. Polls conducted in late 2008 showed how important economic issues had become to voters. A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll, conducted in December 19-21, 2008 with an N size of 1,013 adults nationwide and a margin of error of ? 3, asked the sample: "Which of the following is the most important issue facing the country today?" The response was:
The economy = 75%
Health care = 7%
The War in Iraq = 6%
Terrorism = 6%
Illegal immigration = 5%
Other responses = 1%

Most Americans also wish for government to spend more on solving domestic problems. General Social Survey polls found the following percents of Americans believing that the national government spent "too little" on federal programs in 2012

• Education = 73%
• Poor people = 63%
• Alternative energy = 60%
• Health care = 59%
• Social Security = 53%
• The environment = 52%
• Aid to blacks = 49%
• Police and law enforcement = 47%
• Childcare = 45%

Less popular programs, where more people saying too much was spent than too little were:

• Military and defense: 32% too much, 24% too little
• Welfare programs: 43% too much, 20% too little
• Space exploration: 30% too much, 20% too little
• Foreign aid: 60% too much, 8% too little

Public support for spending is so great that even a conservative, traditionalistic state like Mississippi has a public backing more state spending. The Mississippi Poll found the following percentages of the state public backing increased state spending in 2014:

• Public elementary-secondary education- 76%
• Streets and Highways- 62%
• Industrial growth and development- 61%
• Health care and hospitals- 55%
• Police forces- 55%
• Child Day Care facilities- 51%
• Colleges and universities- 50%
• Programs for the poor- 48%
• Encouraging tourism- 46%
• Environmental programs- 37%

Environmental programs in Mississippi were the lowest priority. While 37% said to spend more, 43% said spend the same amount, and 14% wanted to spend less (6% had no opinions)

Americans back increased education spending, but they also favor some conservative reforms. (November 2000 Gallup Poll)
Mandatory teacher testing in public schools is favored by 95%
National standardized tests for schools is favored by 75%
School vouchers is endorsed by 56%, opposed by 39%
President Bush's and the Republican Party's conservative education philosophy had public support, therefore.

An in-depth study of vouchers shows the public split on this specific education issue, resulting in vouchers often failing in public referenda in various states:
(Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup Poll. June 5-26, 2002. N=1,000 adults nationwide. MoE ? 3. "A proposal has been made that would allow parents to send their school-age children to any public, private, or church-related school they choose. For those parents choosing nonpublic schools, the government would pay all or part of the tuition. Would you favor or oppose this proposal in your state?")
Favor = 52%
Oppose = 46%
No opinion = 2%
It is likely that the public would be more supportive of vouchers if they were limited to choice among the public schools.

Americans view health care from self-interest perspective.
For Medicare, don't raise eligibility from 65 to 67, but make wealthier pay more than lower income.
People want a universal system of health care, which includes high cost items like catastrophic illness coverage, nursing home care, and prescription drugs. But they want employers to pay for it, and don't want abortion covered. The public (73%) favors a government plan covering all children under 18, even if it requires a tax increase (CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll, May 4-6, 2007)
Clinton plan died because people saw it as: benefitting poor primarily; fewer medical choices; declining health care quality; increasing health care costs; too much government involvement.
Yet in a 2000 Gallup Poll, 64% still say it is the federal government's role to ensure that everyone has health care coverage. Furthermore, a June 12-15, 2008 ABC News/Washington Post Poll found that 66% of Americans favored providing health care coverage for all Americans, even if it means raising taxes, instead of holding down taxes at the cost of some Americans not having health care coverage.

The Obama health care plan (or the Democratic congressional plan) by late 2009 encountered some public resistance. An Ipsos/McClatchy Poll conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs in November 2009 found that 46% of adults nationally opposed "the health care reform proposals presently being discussed," with 34% in favor and 20% unsure. When those opposed were asked: "Is that because you favor health care reform overall but think the current proposals don't go far enough to reform health care, or you oppose health care reform overall and think the current proposals go too far in reforming health care?", 66% said the proposals went too far, while 25% said they don't go far enough, and 9% were unsure. A FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll the same month found that 51% of registered voters felt that abortion procedures should not be covered by private insurance plans, while 37% said they should be; also, 37% felt that the health care reforms would make their family worse off, and only 16% said better off, and 37% said no difference, while 9% didn't know. An August 2010 CNN Poll found that 56% of Americans opposed the new health care law. 56% opposed requiring that people get health insurance. More popular items were: 59% favored preventing health insurance companies from dropping seriously ill people; 58% favored preventing health insurance companies from denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions (http://www.pollingreport.com/health.htm).

By 2015 people seemed to have a more mixed view towards Obama's health care law. A Kaiser Family Foundation poll in June 25-29 found that 43% had a "generally favorable" opinion of it, while 40% were "generally unfavorable" and 17% were undecided.

When the same poll asked: "What would you like to see Congress do when it comes to the health care law? Expand what the law does. Move forward with implementing the law as it is. Scale back what the law does. Repeal the entire law," the responses were:

• Expand it = 25%
• Implement as is = 22%
• Scale it back = 12%
• Repeal it = 27%
• Unsure/other responses = 14%

Welfare Reform- ideologically diverse ways to deal with problem (USA Today and Gallup, 1994):
Conservative options backed by most people: job training; five year lifetime limit for adults; two year limit for those without jobs; no immigrant aid; people believe that "most" welfare recipients are "taking advantage of the system." Hence, even Democrat Bill Clinton supported welfare reform.
Liberal options backed by majority: child care for job seeking parents; commuting costs paid; government paid jobs; keep paying unmarried mothers, kids of unmarried moms, give kids separate benefits.

Social Security reform shows how public is unwilling to make sacrifices, as shown in a 2005 poll (ABC News/Washington Post Poll. March 10-13, 2005. N=1,001 adults nationwide. MoE ? 3.)
"I'm going to mention changes some leaders have proposed for Social Security. Please tell me if you support or oppose each one. . . ."
"Increasing the Social Security tax rate": 31% support, 64% oppose, 4% unsure
"Collecting Social Security taxes on all the money a worker earns, rather than taxing only up to the first $90,000 of annual income": 56% support, 40% oppose, 4% unsure
"Raising the retirement age to receive full Social Security benefits to 68, instead of the current 67": 33% support, 66% oppose, 2% unsure
"Further reducing the benefits paid to people who retire early. For instance, people who retire at age 62 would get 63% of their full benefits, rather than the current 70%": 36% support, 62% oppose, 2% unsure.
"Changing the way Social Security benefits are calculated so that benefits increase at a slower rate than they would under the current formula": 37% support, 57% oppose, 6% unsure.
"Reducing guaranteed benefits for future retirees": 20% support, 75% oppose, 5% unsure.

A February 15-18, 2013 Bloomberg National Poll suggests more public flexibility on fixing Social Security.
Flexibility may exist because 43% of respondents felt that Social Security will "not be there" when they retire, and 51% believe that "a major overhalf of Social Security is ... necessary to substantially reduce the deficit."
64% claim to favor "reducing the cost-of-living adjustment that automatically increases the amount of benefits Social Security pays out to help the program remain financially secure," while 35% oppose this measure.
59% claim to favor "a sliding scale for Social Security so that poorer people get more benefits and wealthy people get fewer benefits," while 35% are opposed.

Low priority items historically (on the most important problems facing America, open ended item) included many backed by partisan and ideological politicians: Racism - 2%; guns and gun control - 1%; AIDS, abortion - less than 1%, each. A 1997 Gallup Poll(The Gallup Poll Monthly, February 1997 p.11-13) found that other minor issues were: term limits, campaign finance reform, and capital gains tax cut.

Some of these historically low priority items have become more important to Americans, due to recent events. Note the most recent open ended responses on the question: "What do you think is the most important problem facing this country today?" asked by CBS News/New York Times in December 4-8, 2015:

• Terrorism/Islamic Extremism/ISIS/Al Qaeda = 22%
• The economy, jobs = 12%
• Guns, gun policy = 6%
• Crime, violence = 4%
• Immigration, illegal immigration = 5%
• Racism, race relations = 3%
• Health care = 3%
• Other responses = 45%

Practical problems with balancing the budget. While a majority of Americans say that they believe in a Balanced Budget constitutional amendment, majorities tend to back cutting only less expensive programs such as arts funding. Majorities historically have also favored cutting welfare, food stamps, and defense programs, though practical problems make it hard to cut such programs (many welfare recipients are kids, for instance). Most Americans oppose cutting expensive programs such as medicare, social security, medicaid, school lunch, college loans, police grants.
A majority of the public has historically supported a line item veto for the President, like most state governors have.

Labor issues. A majority of Americans and Mississippians approve of the concept of labor unions, and of increasing the minimum wage. Usually, about 60% of Americans approve of labor unions (Gallup, August 2007 poll, and previous polls from 1978 thru 2006), though support was mixed more recently (53% approve, 38% disapprove in August 2014).
Raising the minimum wage is consistently favored by most Americans. In May 2015, when told that the federal minimum wage was $7.25 an hour, and asked about raising it to $10.10, 71% were in favor and 26% were opposed.

Environmental and Energy Issues-

A Pew Research Center poll during May 5-June 7, 2015 of 5,122 adults nationwide asked whether "In your view, is global warming a very serious problem, somewhat serious, not too serious, or not a problem?". 46% said very serious, 23% somewhat serious, 13% not too serious, 16% not a problem, and 2% were unsure.
A CBS News/New York Times Poll in September 2014 asked 1,000 adults nationally: "With which one of these statements about the environment and the economy do you most agree? Protection of the environment should be given priority, even at the risk of curbing economic growth. OR, Economic growth should be given priority, even if the environment suffers to some extent." 58% said to give the environment priority, 37% said give economic growth priority, and 5% were unsure.
A Bloomberg National Poll conducted by Selzer & Company in June 6-9, 2014 of 1,005 adults nationwide, asked respondents: "Addressing climate change will mean more spending and potentially higher costs for consumers with the goal of reducing air pollution and preventing further damaging changes in climate. Are you willing or unwilling to pay more for energy if air pollution from carbon emissions could be reduced?" 62% favored more spending and higher consumer costs, 33% were unwilling, and 5% were unsure.
Despite such public support for fighting climate change, remember that this is probably not as high priority an issue as the economy, education, or health care.

Term limits backed by most Americans nationally.
But remember issue is a low priority one.
People back term limits due to rising public cynicism with government.
Public divided when reminded that they can't reelect someone doing a "good job." 74% of Mississippians backed a two-term limit of state legislators in 1992; when reminded about inability to reelect someone doing a good job, only 59% backed term limits in 1994 and 57% opposed it in 1996.

CRIME AND CIVIL LIBERTY ISSUES

CRIME

Crime is a top priority to the public. In a January 2001 Gallup Poll, crime was the third most important problem facing the nation, just behind moral issues and education. Americans are generally conservative on this issue, though it does favor some liberal provisions seeking to prevent crime.

People are frustrated with crime. In a 1993 Gallup Poll, a majority believe that the criminal justice system makes it too hard for the police and prosecutors to convict people accused of crimes (African-Americans are split 50-50, though). Frustration is reflected in a majority agreeing that criminal defendants should be required to prove their innocence, and disagreeing that it is better to let some guilty people go free than to risk convicting an innocent person. People respect police and believe in respect for authority figures. A majority believe that police testify truthfully, and believe that obedience and respect for authority should be the most important virtues taught children.

Death penalty for murder is supported by about two-thirds of Americans nationally in 2009 (65 favor to 31% opposed in October 2009 Gallup Poll). Death penalty was supported by three-fourths of Americans in the 1990s. The same level of support is found even if one out of one hundred people sentenced to death were innocent. Support nationally rose in 1976 and in 1985. Even among non-whites, some polls show a narrow majority backing it.
Question wording affects death penalty support. When given two options instead of one, 50% back the death penalty and 46% back life in prison without parole (ABC News/Washington Post Poll. June 22-25, 2006). Similar margin (47-44%) in July 2008 Quinnipiac University Poll. In Mississippi Poll in 1996, when given three options, 56% backed death penalty, 42% life in prison without parole, and 2% a shorter jail term. Similar results in 2008 Mississippi Poll, with 48% backing death penalty, 44% life without parole, and 8% desiring a shorter prison term. The latest 2014 Mississippi Poll showed 44% backing life without parole, 39% favoring the death penalty, 8% backing a shorter jail term, and 9% being undecided.
Rising support for death penalty prior to 2000 was because of rise in actual violent crime rate after 1960, and rising percent of people who think that the courts are too lenient on criminals.
Death penalty opponents have stressed need for a moratorium in order to ensure that innocent people are not executed, and argue that the death penalty is unfair to the poor and minorities in its application. The public is split on a moratorium, but is sympathetic to claims of its unfairness.

Public wishes to reduce crime rate regardless of ideological direction of policy. Some gun control options favored by the public include:

• 92% favor requiring background checks for all gun buyers (2014 poll)
• 89% support laws to prevent people with mental illness from purchasing guns (2014 poll)
• 81% favor making private gun sales and sales at gun shows subject to background checks (2013)
• 66% favor creating a federal government database to track all gun sales (2013)
• 66% favor requring gun owners to register with the state or local government and provide a set of fingerprints (2013)
• 56% support a nationwide ban on high-capacity ammunition clips, meaning those containing more than 10 bullets (2013)
• 54% favor a ban on assault-style weapons (2013)

• Tax increase or federal money for more police on the streets
• Three strikes and you're out for serious felonies
• Community notification when sex offenders are released
• Limit death penalty appeals
• For social programs for low income children, such as midnight basketball.
• A November 2000 Gallup Poll showed 83% favoring Hate Crime legislation.

Similar results were found in a 2000 poll by Pew Research Center for the People & the Press. (The survey was conducted by Princeton Survey Research Assoc. April 12-16, 2000. N=1,000 adults nationwide. "Now, I am going to read you some things that might be done to reduce violent crime in this country. As I read each one, please tell me if you think it would reduce the amount of violent crime a lot, a little, or not at all.")
"More job and community programs for young people"- 63% lot, 29% little.
"Longer jail terms for those convicted of violent crimes"- 49% lot, 33% little.
"Restrictions on the amount of violence shown on TV"- 48% lot, 37% little.
"More police on the streets"- 46% lot, 45% little.
"Stricter gun control laws"- 41% lot, 33% little.

CIVIL LIBERTY ISSUES

In 2001, moral issues, ethics, religion, dishonesty, and the decline of the family was the most important problem facing America, according to 13% (12% picked education). Average Americans tend to be conservative on some moral issues, though liberal or ambivalent on some life-style issues.

Americans are generally conservative towards legalized drugs. 67% opposed legalization of marijuana in a 2009 Gallup Poll. Examples of George McGovern and Jocelyn Elders being hurt politically by backing decriminalization of soft drugs. Yet medical use of marijuana is backed in some state referenda. Also, the conservative National Review and William F. Buckley Jr. back decriminalization of some drugs, expressing concern over large jail population for drug possession. However, the Erikson and Tedin book on Public Opinion (p. 106) shows how public support for marijuana legalization has increased greatly between 1996 and 2014, so that by 2014 the public was evenly split on marijuana legalization (plus, there were great generational differences on this issue).

Americans are also relatively conservative on school prayer. About 70% believe that prayer should be allowed in the public schools, and 69% (November 2000 Gallup, 2004 GSS polls) even back a constitutional amendment. Americans back letting religious groups use public school facilities after school hours, saying prayer at graduation ceremonies, and posting the Ten Commandments on public property.
The vast majority of Americans also favor keeping the words "under God" in the pledge of allegiance. A June 2002 ABC News/Washington Post Poll found that 89% favored keeping this religious phrase in the Pledge, and only 10% wanted to remove it.
Indeed, two-thirds in a June 2000 Gallup Poll even endorsed teaching creationism along with evolution, though a majority opposed eliminating evolution teaching.
Yet when asked whether prayer should be solely Christian, the same margin favored permitting all major religions, including Jewish, Muslim, and Hindu. Also, when asked about a moment of silence or silent prayer, over 70% backed that instead of spoken prayer.
Is America a "Christian" nation controversy.

Much liberalization has occurred on the issue of Gay Rights.
Whereas a Pew Research Center poll in 1996 found that only 27% of Americans favored "allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally," by July 2015 54% were in favor with 39% opposed. Page 106 of the Erikson and Tedin Public Opinion book illustrated how support for gay marriage has changed over the last two decases.

Even before support for gay marriage reached a majority, many Americans were willing to grant either civil unions or legal marriage to gays. A February 2012 CBS/New York Times poll found 40% backing legal marriage, 23% for civil unions, and 31% opposing any legal recognition of a gay couple's relationship (with 6% undecided).

Mississippi is also split three ways on this issue, but is more opposed to gay relationship recognition than is the nation. In the 2014 Mississippi Poll, 31% backed legal marriage, 21% favored civil unions, and 38% opposed any legal recognition of gay relationships (10% were undecided).

Opinions towards gays in sensitive occupations has also liberalized over the years. Historically, most Americans believed that the Boy Scouts should not be required to allow openly gay adults to serve as Boy Scout leaders. A May 2013 ABC News/Washington Post poll found that 56% of Americans were opposed to "the plan by the Boy Scouts of America to continue to ban gay adults from being scout leaders," while 39% supported the ban on gays.
Americans oppose job discrimination against gays in most occupations, except those where they have contact with children.
In previous years, most Americans backed the moderate "don't ask, don't tell, don't pursue" policy towards gays in the military. However, 2008 polls showed support for gays in the military; a December CNN/Opinion Research Corporation Poll found that 81% believed that "people who are openly gay or homosexual should... be allowed to serve in the U.S. military," while 17% said should not; December Newsweek poll had 66-29% split. A May 2009 USA Today/Gallup Poll also found that 69% favored "allowing openly gay men and lesbian women to serve in the mililtary," while 26% were opposed and 6% were unsure.

Americans are divided on the issue of abortion. Only about one-fifth wish it always legal and one-fifth wish it always illegal, while 60% wish it legal only under certain circumstances. Over 70% back legal abortions for rape, incest, life of mother endangered. A bare majority favor permitting abortions for reasons of mental health of mother, or if fetus has fatal birth defect (See FOX News/Opinion Dynamics Poll. Oct. 23-24, 2007)
Abortion restrictions backed. Majorities back: 1) Requiring doctors to inform patients about alternatives to abortion; 2) 24 hour waiting period; 3) Requiring husband to be notified; 4) Parental consent for those under 18; 5) Partial birth abortion ban (63% in a November 2000 Gallup);
An attack on a pregnant woman that results in the death of a fetus should be treated as murder, according to 79% of Americans in a July 2003 Fox News Poll.
Americans are evenly divided on legal abortions for: single women who don't want to get married, women who cannot afford children, or for married women who don't want more children. A plurality of 47% oppose an abortion pill (RU-486), but 39% favor it.
Americans oppose overturning Roe v. Wade decision. A June 2009 CBS News/New York Times poll found that 64% would not like to see Roe overturned by the Supreme Court, while only 29% wanted to see it overturned (7% were unsure). (Margins opposing overturning Roe in previous polls were 67% versus 30% in a November 2000 Gallup Poll, and 53-35% in a May 2007 Gallup Poll).

Americans are liberal on sex education and freedom of expression. 89% back sex education in schools. 63% oppose a ban on pornography for adults, though most back ban for minors (Erikson and Tedin, page 107).

RACIAL ISSUES

Americans have become more liberal over time on the general issue of racial discrimination, but are divided over how to deal with concrete examples of lingering racial problems.

Increased white liberalization over time. Over 80% of whites back abstract concepts of school integration, integrated neighborhoods, and voting for an African-American for President (Erikson and Tedin textbook, page 99). There is less support, however, for concrete governmental actions to guarantee racial equality. Some reasons are: whites may continue to harbor racial prejudice; whites prefer self-reliance over governmental action; whites favor equal opportunity, not government guaranteeing equal results.

Affirmative Action for minorities and women- Mend, Don't End. (USA Today Poll, March 1995). This in-depth study of different aspects of affirmative action was commissioned after Republicans gained control of both chambers of Congress for the first time in forty years, and President Clinton had to fight to preserve aspects of affirmative action. The poll found that:
Over 70% of whites backed: 1) Outreach, identification, and encouraging blacks to apply for jobs; 2) Job training programs to improve qualifications to get better jobs; 3) Special educational programs to make them better qualified for college.
Over 60% of whites opposed: 1) College scholarships available for only women and minorities; 2) Quotas for jobs or college admissions; 3) Favoring a less qualified minority over a white in a business with few minority workers. A November 2000 Gallup Poll showed that 85% of Americans opposed racial or gender preferences in jobs and schools, which I believe reflects this perception of quotas and special preferences. A June 2003 Gallup Poll found that 69% of Americans believe that only merit should be used in deciding entry into universities.
This was not a salient issue to many whites. Only 12% of whites say they lost a job that went to a minority; only 8% were passed over for promotion that went to minority. Issue is more salient to minorities, where 32% believe they lost a job or promotion because of racial discrimination.

African-Americans are concerned over racial discrimination. In a CNN/ORC Poll, conducted February 12-15, 2015 of 1,027 adults nationwide, when asked: "In general, do you think blacks have as good a chance as white people in your community to get any kind of job for which they are qualified, or don't you think they have as good a chance?" 81% of whites said "as good a chance" while 54% of blacks said "not as good a chance."
In a CBS News Poll conducted June 18-22, 2014 of 1,009 adults nationwide, when asked: "How much discrimination do you think there is against African Americans in our society today: a lot, some, only a little, or none at all?": 41% of blacks said a lot and 47% said some, compared to only 14% of whites who said a lot and 51% who said some.

There are big racial differences in perception of how police treat African Americans.
An Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll conducted July 17 and July 19, 2015 of 1223 U.S. adults found the following:
When asked: "Have you personally ever felt treated unfairly by a police officer specifically because of your race?" 50% of African Americans said yes, compared to only 3% of whites.
Asked: "In general, do you think police in most communities are more likely to use deadly force against a black person, or more likely to use it against a white person, or don't you think race effects use of deadly force?" 85% of blacks said more likely to use deadly force against blacks. Among whites, only 39% said more likely to use deadly force against blacks, and 58% said race had no effect on use of deadly force.
Asked: "How do you think police officers who cause injury or death in the course of their job are treated by the criminal justice system? Too leniently fairly, or too harshly?" Among whites, 46% say fairly, and 32% say too leniently. Among blacks, 70% say too leniently, and only 20% say fairly.

Racial Profiling. Results from 2014 Mississippi Poll, question included in poll by former MSU PhD student LaShonda Stewart:
Have you ever been a victim of racial profiling? Of blacks, 38% say yes, 62% say no (for whites, it is 8-92 split).
Do you believe that racial profiling is a widespread practice in Mississippi? Of blacks, 85% say yes, 15% say no (for whites, 47-53 split)
Do you believe that law enforcement officers should be allowed to use racial profiling to fight crime? Of blacks, 4% say yes, 96 say no (for whites, 24-76 split).

Confederate Flag issue.
A CBS News/New York Times Poll conducted July 14-19, 2015 of 1,205 adults nationwide, asked: ""Do you, yourself, see the Confederate flag more as a symbol of Southern pride or more as a symbol of racism?" Among Americans overall, 51% said Southern pride, and 35% said racism. Among whites, 57% said southern pride, and 30% said racism. Among African Americans, 21% said southern pride, and 68% said racism.

FOREIGN AFFAIRS

Americans are basically internationalist. Generally, about twice as many say that our country should "take an active part in world affairs," as say that we should "stay out of world affairs." In Mississippi the isolationist sentiment is higher, however. Internationalist sentiment is affected by world events. It rose after the 9-11 terrorist attack, but declined after Vietnam and after the Iraqi war dragged on.

Defense spending preferences are influenced by external events. Vietnam era of early 1970s saw cynicism towards war and military causing desire for spending cuts. Iran and Afghanistan crises in 1980 and perception of American weakness caused desire for more spending. After 1984 support for defense spending declined, as defense spending increased greatly under Reagan and Eastern Europe was freed in 1989 from the Soviet Union, and the USSR itself dissolved in 1991. The terrorist attacks of September 2001 on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon naturally caused public support for defense spending to increase. By 2007, a fading memory of the 9-11 attack, plus public cynicism over the Iraqi war, were likely explanations for a plurality of Americans now saying that too much was being spent on defense. (See Erikson and Tedin chart on page 104)

These defense spending patterns are paralleled in Mississippi. In 2002, 55% of Mississippi adults wanted to increase defense spending. From 2008-2014, between 45% and 54% of Mississippians said to keep defense spending the same. Only 29-39% wanted defense spending increased, and 12-16% wanted it deceased in the 2008-14 period.

If you get into a war, win it. Most Americans rated World War 2 and Persian Gulf Wars as "just wars," but most viewed our Vietnam troop involvement as a mistake and people were divided over Korea as well.

Americans are generally supportive of the issue of a missile defense system. A February 2003 Gallup Poll found that 46% favored spending for "research and possible development" of such a system with only 21% opposed and 33% unsure. A July 2001 CNN/Time Poll conducted by Harris Interactive warned people about the cost of such a missile defense plan, plus its possible interference with current U.S.-Russian treasties, so support for a missle defense plan went down to 52% with 40% opposed.

Cuba relations. A November 2000 Gallup Poll saw 56% favoring re-establishing relations with Cuba, while 35% opposed it.
A Pew Research Center poll conducted July 14-20, 2015 of 2,002 adults nationwide, asked "All in all, do you approve or disapprove of the U.S. re-establishing diplomatic relations with Cuba?" 73% approved, 20% disapproved, and 7% were undecided.

Iran Nuclear Deal. This is a complex foreign policy issue. A CBS News Poll conducted July 29-Aug. 2, 2015 of 1,252 adults nationwide, asked: "Recently, Iran and a group of six countries led by the United States reached an agreement to limit Iran's ability to make nuclear weapons for more than a decade in return for lifting economic sanctions against Iran. From what you've heard or read so far, do you approve or disapprove of the recent agreement with Iran, or don't you know enough about it yet to say?" 20% approved, 33% disapproved, 46% said they didn't know enough to say, and 1% had no answer.

Immigration.
An NBC News/Wall Street Journal Poll conducted by Hart Research Associates (D) and Public Opinion Strategies (R) in July 26-30, 2015 of 1,000 adults nationwide, asked: "Would you say that immigration helps the United States more than it hurts it, or immigration hurts the United States more than it helps it?" Public was divided, as 47% said it helps more, while 43% said it hurts more, with 10% saying a little or both or being unsure.
When asked: "When it comes to foreigners staying illegally in the United States, which one statement comes closest to what you think? We should allow these people a pathway to citizenship to eventually become citizens of the United States. We should grant these people legal status so they can live and work here, but not become citizens. We should do neither one of these and work to find and deport people who have come to this country illegally:" 47% backed a pathway to citizenship, 17% said legal status but not citizenship, 32% said find and deport, and 4% were unsure.
An ABC News/Washington Post Poll conducted July 16-19, 2015 of 1,002 adults nationwide, asked: "Do you think undocumented immigrants from Mexico are mainly undesirable people like criminals, or mainly honest people trying to get ahead?" 74% said honest, and only 16% said undesirables, while 10% were unsure.

TOPIC TWO: THE CANDIDATES

Fenno's book Homestyle talks about how Congress members engage in non-stop campaigning.

Perceptions of constituency: 1) Geographic; 2) Re-Election- redistricting, fight of my life memory, worry over possible opponents, uncertain what works; 3) Primary constituency, strongest supporters, provide money and workers; 4) Intimates- most relaxed with.

Presentation of Self is important. Building Trust is key, thru Personal Contact. Demonstrate Qualifications for job, Identification (I am One of You), Empathy (I understand and care).

Different presentation styles: 1) Person to Person- Dowdy; 2) Popular Local Boy- Tuck; 3) Issue Articulation- open meetings, spend time at home- Bowen; 4) Servicing the District- many trips home, public appearances- Cochran; 5) Political Leader- African-American churches important- Thompson.

Other important points.

Appear before unfriendly groups to reduce intensity of opposition. Republicans should appear before NAACP.

People want Access to congressperson, so important to speak before community groups. Two-step Flow of influence expands impact.

Explaining Washington Activity.

I have power, key committee assignments, to be effective for you. (Trent Lott 1994 senate reelection campaign)

Building Trust: have overall policy record consistent with district; be able to explain one's vote when inconsistent with district; if have trust, then people give you voting leeway.

Deal with public cynicism by running against Congress, "I'm not like the rest" argument.

Congressional Careers: Expansionism; Protectionism.

Freshmen are expansionist, visit district often. Senior members have seniority on committees, Washington power, so make fewer trips home.

SUCCESSFUL SOUTHERN POLITICIANS

Arkansas's Five Democratic Titans:

Bill Clinton- Governor, 1978-80, 1982-92- Bill Clinton. His political career started as state attorney general in 1977, where he earned an image as being pro-consumer and anti-utility (Allen and Portis 1992: 50). Blasted by his opponents as a liberal on social issues such as gun control and women's rights, Clinton portrayed himself as one of the new South's "compromise progressive candidates," and proceeded to win 60% of the vote in the 1978 Democratic gubernatorial primary and 63% of the general election vote over A. Lynn Lowe, the state GOP chairman (quote in Allen and Portis 1992: 52; Lamis 1990: 126). Clinton was narrowly unseated in 1980 by businessman Frank White, who blasted the Democrat for raising car tag fees and for permitting fellow Democrat and President Jimmy Carter to locate Cuban refugees at Fort Chafee, where on two occasions the dissatisfied "undesirables" that Castro had expelled had frightened local residents by rioting and fleeing the camp (Allen and Portis 1992: 66-68). Attacked for being "too young, too liberal and too big for his britches" by Republican White, Clinton was also viewed by many voters as "arrogant, aloof, inaccessible, or egotistical" (first quote in Allen and Portis 1992: 69; second quote in Lamis 1990: 127). Frank White as governor became most known for signing a bill that required the teaching of "scientific creationism" whenever evolution was taught, a measure that was quickly ruled unconstitutional by a federal court (Blair and Barth 2005: 7).

The Comeback Kid, as Clinton has often been called, bounced back in 1982 to unseat Frank White with a comfortable 55% vote, as the chastened ex-governor apologized for being out of touch with voters and for raising car tags, blasted the incumbent Republican for high unemployment and rising utility rates, and benefited from thousands of passionate campaign volunteers (Lamis 1990: 128-129; Blair and Barth 2005: 56). Returning to the governorship, Clinton convinced the legislature to raise taxes for several educational programs, such as teacher raises, an 8th grade student competency test, lower class sizes and a longer school year, and accountability through teacher testing (Allen and Portis 1992: 88, 90, 92, 97). Despite the state education association�s opposition to the teacher testing provision, Clinton won reelection in 1984 with 63% of the vote over Republican Woody Freeman, a contractor who had never run for public office (Lamis 1990: 257). In 1986 Clinton was easily reelected to a newly-established four-year term as governor over GOP former governor Frank White, who had unsuccessfully fought to delay implementation of the allegedly expensive improved education standards that the governor had fought for and who had claimed that school consolidation in rural areas would kill the towns (Blair and Barth 2005: 317).

Bill Clinton's greatest strengths were his charisma, and his ability to personally connect with people. Clinton reportedly would "show up at every fish fry, at every Democratic party event, at every bake sale and shake every hand until he'd shaken them all" (Barth, Blair, and Dumas 1999: 180). He also made a special personal appeal to African Americans, attending their churches, visiting their homes, and attending their organizational dinners. His operatives also used black churches to maintain support for Governor Clinton (Barth, Blair, and Dumas 1999: 167, 175). As Clinton went into his last reelection campaign of 1990, Democrats benefited from successful businessman and ex-congressman and state attorney general Jim Guy Tucker's willingness to run for lieutenant governor instead of challenging the party�s incumbent governor. Republicans though suffered a bitter primary featuring two former Democrats. Moderate 3-term congressman Tommy Robinson ended up losing to businessman Sheffield Nelson, a civic leader and former executive officer of Arkansas Louisiana Gas Company, in what became a personal feud over a financial deal involving a friend of both men (Barth, Blair, and Dumas 1999: 168, 170; Duncan 1989: 80). Proclaiming that "Ten Years is Enough," Republican Nelson went on to blast Clinton as a tax-and-spend liberal whose expensive education proposals had failed to raise the state's teachers' salaries and other education indicators off of the nation�s bottom tier (Barth, Blair and Dumas 1999: 170; Allen and Portis 1992: 139). Clinton nevertheless won his last reelection with a 57.5% vote, though it was his lowest victory margin since 1982.

Clinton's last major accomplishments as governor included a tax increase for education, which included teacher pay raises, requiring kindergartens statewide, enhanced preschool opportunities, and a scholarship program (Blair and Barth 2005: 317-318). As the last decade of the 20th century began, there was little to suggest that Democratic political hegemony in Arkansas would soon be threatened. Democrats controlled every statewide elected office, held about 90% of state legislative seats, and had just reelected U.S. Senator Pryor without opposition (Table 9-2).

Dale Bumpers- Governor, 1970-74, senator, 1974-98. Lawyer and civic leader from small town, viewed as an "attractive and unflappable newcomer" who was a "young, honest, and vigorous advocate of improvement in state government" (Yates 1972: 292). He was "articulate, intelligent, and forward-looking," and a superb storyteller who "educated and preached" to his audiences (Blair and Barth, 2005: 68, 343). He defeated Senator Fulbright, whose persona was an "aloof intellectual and aristocrat" who had an "arrogant and most holier than thou attitude;" Bumpers' "drawl is almost Western," he spoke in a "language that factory workers and hardscrabble farmers" could understand, and he denounced oil company profits with a "passion in his voice" that recalled the "ancestral poverty of the hills" (Bass and DeVries 1977: 95-96). Sources: Bass, Jack, and Walter DeVries. 1977. The Transformation of Southern Politics: Social Change and Political Consequence Since 1945; Blair, Diane D. and Jay Barth. 2005. Arkansas Politics and Government, 2nd ed; Yates, Richard E. 1972. "Arkansas: Independent and Unpredictable." In The Changing Politics of the South, ed. William C. Havard.

David Pryor. Governor, 1974-1978, Senator 1978-96. Exposed nursing home abuses by posing as an attendant. Ran a person-to-person campaign for a year before election, his theme was "Pryor Puts Arkansas First." He stressed "issues that affect Arkansas and Arkansas people" and "representing real people with problems" instead of a rigid ideology (Fenno 1996: 317, 319). Words used to describe him as senator were: showing a "genuine interest in whatever is on the minds of his constituents," he was "personable," "folksy," "unassuming," a "real nice guy," who was decent, never made enemies, knew many constituents on a first name basis, and constituents viewed him as "one of us" (Fenno 1996: 283, 284). He was so humble and accessible that he would often serve as receptionist early in the morning. Source: Fenno, Richard F., Jr. 1996. Senators on the Campaign Trail: The Politics of Representation.

Mark Pryor. Senator, 2002 to 2015. Described as "eminently likable," having "mannerisms that looked so much like his father," performs "amazingly well when talking directly to the television camera," theme is that "people matter more than political parties," adopted father's theme of "Pryor Puts Arkansas First" (Blair and Barth 2005: 351, 101). Source: Blair, Diane D. and Jay Barth. 2005. Arkansas Politics and Government, 2nd ed. Mark Pryor lost reelection in 2014 to Republican challenger Tom Cotton, an Army veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Accused of having a sense of "entitlement" because of his military service, Cotton ran an ad with himself as a soldier at attention to his real life drill sergeant, George Norton, and explaining that as a soldier he had learned "accountability, humility, and putting the unit before yourself. That training stuck." Pryor ran an ad with his father, who explained that his son backed Obamacare because of his own fight with an insurance company during his cancer battle.

Mike Beebe. Governor, 2007 to 2015. Born in a "tar-paper shack" to a "single mother" and to a father whom he "never met or talked to" (Blomeley 2006). Unopposed 20-year state senator, he was a legislative "consensus builder" who understood the "nuts and bolts of government" and who would bring people together instead of being an ideological framethrower (Blomeley 2006). Newspaper endorsement cited him as "a pragmatic, even-tempered, knowledgeable and forward-looking candidate deeply rooted in his community and his state" (Arkansas Democrat-Gazette 2006). President Clinton praised him as not needing on-the-job training, as being more qualified than Clinton was when first elected governor, and as having "common sense and common good" at heart, instead of opponent's being a "Washington Republican" who cared about "special-interest ideological extremism" (Blomeley and Kellams 2006). Sources: Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. 2006. "Editorials: Our choice." October 29, 2006; Blomeley, Seth. 2006. "At long last, Beebe is taking his big shot." Arkansas Democrat Gazette, October 22, 2006; Blomeley, Seth, and Laura Kellams. 2006. "Clinton in Arkansas to tout Beebe." Arkansas Democrat Gazette, November 4, 2006.

Texas' Governor George Bush-
The GOP in 1994 rallied behind the candidacy of George W. Bush, who was popular in Republican circles as the former President's son and as part owner of the Texas Rangers' baseball team. Bush skillfully exploited Governor Ann Richards' liberal record, as he supported the concealed weapons bill and the parental notification of teenagers' abortions bill that Richards had vetoed. Bush also projected a likeable image as a "compassionate conservative" on education matters, as he criticized a school funding equalization plan that had hurt some wealthy suburban districts and argued that all of the proceeds of the lottery enacted by Governor Richards and the legislature should go to enhancing education funding (Murray and Attlesey 1999: 323, 325-327; Thielemann and Elliott 2005: 238 quote). On the issues of crime and welfare, Bush claimed that "juvenile crime is out of control," and promised to get tough with welfare recipients by cutting off the additional benefits provided for any extra child that a woman gave birth to (Ivins and Dubose 2000: 93 quote, 95). Bush was also a very personable candidate, speaking a little Spanish before Mexican American audiences and projecting a "non-threatening, affable, well-mannered" impression to voters (Ivins and Dubose 2000: 91 quote, 19). The Democrat Richards was especially doomed by her inability "to hold the urban Anglo women against Bush" (Richards 2002: 246). The Republican's 54% popular vote victory was the highest winning margin for a Texas governor in twenty years.
As governor, the "compassionate conservative" Bush appointed Mexican Americans to high level positions, including Al Gonzales to the state Supreme Court, promoted accountability in education through promoting charter schools and testing students, and sponsored tax cuts in two legislative sessions (Feigert and Todd 2002: 199; Lamare, Polinard, and Wrinkle 2003: 269-270; Ivins and Dubose 2000: 205). Bush also backed such pro-business policies as tort reform, which capped punitive damages levied against companies harming people and required that lawsuits be filed in corporations' hometowns, and loosening environmental regulations that were believed to be a burden to companies (Ivins and Dubose 2000: 152, 177, 196). Getting tough on crime, Bush signed laws providing for stiffer sentences for possession of a small amount of cocaine and for possessing drugs near a school or school bus, urged a legislative rewrite of the juvenile justice code that tripled the state�s juvenile prison population, and vetoed a bill requiring that each county set up an indigent defender program (Ivins and Dubose 2000: 231, 236, 247).
More importantly, Governor Bush gained a reputation for "working across party lines" in the state legislature, as he "reached out" to the Democratic lieutenant governor and Democratic house speaker and even "shared credit" for policy accomplishments (Thielemann and Elliott 2005: 239 1st two quotes, 235 last quote). Bush was popular among lawmakers because of his "amiable, up-close-and-personal" style, as he invited nearly every lawmaker to have dinner at the governor�s mansion or to meet with him personally and even referred to them by their nicknames (Ivins and Dubose 2000: 157 quote, 90). Endorsed even by such a prominent Democrat as the state�s lieutenant governor, Bush cruised to reelection in 1998 with 68% of the vote to 31% for Democratic land commissioner, Gary Mauro. Spending heavily on a campaign in the Spanish-language media and with a campaign slogan of "Together we can," Bush managed to even attract 49% of the Hispanic vote and 27% of the African American vote (Ivins and Dubose 2000: 282 quote, 13, 280; Lamare, Polinard, and Wrinkle 2003: 278; Thielemann and Elliott 2005: 239; Duncan and Nutting 1999: 1282). Even more historic and shocking was that Republicans swept all statewide elective offices, electing agriculture commissioner Rick Perry as lieutenant governor and also electing Republicans as attorney general, comptroller, agriculture commissioner, and land commissioner (Lamare, Polinard, and Wrinkle 2003: 274). Leading such an historic GOP breakthrough in such a traditionally Democratic state put Governor Bush in the driver's seat for his party's upcoming presidential nomination.

South Carolina's Strom Thurmond- Democratic governor 1946-50; senator, 1954-2002, Democrat until 1964, Republican after. Learned from governor Ben Tillman, a family friend, how to have a good grip when shaking hands. Army combat service in World War 2 earned him many medals. Progressive governor, backed kindergartens, protected workers' health, improved black education facilities, condemned lynchings, appointed first black and woman to two commissions (Cohodas 1994). Only senator ever elected in a write-in movement, as protest to state committee's selection of a political boss, he fulfilled promise to resign and let people decide who should be senator without any incumbency advantage. His risky switch to weak GOP party was viewed as showing his "courage and independence," and how unlike a "machine politician" he always made a "direct appeal to the people" (Cohodas 1994: 360). In Thurmond's first reelection as a Republican in 1966, his supporters played the race card, with the state GOP newsletter printing a picture of challenger, Democratic Governor McNair, shaking hands with a black lawyer, and with an independent group distributing brochures accusing national Democrats of promoting "Black Revolution" which had allegedly led turban riots (Cohodas 1994: 384-385). Thurmond won all other reelections by stressing non-ideological service to his constituents. In 1971 he beat Democratic Senator Hollings to the punch by appointing a black staff member, and also began to dispense scholarships to black students through his Strom Thurmond Foundation (Cohodas 1994: 412, 428). In his 1972 reelection his Washington office was described as a "fountain of press releases announcing grants to communities around the state" (Cohodas 1994: 427). Indeed, Thurmond would even come back home to announce some grants himself or to attend dedication ceremonies. Thurmond also aggressively sought and obtained expressions of thanks from local officials, which were then put into his campaign ads (Cohodas 1994: 427). Thurmond's 1978 reelection also was a product of a campaign stressing his Washington experience and ability to secure federal projects that helped South Carolina, as well as his leadership posts on three important committees (Cohodas 1994: 444-445). The 75-year-old Senator sought to neutralize the age issue by sliding down a fire pole at a fire station and by having his four young children campaign for him (Cohodas 1994: 446-447). On the potentially explosive race issue, Thurmond was helped by the federal money he had channeled into black as well as white communities, as he even won the endorsement of the state's black mayors. National columnists covering the campaign reported encountering two African Americans who had personally benefited from Thurmond's constituency service, an example of which was the senator's diversion of an Air Force plane to transport a burn victim to a Cincinnati hospital (Cohodas 1994: 448-449). Thurmond's opponents in his next three reelections were relatively unknown and unfunded. Source: Cohodas, Nadine. 1994. Strom Thurmond & the Politics of Southern Change.

Alabama's George Wallace- governor from 1962-66, 1970-78, 1982-86, wife governor 1966-68. Born in shotgun house where roof leaked constantly, had no electricity or running water, and had an outhouse. Arrived at university with a cardboard suitcase containing only two shirts and a little underwear, and worked way thru college with part-time jobs. Won state bantamweight, wife was clerk at a dimestore. Elected to legislature with a people-to-people campaign, he campaigned by hitching rides, walking 5 miles, stopped at farmhouses and fields. Campaigned at church meetings, school plays, cotton mill gates, talking about needs of farmers, elderly, schools, and working man. As circuit judge, he was feisty and folksy. Wife attacked, he defended her blue collar origins where father was a shipyard worker. George Wallace himself narrowly regained the governorship in 1970 by stressing race in the runoff primary campaign against Governor Brewer, warning voters that the "“black,bloc vote (Negroes and their White Friends)" and the "Spotted Alliance" threatened to gain control of government (Lesher 1994, 448: Bass and DeVries 1977, 65). Even on the issue of race, as early as 1971 Wallace claimed to support “non-discrimination in public school and public accommodations that were open to all,” and he began greeting integrated school groups and signing photographs for them as they toured the capital (Carter 2000: 417). His 1971 inaugural address omitted the word segregation, pledging governmental action for the "weak, the poor, and the humble as well as the powerful," and asserting that Alabama belonged to "us all-black and white, young and old, rich and poor alike"” (Lesher 1994: 457). In any event, in 1973 Wallace crowned a black homecoming queen at the University of Alabama, and at a conference of black mayors proclaimed that, "We're all God'’s children.All God's children are equal"” Bass and DeVries 1977: 68). The next year he visited Martin Luther King's old church in Montgomery, where he appeared to seek forgiveness by claiming to be “misunderstood, explaining his opposition to school segregation as a commitment to states' rights instead of any racist feelings (Carter 2000: 463). Winning the state AFL-CIO endorsement and renominated by Democrats with an estimated 25-30% of the black vote (Carter 2000: 456; Lesher 1994: 493; Bass and DeVries 1977: 68), Wallace went on to an easy reelection in 1974. Wallace returned to the governorship a last time in the recession year of 1982 by winning some black support and promising to attract new jobs to Alabama. He expressed concern for the “unemployed and hungry and raised class issues by blasting the GOP as people “who only have to worry about who will mow their beachfront lawns” (Lamis 1990: 9; Lesher 1994: 497). He promised to protect working class blacks and whites from the “special interests,” and blasted the persistence of “tax loopholes for the rich” (Carter 2000: 4, 465). In his last gubernatorial term, Wallace fulfilled his campaign pledge to appoint “African Americans to all levels of state government,” and he reportedly welcomed “them into his office numerous occasions” (Carter 2000: 465) Sources: Carter, Dan, The Politics of Rage: George Wallace, the Origins of the New Conservatism, and the Transformation of American Politics; Lesher, Stephen. George Wallace: American Populism.

CANDIDATE CHARACTERISTICS

Age. Herrnson book (Congressional Elections: Campaigning at Home and in Washington. 7th Edition. By Paul S. Herrnson. CQ Press; Washington, D.C., 2012) points out that Congress is largely middle-aged or older (p. 65), usually being age 40 thru 74. About 90% of U.S. House members of both parties in 2015 were between the ages of 40 and 74. Less than 10% were under age 40. Tendency for the young to have a greater difficulty in getting elected, as about 15% of major party candidates for office were under age 40.

Age of Mississippi congressional delegation as of their birth date in the year 2015 is: Cochran 78, Wicker 64; Kelly 49; Thompson 67; Harper 59; Palazzo 45.

In state legislature, similar middle aged bias but more openness to the young. Scott Ross, Amy Tuck examples.

Women have historically been underrepresented in the U.S. Congress. Comprising over 50% of the population, women made up only 33% of Democratic U.S. House members and 9% of Republican House members in 2015 (Herrnson, page 65). So note the party differences- more Democratic women than Republican women. But interesting that women are not hurt by being candidates, as they comprise the same percentage of candidates who run as they do of elected congress members. Thus, the main problem with women is just getting them to run for office.

The Institute for Women's Policy Research rated Mississippi as the worst state in the nation for women in quality of life. For instance, they found that the state had never elected a woman to the Congress. The National Conference of State Legislatures found Mississippi one of the five worst states in representation of women in the state legislature. 17% of state legisators in 2012 was women. Other states with low rankings were Alabama, South Carolina, Oklahoma, and North Dakota. None were in chamber leadership positions also. There was very little change in 2015, when again only 17% of Mississippi's legislature was female; states lower were Alabama, Kentucky, Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.

Big party differences in ethnicity. Though a majority of both party's U.S. House members are white, 23% of Democrats were African American and 12% were Hispanic, compared to less than 1% black and 3% Hispanic for Republicans (Herrnson p. 66). Again, these aggregated percentages were similar to the percentages of these racial groups among all candidates, suggesting that once minorities offer themselves as candidates, they are as likely to win as whites are (but, Democratic minorities in 2014 seemed to be more likely to be elected, while Republican minorities were less likely to be elected). However, most African Americans are elected in majority black districts, so that is a geographic limitation for most minorities.
As of 2015 there were 2 African American Republican Congress members: Mia Love of Utah and Will Hurd of Texas, both first elected in 2014.

Before the 2012 election, there have only been six African American U.S. Senators ever: during Reconstruction, Republicans Hiram Revels and Blanche Bruce from Mississippi; liberal Republican Edward Brooke from Massachusetts; and Democrats Carol Moseley-Braun from Illinois, and most recently from Illinois Democrat Barack Obama and Roland Burris for the rest of his unexpired term. After the 2012 election, an African American Republican Tim Scott, a conservative Republican Congressman from South Carolina, was nominated by the governor after a senator's resignation, and he was reelected in 2014. In a special election in 2013, Democrat Cory Booker was elected from New Jersey. Therefore, in 2015 there are 2 African American Senators, 1 from each party.

In Mississippi state legislature, there are 37 black house members and 12 senators, as of the outcome of the 2011 state elections, which is 30% of the House and 23% of the Senate. These high numbers are due to the large African American presence in the state population, and due to the federal Voting Rights Act.

Occupation. Notice how business/banking, law, and politics/public service dominate U.S. House members, comprising 33%, 21%, and 23% respectively on House membership composition. Only 12% of the general population falls in any of these three categories (Herrnson p. 58). Business does not advantage candidates in terms of winning, but law and politics/public service does help candidates get elected, as these occupations comprise a greater share of House members than of mere candidates. The biggest party differences is that Republican House members are more likely to be in business compared to Democrats, while Democrats are more likely to be in politics/public service than Republicans (Herrnson p. 65).

In Mississippi state legislature, business generally is the largest category (about 2/3 of members in senate, about half in house). Lawyers are second (about one-fifth of both chambers). Farmers and public servants are tied for third (less than 10% of members). Educators are generally fourth in size, also less than 10%.

Religion. Notice that Catholics, Jewish, and Protestants are all pretty well represented in Congress compared to their presence in the population, and that these religions do not seem to affect the candidate's chance of getting elected. The only negative is among candidates with no religious affiliation or other religions (Muslims, Buddhists), who are underrepresented among all candidates and who are least likely to get elected.

Salaries of Mississippi public officials. State Legislators- $23,500 plus expenses. Governor- $122,160; Attorney General- $108,960; Treasurer, Auditor, and Secretary of State- $90,000; Lieutenant Governor- $61,714. U.S. House or U.S. Senate salary is $165,200. Source.. Note that all state salaries have increased since eleven years ago, except for Lieutenant Governor's increasing the least, due to former Lieutenant Governor Tuck's position that she knew what the salary was when she ran for the position.

Nativeness. In state legislature, it pays to be born in Mississippi. Over 80% have been born in the state. Nativeness is less important in rapidly growing states like Florida or California, where many people are in-migrants.

Ideology. In Congress and state legislature, it depends on the district. Majority black districts tend to elect liberal African-Americans (Mike Espy, Bennie Thompson). Majority white districts in South tend to elect conservative Republicans (Wicker, Pickering, Nunnelee, Palazzo) or moderate to conservative Democrats (Gene Taylor). The Mississippi state legislature has three major factions with some ideological variation in each: African-American liberal Democrats; conservative Republicans; moderate white Democrats.

State legislative candidates are often homegrown, as shown with our own legislators. 1) Amy Tuck, a former state senator. 2) Former senator Republican Glenn Hamilton was born in Starkville, attended Maben High School, East Mississippi Community College. Member of farm bureau and Starkville Chamber of Commerce, he's backed MSU's Bulldog Club and Quarterback Club. Was elected in an open seat after Amy Tuck ran for higher office. Got key campaign backing of MSU College Republicans after talking to their membership. Served on committees such as agriculture and colleges. 3) Former representative, Democrat Cecil Simmons from Maben was born in Macon, attended Noxubee County High, MSU, MC Law School. Entomologist, Farm Bureau, alumni association member. Reform leader, on Appropriations and Judiciary committees. 4) Representative, Republican Rob Roberson- born in Greenville, MSU student and alumnus, Starkville businessman and alderman. 5) Representative, Gary Chism, Republican. Born in Columbus, graduated New Hope High School, then MSU. Insurance agent, Southern Baptist. He is a Mason, a Shriner, and a York Rite, and serves on the Lowndes County Board of Education and the East Mississippi Community College Board of Trustees. He serves on various committees, such as Banking and Financial Services, Conservation and Water Resources, Judiciary A, and Local and Private Legislation. 6) Recent state senator, Bennie Turner, just deceased, was an African-American Democrat. He was born in West Point, was a Methodist, and graduated from MSU in our department. He was active in NAACP, and two other African American groups. He served on various committees, such as Chair of Constitution, Vice Chair of Insurance, and a member of Appropriations, Economic Development, Education, Elections, Judiciary B, and Public Health and Welfare. That an African American can not only serve on so many important committees, but also serve in leadership positions on important committees, shows how Mississippi has changed over the past half century.

Regarding Congress, it generally pays to have previous political experience and some connections. Senator Wicker was a state senator, father was a Democratic judge, and he was named chair of GOP freshman class. Congressman Thompson had city and county experience, and is a civil rights leader. Former Congressman Pickering had a father who was state party chair, and he worked for Trent Lott and Agriculture Dept. Former Congressman Gene Taylor was a city councilman and state senator. Senator Thad Cochran was a lawyer elected to House in 1972 in Nixon landslide year, served in House from 1972-78, Senate election. Former Senator Trent Lott had worked for his Democratic House member, served in House 1972-1988, won Senate. Former Congressman Ronnie Shows was a circuit clerk, state legislator, and highway commissioner for 22 years. Former 1st District Congressman Travis Childers previously served as Prentiss County chancery clerk for 16 years. Newly-elected 3rd district Congressman Gregg Harper served as Rankin County GOP Party Chairman for 8 years, and also served as a city prosecutor. Recently deceased 1st district congressman Alan Nunnelee, an MSU graduate from Tupelo, was a state senator for 16 years. Newly-elected 4th district congressman in 2010 Steven Palazzo served in the Marines for 7 years, and was a CPA.

Note state hometown connections. Hometowns: Cochran- Pontotoc; Wicker- Pontotoc; former Senator Lott- Grenada County; Palazzo- Gulfport. Harper- Jackson. Nunnelee- Tupelo. Thompson- Bolton. Former congressman Childers- Booneville; only former congressman Gene Taylor was non-state, New Orleans, but he attended Southern Mississippi, Gulf Park for two years, and coast is a growing area.

It pays to find an ideologically-partisan consistent area to run in, and run in a politically favorable year.

Among Mississippi Congress members. Liberal African-American Bennie Thompson represents a majority black district. The three white House members represent majority white districts, and are conservative Republicans (former Nunnelee, Harper, Palazzo). Two of their white Democratic predecessors, Childers and Taylor, were moderate Democrats. The same was the case for preceeding Congressmembers, such as African American Mike Espy being liberal, white Democrats Ronnie Shows and Wayne Dowdy being moderate, and Republicans Chip Pickering, Roger Wicker, and Trent Lott being conservative.

Senate Republicans in Mississippi have been helped somewhat by national political forces. Cochran and (former senator) Lott were both elected to U.S. House in 1972 when Nixon was carrying Mississippi with 80% of the vote. Cochran was elected to Senate in 1978 in midterm Carter election, and Lott in 1988 during Bush victory. Roger Wicker was elected 1st district congressman in 1994 during the GOP national midterm victory, he was appointed to the Senate in 2007 by Republican governor Barbour, and was then elected to the senate in 2008 over former governor Ronnie Musgrove.

Former congressman Gene Taylor's maverick conservative philosophy was consistent with Gulf Coast district, and he repudiated his national party. If Southern white Democrat, run away from your national party, call yourself a "Mississippi Democrat", or don't even mention your party. Run as an individual.

Don't run against an incumbent in Congress. Their funding advantage is usually huge. Congressmen Wicker and Taylor's opponents in 2002 failed to raise $5,000, while these two incumbents spent $376,000 and $347,000 to get reelected (CQ Politics in America, p. 1156). Congressman Thompson in 2002 spent $622,000 to Clinton LeSuer's $100,000. Senator Cochran in 2002 was unopposed by any Democrat, while former Senator Lott in 2000 spent $3.66 million to Troy Brown's $40,000. Most recently in 2008 elections, Senator Cochran spent $2,063,627, while his Democratic opponent failed to raise $5,000. Appointed Senator Wicker spent $6.2 million to $2.7 million for challenger and former governor Musgrove. Congressman Thompson spent $1.1 million, while his Republican opponent failed to raise enough to officially report. Congressman Taylor spent $513,266 to Republican challenger's $11,141. (2008 data are from CQ's Politics in America, 2010)

The 2012 congressional elections continued to illustrate the great difficulty of challengers raising funds against incumbents. Senator Roger Wicker, boasting a $2.3 million campaign warchest, faced retired minister, Army colonel, and former Oktibbeha County Democratic chair Albert N. Gore Jr., who joked that his "travel budget is my back pocket... I think I've been given about $3,200." Second district Congressman Thompson spent over $1.4 million, while black Republican and Tea Party favorite, businessman Bill Marcy of Vicksburg, reported spending less than $26,000 through September 30. Fourth district Congressman Palazzo faced community college student Matthew Moore, treasurer of the Harrison County Democratic Party Executive Committee, who replaced the party's nominee who had withdrawn from the race for personal reasons, and who reported zero campaign money received and spent. Third district Congressman Gregg Harper's only general election opponent was a Reform Party candidate who also reported zero campaign money received and expended. Only the 1st district saw much of a contest, with first-termer Congressman Nunnelee facing attorney Brad Morris, the former chief of staff of former Congressman Childers. Thru November 26, Nunnelee reported spending $1,370,447 to Morris' $204,767.

You can raise money against an incumbent if you can convince donors that the incumbent is vulnerable and you are especially strong. The Republican opponent of Gene Taylor in 1996 was a former legislator (Dennis Dollar) running in a Republican district, so he amassed $466,000 to Taylor's $412,000, but he still lost 58-40% vote margin. The conservative black Republican opponent of Thompson (Danny Covington) in 1996 raised $224,000 to Thompson's $428,000, but still lost 60-38%. Interesting that two Democratic incumbents were unseated in the 2010 wave elections, as Nunnelee beat Childers and Palazzo beat Taylor. In 2010 incumbent Childers spent $1,846,376 to challenger Nunnelee's $1,617,120. Incumbent Taylor in 2010 was actually outspent, as he spent $971,236 to $1,058,476 for Palazzo the challenger. Obviously, Republicans in the state and nationally saw a real chance of knocking off these two Democratic incumbents.

People generally are first elected in open seats. Cochran was elected to Senate when Eastland retired, and Lott when Stennis retired. Also, as Democratic incumbents retired, Wicker replaced Whitten, Thompson replaced Espy, and Pickering replaced Montgomery; Taylor replaced Smith after Smith's death. Regarding retirements in the old 4th district, Mike Parker replaced Democrat Wayne Dowdy, and Democrat Ronnie Shows replaced Democrat-turned-Republican Parker.

Win big and scare off the strong opponents. Wicker won open house seat with 63% of vote, got unfunded unknown opponent the next time, got 68% of vote. Pickering won open house seat with 61%, and repeated Wicker pattern; he got 85% of the vote in 1998 with no Democratic opponent and only a Libertarian opponent. Senator Cochran defeated Winter with 61% in 1984 reelection, was unopposed in 1990. Senator Lott won a close race in 1988 (54%), but national Democrats diverted funds to other states in 1994 Democratic disaster, so Lott outraised opponent 2.5 million to $367,000, and won 69% of vote.

Another way to scare off strong opponents is to start raising money immediately after your election. A reported campaign warchest of $200,000 before race even begins demoralizes challengers.

Other factors that can help in getting elected to Congress: 1) U.S. House service helps in getting elected to the Senate, where 49 members were former U.S. Representatives. 2) Military service, where 25% of senators and 22% of house members served (just as many Democrats as Republicans have served). 3) Former Congress staffer job experience- 14% of congress members served; 4) Parents who served in congress is more rare, only 6%, which included Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whose father was a Maryland Congressman, and Arkansas Senator Mark Pryor whose father was a senator from the same state. (Source for items 1-4: CQ's Politics in America, 2010) 5) Great intelligence- only 7 or 1.3% of 535 congress members were Rhodes Scholars as of 2007, which included two Louisiana Republicans, Representative Bobby Jindal (now the state's governor) and Senator David Vitter, both elected in 2004. (Source: CQ's Politics in America, 2008)

A special note on the 2014 Cochran-McDaniel GOP Senate primary battle (what do we learn from it?)-
As with the Nunnelee and Palazzo congressional renominations in 2012, when both Republican incumbents had to fight off spirited Tea Party challengers, the 2014 U.S. senate campaign suggested that the "real" contests in today's Mississippi were now within the dominant Republican party rather than in the November general election. Seventy-seven year old Thad Cochran, who had been in the senate for 36 years, faced state senator Chris McDaniel, a conservative leader and a Tea Party favorite. Cochran's campaign pledged continued use of "his status as a top member of the Appropriations Committee to support federal projects such as military bases, university research and agricultural projects in Mississippi," while McDaniel blasted Cochran's allegedly liberal votes and labeled him as a "senator who's been in Washington so long, he's forgotten his Mississippi conservative values" (Pettus 2014a, 2014b). Aggressively campaigning across the state, McDaniel shocked the political establishment by leading the first primary with 49.5% of the vote to Cochran's 49.0% with a minor candidate forcing a runoff race. Cochran supporters quickly became energized, with the aging senator personally campaigning across the state, with Republican establishment leaders urging a Cochan vote to help ensure a GOP-controlled senate, and with many African American leaders praising Cochran's support for some programs that benefitted minorities. One kiss of death for the spunky challenger was that his call for cuts in education prompted pleas for Cochran's reelection on the part of the chairmen of all three of the state's public education bodies (elementary and secondary, community colleges, and universities). The Cochran forces reversed their initial first primary deficit with a narrow 51% runoff victory, prompting a bitter McDaniel to spend months in court challenges over allegedly illegal Democratic crossover votes in the GOP runoff. Continuing the GOP monopoly of both U.S. senate seats starting in 1988, Cochran easily bested Democratic former congressman Travis Childers, whose supporters had hoped in vain for a McDaniel GOP upset, as polls had shown a tossup or even Childers victory if he had faced the Tea Party favorite (exit poll: http://www.cnn.com/election/2014/results/state/MS/senate).

TOPIC THREE: CAMPAIGN ORGANIZATION, STRUCTURE AND PERSONNEL

U.S. HOUSE CAMPAIGN ORGANIZATION:

Activities that should be staffed in some fashion in a campaign: (Source: Herrnson, Paul S. Congressional Elections: Campaigning at Home and in Washington, 7th edition, pages 74-76)

• 1) Campaign Management and Press Relations- for these two positions, nearly two-thirds of candidates used paid staff. Only weak challengers to incumbents relied on their own candidate to do this, instead of paid staff.
• 2) Fundraising and Accounting- half of candidates used paid staff, especially incumbents. Again, weak challengers were more likely to use own candidate instead of paid staff, especially for fundraising.
• 3) Issue/Opposition Research and Internet Web Site- about 40% of candidates used paid staff. Over 50% of strong challengers to incumbents used paid staff for these two positions. Again, weak challengers to incumbents much less likely to afford paid staff.
• 4) Media Advertising, Direct Mail, and Polling- on average, about 43% used consultants and 20% paid staff. Majorities of all types of candidates used either, except for weak challengers who again lacked the money.
• 5) Mass Phone Calls, Get Out The Vote Drives, and Legal Advice- only a little over one-third of candidates used paid staff or consultants. Interest groups, political parties, and volunteers were most likely to be used for Get Out The Vote Drives.
• 6) Strong challengers and strong open-seat candidates- both groups had campaign organizations that resembled incumbents, being more likely to have paid staff or consultants for these campaign staff positions (compared to long-shot challengers and weak mismatched open-seat candidates.

(Source: Herrnson, Paul S. Congressional Elections: Campaigning at Home and in Washington, 7th edition, pages 74-76)

CAMPAIGN POLLING

Historic Problems with Polls: 1) Biased Samples- 1936 Literary Digest poll example; compare the composition of your poll with census data, weight needed. 2) Time Bound polls- 1948 Dewey-Truman race, 1980 Reagan landslide; conduct your final poll the day before the election, use tracking polls. 3) Likely voter problems--people overreport voting, so use scale of polling place knowledge, congressional name knowledge, campaign interest, etc. 4) Hard to estimate party primary voters--use party identification or candidate preference strength.

Sample Error Example.

Major correlate of sample error is sample size. For 3% error, interview 1100 people; for 4%, need about 600; for 5% about 400; for 6% about 300; 7%, 200.

If you use cluster sampling, your error is one-fifth higher than these figures.

Types of Surveys:

1) Mail surveys have too many validity problems.

2) In-person surveys are too expensive.

3) Telephone surveys are cost effective and quick, but leave out people without telephones, having only cell phones. Plus, people from a lower socioeconomic status are undersampled, but many do not vote anyway. Most recently in the 2012 and 2014 Mississippi Polls, we included cell phones, but our response rate dropped.

4) Telephone surveys sampled from telephone directory leave out unlisted numbers, and people who just moved to community. Sample by taking equal intervals from telephone directory.

5) Random digit dialing can be used, but numbers purchased from a marketing firm are a preferable method.

6) Determining which adult to interview in each household: last birthday, oversamples women; quota sampling, asking for man first, other undersampled groups.

Demographic Groups Historically Undersampled in Telephone Surveys:

1) High School Dropouts

2) Lower income

3) African-Americans

4) Men

5) Young

6) Old

Weighing the Telephone Sample:

1) Weight by number of adults in household

2) Weight by inverse of number of different telephone numbers

3) Compare sample and census on demographics

4) Weight by undersampled groups, such as high school dropouts and men; compare sample and census

5) Repeat step 4 until obtain representative weighted sample.

Name Visibility is important to measure. A major reason Barbour lost to Stennis in 1982 is because he was less known to voters than was Stennis. Two ways of measuring it: 1) Name Recall- open ended, ask the person if they can recall the name of their congressman, senator, party nominee for whatever office; 2) Name Recognition- include the actual candidate's name in a list of fictitious names, and ask the person who the candidate is; correct for guessing.

General Favorability is very important, and highly related to people's vote preferences. Ways of measuring: 1) Job performance question- approve-disapprove, or excellent, good, fair, poor. For presidential election outcome prediction, an incumbent president must have approvals outnumbering disapprovals, or he is expected to lose. 2) Likes-dislikes about a candidate, open-ended. Thad Cochran's 96% favorability rating in 1984 predicted his defeat of Winter. 3) Rating candidate on each issue or personal trait. In 2004 presidential race, Bush was rated higher on fighting terrorism, having strong leadership; Kerry was rated higher on domestic issues like health care and education. Due to the 9-11 terrorist attack, terrorism was a more salient and important issue to most voters.

Other validity problems you may face: 1) Biased sample based on voter rejection of name of polling company. If a candidate mentions his/her name or party, opponents may refuse to answer survey. 2) Loaded or leading questions give inaccurate results, often consistent with candidate's views. 3) Double barreled questions have people responding to more than one question. 4) Too complex questions measure non-attitudes; remember, people often lack specific knowledge, attitudes. 5) Acquiescence bias (agreement bias), especially on agree-disagree items. Give people realistic, dichotomous choices, such as specific tax increase for education. 6) Sensitive items, like race, people often lie and give social desirable response. For income question, use broad categories; for age, ask year born in.

Types of Campaign Polls (p. 209-212, Herrnson, 7th edition, Congressional Elections)

• Benchmark polls- one year before elections
• Trend polls- intermittent throughout campaign
• Tracking polls- late in campaign, every night, takes rolling averages
• Focus groups- in-depth assessments
• On-line surveys- newer approach
• Media stories, such as newspaper letters to editors
• Direct contact with voters- rated most important method

TOPIC FOUR: CAMPAIGN FINANCES

Stephen Wayne's The Road to the White House (8th edition, 2008) has an informative chapter on campaign finance.

Money does not always win elections. Party identification is more important. Prior to the 1974 Federal Election Campaign Act, Republican presidential candidates nearly always spent more than Democrats, and they won most presidential elections until 1932. Indeed, in 29 presidential elections from 1860 thru 1972, only 4 times did Democrat spend more than Republican (Grover Cleveland's two wins, plus Truman's win, plus Wilson's first win.) But Republicans were usually victorious because they were the majority party in terms of party identification. When the Democrats became the majority party in 1932, they won most presidential elections until 1968, despite being outspent each time except for Truman in 1948. With the party id gap closing, the two parties are now competitive (see p. 34 of Wayne text).

Spending in presidential elections kept growing exponentially, and millions of dollars of illegal corporate donations were made to Nixon in 1972. Total major party campaign spending in presidential races: $150,000 in 1860, $3.4 million in 1900, $5.1 million in 1932, $19.9 million in 1960, $24.8 million in 1964, $36.6 million in 1968, and $91.4 million in 1972. Hence, 1974 FECA enacted, establishing FEC and federal campaign regulations. (page 34 of Wayne book, source)

FECA provisions, as amended by McCain-Feingold 2002 Act (p. 43 of Wayne text, data are for 2008 year):

1) Public disclosure. Contributions of $200 or more must be identified and reported.

2) Contribution limits. Individual contributions in each election (primary and general elections are separate) cannot exceed $2,600 (in 2014 election cycle) to a candidate (or candidate committee, always assumed throughout), $5,000 to a political committee or PAC, $5,000 to a state or local party committee per election. See Herrnson textbook, page 14 for other contribution limits.

3) "Multicandidate committee" PACs are limited to $5,000 contribution per candidate per election. PACS can contribute $5,000 to a state or local party or political committee, and $15,000 to a national party committee. There is no limit on total amount contributed to all candidates or committees.

4) Candidate self-contributions in presidential races. Contributions by candidates or immediate families are limited to $50,000, if candidate accepts federal funds. Candidates rejecting federal funds can contribute unlimited amount to own campaign.

5) Independent Expenditures. Individuals and political action committees can spend unlimited amount on their own to promote a candidate, provided they do not consult or communicate in any way with candidate's campaign organization.

6) Spending Limits (presidential races) for two major parties. Candidates accepting public funding were limited in 2008 to $41 million in pre-convention and $82 million in post-convention period, with a cost of living adjustment and extra funds for accounting and legal costs of complying with law. If accepting public funding, spending limits during nomination process in each state are based on population. (See Wayne, p. 49)

7) There are also party convention spending limits and party general election limits of about $16 million each in 2008 (see Wayne, p. 57).

8) Soft money (get out the vote efforts) ban in new law. Soft money solicitation and distribution by the national parties is outlawed. State and local parties must use only federal funds for all communications mentioning a federal candidate. Even voter registration drives conducted in the last 120 days of a federal election that mention a federal candidate must use federal funds (see Herrnson, Congressional Elections: Campaigning at Home and in Washington, 4th edition, p. 288).

9) Issue advocacy ads. Issue advocacy ads in which a candidate's name is used is outlawed after 30 days before a primary and 60 days before a general election. Rise of 527 non-profit, non-partisan groups- as long as they are not affiliated with a political party, they can raise and spend unlimited amounts on issue advocacy (Wayne, p. 44).

10) Coordinated Expenditures (Congress). Made in coordination with candidate's campaign, usually for services a party provides to candidate, such as polls, ads, fund-raising, or issue research. (See Herrnson, p. 16.)

11) Matching Funds (prenomination period- presidential race). Major party contenders raising $5,000 in each of 20 states in contributions of $250 or less can receive matching funds beginning January 1. Only the first $250 of each contribution is matched by government. In 2000 government provided $61 million in matching funds to all candidates. In 2004 due to an incumbent president lacking intra-party opposition, only $28 million was provided in matching funds to all candidates.

12) Communication Notices. Authorized ads by candidate organization must state the name of candidate or agent who authorized them. Non-authorized ads must identify person who made or financed the ad and their organizational affiliation.

13) Compliance. FEC assesses civil penalties, appeals made to U.S. District Court. Justice Department can assess criminal penalties.

FEC's website is http://www.fec.gov

The Independent Spending loophole is huge, and previously benefitted Republican presidential candidates.

The 527 groups are also a loophole, with numerous groups forming that in 2004 gave an edge to Democrat John Kerry.

Presidential Spending Patterns. 1) Prenomination period, equal amounts generally went to overhead, fund raising, and advertising. 2) Post-nomination period, majority went to media advertising. Overhead was now only 30% or less of advertising budget.

Congressional Finances- see Herrnson book, 7th edition, chapter 1, particularly pages 15-16. Study these charts on contribution limits, and federal spending limits in congressional elections.

Study the differences between 527 Committees, 501c Organizations, Super PACs, Corporations, Labor Unions, Other Groups, and Multifaceted Groups on pages 137-142 of Herrnson book.

Page 84 of Herrnson provides budget of typical House campaign.

National party money tends to be spent on three types of candidates: 1) Incumbents in Jeopardy (under 60% vote margin); 2) Hopeful Challengers (over 40%); 3) Open Seat Prospects (over 40%) instead of long shots. (P. 104).

National trends and waves affect party spending decisions. Party hurt nationally try to protect their incumbents, while party helped by national trends pour money into strong challengers. (p. 104, Herrnson 7th edition).

Political Action Committees (PACs)- Since 1974 law prohibited direct business and labor contributions to candidates, such organizations formed PACs. Number of PACs grew from 600 in 1974 to 5,825 in 2014. Total contributions to congressional candidates grew from $12.5 million to $438 million in 2014, and keeps growing. (Herrnson, p. 135)

Corporate PACs donate more than half of their money to Republicans, while labor PACs donate about 90% of their money to Democrats. In House, Corporate and Labor PACs in 2014 gave most of their money to incumbents. (See Herrnson, p. 154-155).

PAC Independent Expenditures on media- in 2014, which was a bad year nationally for Democrats, most of the money in House and Senate was spent supporting Democratic incumbents in jeopardy and hopeful Republican challengers to Democratic incumbents. (See p. 163 of Herrnson).

Congressional campaign spending helps challengers more than incumbents, since challengers need to buy the name recognition that incumbents already have.

Spending by winners and losers in House in 2014. See page 270 figure. Incumbents who lost spent more than incumbents who won, because they had faced a very tough opponent so they felt they needed to spend more. Winning challengers spent more than losing challengers; the money obviously helped them buy name recognition and get their message out.

Spending by Senate candidates in 2014. Note that senate races tend to be more competitive than house races, so not only is more money spent, but the average amounts spent by different kinds of candidates tends to be more even. See page 271 of Herrnson book. Also note how outside spending greatly increases the total amount spent of campaigns.

See the Secretary of State's website for information on Mississippi's Campaign Finance Law.

TOPIC FIVE: MASS MEDIA

Notable points regarding media use in campaigns:

1) Newspapers- important to seek endorsements of newspapers and columnists. Especially in less visible contests, they provide a positive item of information about a candidate. Eric Clark example- Sid Salter's column about Eric Clark as family man with Down's Syndrome child helped him, as did Bill Minor's lobbyist column attacking Secretary of State candidate Tuck in 1995.

Newspapers tend to be a more partisan medium, but their partisan leanings vary. New York-Washington D.C.-Boston axis is a liberal one, but many newspapers in rest of country are conservative and Republican.

Lott in 1988 countered the Clarion-Ledger's endorsement of his opponent by running as a paid ad in that newspaper the Memphis paper's endorsement of him. In local politics, having friends and supporters contact a newspaper complaining about unfair coverage can also help--Tuck example.

2) Radio- most prominent effective use of radio was FDR, whose voice and use of radio in era without television was unsurpassed. Reagan also used radio with Saturday broadcasts.

Radio permits you to target your audience by advertising on those stations that have a particular audience, such as African-Americans, country music fans, etc. Gubernatorial challenger in 1995 Dick Molpus' accusation on black stations in Delta that Fordice would send blacks to the back of the bus was designed to stimulate black turnout, but it backfired by being reported on statewide. A big problem that Republicans have with the black vote is that they tend to not even advertise in majority black areas, thereby conceding contests to the Democrats.

3) Television: free versus paid media.

Seek free media coverage with: staged events, such as Reagan in front of Statue of Liberty, Bush Sr. in 1988 at polluted Boston harbor; appearing on popular programs, such as Clinton in 1992 on Arsenio Hall and MTV, Dole in 1996 on Tonight show.

Entering debates gives free media coverage.

Paid media- positive ads about self builds up name recognition; negative ads about opponent provide memorable information, but can backfire (Molpus' "irreconcilable differences" comment about Fordice).

4) History of Television in Presidential Elections.

1952- Checker's Speech saves Nixon.

1960- First Debates, help Kennedy.

1964- Daisy Commercial hurts Goldwater.

1968- Coverage of Divisive Democratic convention hurts Dems.

1972- Anti-McGovern ads hurt him.

1976- Ford's foreign policy debate blunder hurts him.

1980- Reagan's "There you go again" joke helps him, defuses Carter's claim that he is too extreme a conservative.

1984- Reagan's "Morning in America" campaign was a classic "feel good" campaign; Reagan age joke in debate was good.

1988- Dukakis' Kitty Dukakis-rape-death penalty comment hurts the "ice man"; Bush's negative ads hurt Dem, especially the Willy Horton ad about a furloughed prisoner in Massachusetts who raped a woman.

1992- Bush's impatience during recession question in town meeting hurt him; Clinton's showing empathy with people's problems during the recession helps him.

1996- Both conventions orchestrated for media. Dole falls down during campaign event.

2000- Gore's sighing during a Bush response shows arrogance. Media reports on last weekend before election of youthful Bush's DUI arrest hurts him.

2004- Bush's defensiveness and whining about how hard his job was hurt him, but so too did Kerry's flipflop on Iraq. Bush did effectively portray himself as a fighter against terrorism.

2008- Obama during campaign and debates appeared cool, calm, poised, articulate; McCain appeared old and befuddled.

2012- Obama lost the first debate, as he just kept looking down while Romney attacked his failed economic policies. Obama did better in next two debates, and Romney even kept agreeing with Obama's foreign policy. Key media event was a waiter videotaping Romney's remark to private donors that accused 47% of Americans of being freeloaders.

5) Media in Mississippi Elections.

Cochran's use of constituency service radio ads on social security casework effective in 1984.

Lott's non-ideological feel good television ads effective in 1988 in avoiding right wing extremist tag. Lott's ads showed him as a supporter of social security, college student loans, the environment, and highway construction.

Fordice's positive growing economy TV ad with child on his lap defused ideology and played to his economic strengths.

Musgrove in 2003 unsuccessful reelection bid ran negative ads against Barbour without even mentioning Musgrove's own name, seemed to backfire.

TOPIC SIX: CONGRESSIONAL ELECTION CAMPAIGNS

Using Mississippi as an example:

1) Non-divisive constituency service- 1984 Senate race where Republican Thad Cochran defeats Democrat Winter.

Cochran has moderate image, as backed food stamps, rural housing, aid to developing institutions that help poor state.

Radio ad about helping person with social security.

Overwhelmingly positive image based on performance- 96% of comments about him in 1984 MSU poll were positive.

General performance factors (71% total): Good job- 22%; experienced and qualified- 14%; good record, performance- 10%; familiar with him- 9%; incumbency- 5%; "good man"- 4%; helps people and state- 4%; personal qualities- 3%.

Issues (14% total): like his ideas- 6%; issues generally- 3%; domestic issues- 3%; he's conservative- 2%.

Party (6% total): like his party- 5%; he's independent- 1%.

Other likes (5% total)- 5%.

Dislikes (4% total): dislike him- 2%; unfamiliar with him- 2%.

Opponent Winter was equally visible, but 18% of comments were negative, "only" 82% positive.

Constituency service was the key to Cochran winning the GOP nomination in 2014 over a strong conservative challenger, Chris McDaniel. Cochran had delivered many federal projects to the state's universities; he was praised by all three education boards (elementary-secondary, community college, universities), and prominent African Americans backed him.

2) A "Feel-Good" campaign- 1988 Lott Senate campaign (1988 Presidential Election in the South book).

Republican Lott anticipates moderate Democrat Dowdy's attacks on his conservatism, paints self-portrait as a progressive. Ads show him against social security cuts, "No Way, Period, End of Discussion"; rebuts Dowdy charge by saying his mother isn't rich and lives on social security. Ads show Lott for college loans, more highway money, for environment.

Dowdy attacks Lott "chauffeur-guard" driving across poor towns. Lott shows black guard George Awkward with handgun in shoulder holster saying, "Mr. Dowdy, I'm nobody's chauffeur. Got it?" At debate Dowdy said, "let's cut George." Lott attacking Dowdy's roll-call absences deadpanned, "I've got a better idea. Let's cut Wayne. At least George shows up for work and he makes less than you do."

Lott problem of hiring only 2 blacks of his 163 staff members since 1972. Some black backed him because of stress on jobs, such as Fayette mayor Charles Evers, former state NAACP field director Cleve McDowell, and Isadora Hyde of Moss Point who formed a "Blacks for Trent Lott" organization.

3) Mike Espy- Non-threatening, constituency service.

An African-American Democrat, Espy is well educated, young professional, low-keyed, businesslike, non-threatening to whites. Appointed by Democrats to Assistant State Secretary and Attorney General's Director of Consumer Protection Agency. Targeted black precincts, matched drivers licenses with voter registration rolls for registration drive, black turnout high, only 10% whites backed him. White Democrats (county sheriffs, two statewide officials) backed him. Agricultural recession hurt incumbent conservative Republican Webb Franklin in 1986.

In first term, Espy speaks to numerous chambers of commerce, Rotary Clubs, and black churches. Helps create Lower Mississippi River Delta Development Commission, funds Greenwood-Leflore County airport runway extension, federal loan for 85 new jobs for electronics company in Yazoo City, national Catfish Day, Army Secretary tours district, increased military purchase of catfish. In 1988, 30% of his funds came from white delta farmers, has biracial county coordinators, and second cousin Hiram Eastland hosts fundraiser on Adair Plantation Home. Espy rebuts his own liberal record by touting his support for death penalty for drug kingpins, balanced budget amendment, and anti-gun control and NRA endorsement. Republican Cochran refuses to campaign with Espy's Republican opponent. Espy gets 66% of vote in his first re-election in 1988.

(Note: Espy retired from Congress to accept the Agriculture Department headship in the Clinton administration. Resigning after being indicted by a Republican Special Prosecutor, he was found not guilty of every charge by a jury. He now practices law.)

4) Mobilizing One's Base, Empathy, Service- Bennie Thompson's elections.

Thompson is an African-American Democrat elected in 1993 with black mobilization- "If you vote for my opponent, it's like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders." Challenges white Democrats- "The party faithful must be willing to back African-American candidates as well as white candidates... don't like how the district has gone to the plantation owners after blacks worked so hard to get it." Inexperienced Hayes Dent simple assault barroom conviction.

Beats black conservative Republican in 1994 who says he isn't an African-American Republican, but is a "Republican who just happens to be black."

Thompson touts constituency service in 1996: Mid-Delta Empowerment Zone creates 1,000 jobs; millions for Delta levees; crime bill helped small city start police department with two officers. Organization speaking: Farm Bureau, he touts his support for farm bill; gets "respectful, even healthy applause" among white Rotarians in Clarksdale, where he jokes, "I don't have horns, I don't have a tail."

White planter Mike Sturdivant hosts reception for "Bennie", says he is: "very intelligent, very articulate... very supportive of the ag issues, has been very supportive on flood control, and he is interested in creating jobs."

When attacked for black staff, cites white college lady worker, pledges to serve constituents regardless of race, especially the "poor, senior citizens, children, and the disenfranchised."

Black conservative Republican talks about playing Dixie at Ole Miss, pledges in poor district to get federal government "off your back and out of your pocket", says he is Republican who happens to be black. Gingrich makes Jackson fund-raising trip for Republican. Thompson points out that "You cannot go and carry Newt Gingrich's policies in this district and expect to get elected."

Thompson wins re-election with 59% of vote in 1996. Demoralized Republicans offered no candidate in 1998.

Thompson won 65% of the vote in 2000. His campaign stressed constituency service, attending a Head Start building ground-breaking ceremony and fighted for a Delta Regional Authority modeled after the Appalachian Regional Commission. Thompson also became a conciliator, speaking to all-white groups such as a local Chamber of Commerce and benefiting from fundraisers held by white planters.

In 2002, Thompson was held to a low 55% by underfunded and little known African American Clinton LeSueur. He beat LeSueur again in 2004, this time with 58% of vote. Thompson won in 2006 with 64% of vote, the same victory margin as Senator Trent Lott received.

5) Repudiating the national party, homespun appeal- Mike Parker and Ronnie Shows.

Mike Parker was elected as a Democrat in 1988 in the old 4th district.

Son of Baptist preacher, funeral home owner.

Rejecting the "liberal" label, Parker calls self a "Mike Parker mainstream Mississippi Democrat," from the party of "Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare, veterans benefits, Sonny Montgomery, and John Stennis."

Homespun values of earnestness and dedication, "I'm just like you" appeal, projected on TV ads. Meeting police, he said his brother was a police officer, he understood the psychological pressures of the job, admitted he wasn't a brilliant man, but was "just like you are, just an everyday person," he pledged to bring common sense to Congress.

Moderate conservative Parker gets 55% of vote.

(Note: Parker switched to the Republican Party in 1996, retired from Congress in 1998, and lost a gubernatorial race the next year.)

Democrat Ronnie Shows elected in 1998 in the old 4th district. Years of experience as a "Mississippi Democrat," state legislator and highway commissioner permits him to repudiate "liberal" label of the national Democrats. He is a down-to-earth homespun guy, personally drives his old car plastered with campaign signs across the district. He focuses on popular domestic issues, such as social security, health care, veterans issues. (He lost to Pickering in the new 3rd district, which combined the old 3rd and 4th districts.)

6) ReRun Election, Repudiate National Party- Gene Taylor.

Maverick Democratic state legislator, lost in 1988 to popular sheriff Larkin Smith. Taylor cites legislative accomplishments and familiarity with state issues. Emphasizes his conservatism by rejecting money from liberal PACs. Mabus endorsement, fundraising, and commercial don't help him. State Democrats lend him state executive director's help.

Building on his 45% showing, Taylor enters special 1989 election after Smith death. Trent Lott backs his aide Tom Anderson, discourages widow Sheila Smith from running. Mike Moore also runs. Taylor leads Anderson by 5%, wins 65% in runoff.

In 1990 Sheila Smith finally gets GOP nod, loses to Taylor who gets 81% of vote.

Gene Taylor is clearly moderate conservative. Colin Powell for President bumper sticker in 1992, voted "present" in 1995 Speaker's race. Leader of conservative Blue Dogs.

Clarion-Ledger endorses Taylor in 1996 touting "his demonstrated performance in Congress representing the diverse interests of the 5^th district," and calling his independence "refreshing in an era with harsh partisanship creating gridlock in Congress."

Gene Taylor was swept out of office in the national 2010 GOP landslide.

7) Winning in Ideologically Compatible Districts-

Republican Roger Wicker, 1^st district, 1994. GOP primary charge of not conservative enough. Wicker beat a populist Democrat who used negative ads by airing earnest TV ad and voicing conservative codewords.

Republican Chip Pickering, old 3^rd district, 1996. Beats Mabus supporter in conservative GOP primary. Democrat self-destructs with missionary-Bible school exchange (Democrats "student-led prayer group I started in junior high" paled compared to Pickering's missionary work behind the Iron Curtain) and Gingrich-Clinton comparison ("I guess the choice is sending Bill and Hillary another player").

Pickering wins new 3rd district in 2002, beating incumbent Democrat Ronnie Shows. Pickering got 64% of the vote, which is identical to the 64% of the vote that GOP presidential candidate Bush got two years earlier in the new 3rd district.

These two elections of the 1990s were critical, because the seats had been vacated by moderate conservative Democrats Whitten and Montgomery, and Democrats had a chance to keep both seats. Yet the GOP victories showed how many white conservative southerners were more comfortable with the modern Republican party.

8) Rebutting Political Weaknesses: Age issue

Democratic Senator John Stennis in 1982. Poll shows age is an issue. Stennis' TV ads show his physical vigor: at desk in D.C. at dawn; climbing up a ladder on a warship; inspecting a military cadet line with cadets chanting.

Democrat Jamie Whitten in 1992, his last race in the 1st district. Calls Appropriations chairmanship loss a "temporary" stepping aside due to health. Cochran backs Whitten claim. Espy-Fordice exchange over age issue, Whitten claims Fordice visited him to save Yellow Creek advanced solid rocket motor. Whitten stresses constituency service: at dedication for Whitten Historical Center at Fulton on Tenn-Tom Waterway, a state conservationist praised Whitten: "Never have so many owed so much to one man." Campaign slogan- "Stand Up for Our Congressman, Jamie Whitten. He Stands Up for Mississippi." Runs newspaper ads and 8-page newspaper inserts stressing the federal programs brought into "every county in our district."

Thad Cochran GOP renomination in 2014 over challenger Chris McDaniel. Cochran's age of 77 (in December 2014) was more of a whispering campaign, and after trailing in the first primary Cochran returned to Mississippi for vigorous, non-stop campaigning. His theme of service to Mississippi by delivering federal dollars and programs trumped McDaniel's uncompromising conservatism.

9) A wave election- beating incumbents in a bad year nationally for their party, using quality challengers in an ideologically-compatible district. Two examples in 2010, Republicans Nunnelee and Palazzo beating incumbent Democrats Childers and Taylor in 1st (north) and 4th (coast) districts.

In the 2008 elections, longtime chancery clerk and moderate Travis Childers had briefly regained the 1st district house district for Democrats after a bitter GOP primary, only to be unseated two years later in the national GOP landslide, along with moderate Democrat Gene Taylor of the 4th house district. Victorious GOP state lawmakers Alan Nunnelee and Steven Palazzo in 2010 aided by state Republican leaders aggressively sought to tie the Blue Dog incumbents to liberal national Democrats, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and President Obama, a winning strategy given not only voter discontent with Washington but also Obama's failure to win more than 37% of the vote in these districts. Nunnelee blasted Childers for backing Obama's stimulus bill, arguing that "we don't like to borrow money from the government of China to be repaid by our grandchildren," while state GOP chairman Brad White accused the Democratic incumbent of playing "on the team of (House Speaker) Nancy Pelosi" (Berry, 2009). Palazzo argued that having been a Marine in the Persian Gulf War gave him "the courage to take on people like Pelosi and Obama," and blasted "the government takeover of health care" (Pettus 2010a, 1st quote; Pettus 2010b, 2nd quote). To add insult to injury, a party switch after the 2010 election gave Republicans a tie with Democrats in number of state senators for the first time since Reconstruction.

To illustrate how Mississippi has changed to a dominant Republican party, both first-term GOP incumbents faced spirited primary challengers in 2012, with one Tea Party candidate blasting "Benedict Alan Nunnelee," and Congressman Palazzo pointing out that his constituents "didn't send me to Washington to shut down government or to default on our national debt." Both GOP incumbents beat back their Tea Party conservative purist challengers (Second Verse, Same as the First book).

TOPIC SEVEN: PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION POLITICS

OLD ERA OF PARTY BOSSES: party bosses dominating a closed system, 1968 and previously:
1) Most delegates selected in caucus-convention system, rather than primary elections.
2) Party bosses dominated caucus-convention system, often backed "favorite sons" or kept delegation uncommitted.
3) Little participation by average citizen in presidential nomination process.
4) Most delegates were middle-aged to old white males.
5) Delegates generally had a "professional" stylistic orientation, wanted a "winning" candidate.
6) Conventions were deliberative bodies, often requiring multiple ballots to nominate a president.
7) As late as 1968, Vice President Humphrey was nominated by Democrats without entering any primaries.

National Democratic Party Rules Changes.

Since 1968, national Democrats have tried to reform their party and make it more open and "democratic," and have imposed more rules on the state parties. The national Republicans are more supportive of states' rights, so they generally do not require as many rules. However, state laws enacted by Democrats can bind Republicans as well.

1) Affirmative action in representing minorities, especially African-Americans; quota system for women. Racial discrimination was outlawed in the 1960s, and a 1972 quota for women, blacks, and young adults created dissension. Beginning in 1976 Democrats used a more flexible affirmative action system for African-Americans, but used a strict quota for women. Today they require each state party to submit information on the representation of numerous "disadvantaged" groups.

2) Open delegate selection system, open to the public rather than a closed-door process dominated by party bosses. State parties must publicize how, when, and where delegates will be selected, and permit all Democrats to participate in the process.

3) PR, Proportional Representation, replaces winner-take-all systems in 1972. States must allocate delegates across candidates based on the candidates' vote totals.

4) Primaries are used by most states by 1970s instead of caucus-convention system; demonstrates an open process.

5) Closed party system-- only Democrats can select Democratic delegates, started in 1970s. Some exemptions.

6) A 3 month window, whereby delegates must be selected from early March to early June. Shortens the lengthy campaign season. Traditional early states like Iowa and New Hampshire got exemptions. This system had granted many exceptions by 2004, when 9 primaries and 6 caucuses were held in February after the first two traditional early states. By 2008 it had become a 4 month window, from early February to early June, with South Carolina and Nevada joining Iowa and New Hampshire getting exemptions for early contests. In 2008 both Florida and Michigan got in trouble by violating this rule and holding early delegate selection contests. In 2016 there is again a 3 month window with 4 early exemptions, one state from each region (Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Nevada).

7) Superdelegates-- 14% of Democratic delegate seats are reserved for public and party leaders, starting in 1984. Many officials weren't willing to run against average citizens for delegate positions, and conventions dominated by amateurs nominated losers like McGovern in 1972 or "outsiders" like Carter in 1976.

8) Super Tuesday, Southern Primary. Southern Democrats got tired of liberal presidential candidates, and most southern states held primaries on the same Tuesday in early March, starting in 1988. This system had broken down by the 21st century; in 2004, only 4 states still conducted Super Tuesday on 2nd week of March, while 4 states came earlier and 3 later; in 2008, 4 southern states held primaries on Super Tuesday, 2 went earlier and 5 voted later (all on different days). In 2016, 7 southern states have primaries on Super Tuesday, with the other 4 southern states also voting in March.

9) Front Loading-- Front Loading-- most delegates are now selected by the end of March, as states seek to increase their power by holding early contests. In 1996, after Iowa and New Hampshire in February came the New England primaries the first week of March, the Southern primaries the second week, Midwestern primaries the third week, and California and two western primaries the last week. This process benefits well-known frontrunners, like Dole. In 2000 the process was even more front loaded, with New York, Ohio, and California joining the New England primaries in the first week (Illinois was the sole midwest primary in the third week and the fourth week no longer existed). In 2004 it was even more front loaded: Iowa caucus was in 3rd week of January, New Hampshire primary was in 4th week; in February were 9 primaries and 6 caucuses; the first week of March had 4 New England states plus 3 large states of California, New York, and Ohio, plus 4 other state contests; the 2nd week of March had 4 southern states, including Mississippi, Florida, and Texas; the rest of March had 4 more contests; April had 2 contests; May had 8 contests; June had 4 contests. The 2008 contest was the most front-loaded yet, with 7 states voting in January, 21 voting on the first Tuesday of February, 9 voting later in February, with the remainder voting in later months; no regional patterns existed, though South Carolina now joined the earliest states, right after Iowa and New Hampshire. (In the 2012 GOP nomination battle, 4 states voted in January and 7 voted in February, with most states voting in March, and 21 voting in April, May, or June, as the party sought to cut back a little on the front-loading process.)

RECENT PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION BATTLES:

1968 Democratic- President Johnson withdraws; liberal "amateurs" McCarthy and Kennedy win primaries; "professionals" support Vice President Humphrey; anti-war platform defeated, party split; ticket- Humphrey/Muskie.

1968 Republican- party loyalist and centrist Nixon defeats liberal Rockefeller and conservative Reagan; ticket- Nixon/Agnew.

1972 Democratic- leader, centrist Muskie, weak 1st in New Hampshire after crying; anti-war liberal "amateur" McGovern strong 2nd in N.H., wins Wisconsin; McGovern narrowly wins California despite Humphrey extremist attack; centrist Humphrey, conservative Wallace lose to McGovern "amateurs"; ticket- McGovern/Eagleton (resigns- shock treatment)/Shriver.

1972 Republican- incumbent Nixon/Agnew renominated.

1976 Democratic- field of little known candidates; centrist Carter wins Iowa and New Hampshire after liberals split up leftist vote; bandwagon-media coverage of Carter; Udall, Brown stay in race; Carter wins Ohio, "professionals" unify behind him to win in November; ticket-Carter/Mondale.

1976 Republican- centrist President Ford challenged by conservative Reagan; seesaw primary battle, as momentum shifts back and forth; liberal Northeast and Midwest support Ford, conservative South and West like Reagan; Reagan seeks Northeast support by announcing Pa. liberal Senator Schweiker as V.P.; uncommitted professionals back Ford as winning candidate; ticket- Ford/Dole.

1980 Democratic- centrist President Carter challenged by liberal Kennedy; international crises boost Carter popularity, but Kennedy stages a comeback as Carter's popularity declines; Kennedy loses bid to free delegates from 1st ballot pledge; ticket- Carter/Mondale.

1980 Republican- frontrunner Reagan refuses to debate in Iowa, loses to Bush; Reagan outmaneuvers Bush in New Hampshire debate, Reagan wins N.H.; N.H. victory reverses Bush bandwagon, starts Reagan bandwagon, Reagan wins; ticket-Reagan/Bush.

1984 Democratic- frontrunner Mondale loses to "new ideas" Hart in N.H. after a weak 1st place win in Iowa; Mondale comeback in southern states (Ala., Ga.) due to "regulars", organization, conservatism, and "where's the beef" attack; Jackson wins black support; Mondale bandwagon starts; ticket- Mondale/Ferraro.

1984 Republican- incumbent Reagan/Bush renominated.

1988 Democratic- field of little known candidates; centrist Dukakis wins home state area of New Hampshire, northern industrial states; South split between Gore (TN), Jackson, and Dukakis; Dukakis defeats liberal Jackson; ticket-Dukakis/Bentsen (TX).

1988 Republican- two, strong candidates, Bush and Dole; frontrunner Bush loses in Iowa, stages comeback victory in New Hampshire ("mean" Dole issue); Reagan-associated Bush carries South, causing bandwagon in other states; ticket-Bush/Quayle.

1992 Democratic- Harkin carries Iowa home state; Tsongas (Mass.) carries nearby New Hampshire; centrist Clinton sweeps native South; Clinton beats liberal Jerry Brown in rest of country; ticket-Clinton/Gore.

1992 Republican- Incumbent Bush/Quayle renominated after Buchanan gets 37% in New Hampshire and Duke loses the South.

1996 Republican- Front-loaded process helps party loyalist, front-runner Dole win 39 primaries, despite losing New Hampshire to Buchanan, and Delaware and Arizona to Forbes. On next two weeks, Dole wins New England and Southern primaries. Ticket- Dole/Kemp.

1996 Democratic- Incumbent Clinton/Gore renominated without opposition.

2000 Republican- Bush was viewed as more of a party loyalist than McCain, as he was backed by GOP governors, his father had been President, and McCain criticized the intolerant, religious Right. McCain won only seven states, including four liberal Northeastern states, plus New Hampshire, his home state of Arizona, and Michigan. The front-loading process is reflected in the last state he won being won on March 7.

2000 Democratic- Gore as Vice President is a party loyalist, wins every state contest though New Hampshire is close race with Bradley.

2004 Democratic- Kerry is a party loyalist, a war hero, a 20-year Senate veteran, backed by prominent liberal/party leader Ted Kennedy; he sweeps all except three states. Early front-runner Howard Dean, an angry, anti-war, liberal governor wins only Vermont, after losing Iowa after he publicly screams (Dean's image makes Kerry look moderate to voters). Clark wins only Oklahoma, and Edwards wins only South Carolina.

2004 Republican- Incumbent Bush/Cheney are renominated without opposition.

2008 Democratic- frontrunner Hillary Clinton stumbles in early state of Iowa, losing to Obama, but she comes back in New Hampshire. Obama wins in early southern state of South Carolina with strong black support, Clinton comes back in non-binding Florida race. Obama's consequent backwagon ties him with Clinton in polls, upsetting her expectation to wrapup nomination on Super Tuesday, which they end up splitting. Obama then wins 9 straight contests, which he had more fully contested than she had, thereby taking a delegate lead. They split the remainder of the contests, the superdelegates move towards Obama, and he wraps up the nomination. Obama's charisma, inspirational speaking ability, and focus on change are an unexpected campaign event for the frontrunner, as was Clinton's overconfidence and failure to fully contest states immediately after Super Tuesday.

2008 Republican- John McCain was a senator for 22 years, runner up for GOP presidential nomination eight year earlier, and was a perceived party loyalist by strongly backing Bush's Iraqi war surge strategy. McCain won prominent early primaries in New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Florida. Huckabee wins Iowa, and Romney wins four of the lesser-known early contests. Guiliani withdraws after losing Florida, which he had concentrated on. On Super Tuesday, McCain wins 9 of the primaries, Huckabee 4, and Romney only 2 (he does win 5 caucuses), so McCain wraps up nomination.

2012 Democratic- President Barack Obama, the incumbent, is renominated without opposition.

2012 Republican- Former Massachusetts Governor and former social issues moderate Mitt Romney is the frontrunner with money and organization, and is the more centrist candidate. Conservatives Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum have less money and fail to contest all of the delegate slots. Gingrich wins only his home state and a neighborning southern state, while Santorum is initially boosted by winning Iowa (while Romney wins New Hampshire and Florida) and 3 of the 7 states voting in February. Santorum wins only 3 states on Super Tuesday versus 7 for Romney, but Santorum then wins 3 Deep South states. Romney wins all three states in early April (including Wisconsin and Maryland), and Santorum withdraws.

WHO WINS THE PRESIDENTIAL NOMINATION:

1) Incumbent Presidents- Usually Presidents are easily renominated, such as Clinton in 1996 and Reagan in 1984. But even when facing economic and international problems such as Carter in 1980, or a strong challenger such as Ford in 1976, they still get renominated. So did Hoover during the Great Depression in 1932.

2) Vice-Presidents- Vice-Presidents have built up political IOU's by speaking to party groups across the nation and backing political candidates. Vice Presidents nominated included both parties in 1968 (Nixon had been Eisenhower's VP), Mondale in 1984 (Carter's VP), Bush in 1988, Dole in 1996 (Ford's VP choice in 1976), and Gore in 2000.

3) It pays to be moderate- Pat Buchanan was too extreme compared to Bob Dole in 1996; Carter in 1976 was a southern moderate compared to his liberal opponents, as was "New Democrat" Clinton; Ford won the uncommitted delegates in 1976 who feared Reagan was too conservative; Humphrey beat the liberal reformers in 1968. Gore was more moderate than Bradley in 2000. Exceptions to this rule were McGovern in 1972 and Reagan in 1980.

4) Being a party loyalist helps. Johnson's loyal Vice President and Vietnam policy supporter Humphrey won in 1968, as did Republican campaigner in 1964 and 1966 Nixon. Vice President Mondale in 1984 had history of backing of labor and civil rights, while Senate Republican Leader Dole in 1996 won. Both nominees in 2000 were more in the mainstream of their parties than their chief opponents. Exceptions to rule are liberal McGovern in 1972 and outsider Carter in 1976. McCain in 2008 was loyal to Republican President Bush's Iraqi war, had come in second in 2000 presidential nomination battle, and had been a senator for 22 years.

5) Being the front-runner helps, particularly in the age of front-loading. In 2000, Gore won every primary, and Bush dominated Titanic Tuesday after McCain split the early states with him. In 1996 Dole's national organization swept his opponents' scattered victories. Frontrunners Bush in 1988, Mondale in 1984, and Reagan in 1980 came back from early defeats. Exceptions include unknown Carter nominated in 1976 and McGovern in 1972.

6) Winning early states can create a bandwagon, increasing fundraising and name identification. Anti-war McGovern in 1972 won a strong second place in New Hampshire; Carter's victories in Iowa and New Hampshire caused a massive bandwagon; Dukakis won his home state area of New Hampshire in 1988. Exceptions are numerous, with Dole in 1996, Bush in 1988, Mondale in 1984, and Reagan in 1980 losing early states but reversing the bandwagon effect by winning later states. Obama won early states of Iowa and South Carolina in 2008, slashing frontrunner's poll lead nationally, and upsetting her strategy to wrap up nomination with a sweep on Super Tuesday. McCain in 2008 won three early primaries of New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Florida.

7) Unexpected events can be a killer. Kennedy led Carter in 1979, but international crises caused voters to rally behind the President, and Carter was renominated. Bush lost New Hampshire after his Iowa victory in 1980, because he refused to debate all of the candidates, and after that it was all downhill. In 2004, Dean's "yell" after losing Iowa torpedoed his campaign. In 2008, Obama's charisma, inspirational speaking ability, and adroit focus on change successfully unseated frontrunner Hillary Clinton, while Clinton's overconfidence in failing to fully contest the states immediately after Super Tuesday was disastrous.

8) The South was important in two decades, due to Super Tuesday. Mondale in 1984 stopped Hart bandwagon in the South; Bush, being Reagan's VP, won the South in 1988; Clinton swept his native South in 1992. But the earlier start of a New England primary in 1996 and the frontloading generally in 1996 reduces the South's importance.

A valuable chart summarizing how often and when each of these eight factors were in causing people to win their party's nomination for President is available here.

TOPIC EIGHT: PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION CAMPAIGNS

2 Models of explaining the outcomes of Presidential elections: 1) Long term (party identification) versus short term factors (issues and candidates); the University of Michigan social-psychological model of voting behavior; majority party usually wins unless short term factors significantly benefit minority party candidate. 2) Satisfaction versus dissatisfaction; satisfaction helps incumbent party's candidate, while dissatisfaction helps the challenger.

Review of recent presidential elections, the candidates of the parties, and key factors resulting in victory.

1948- Truman (D) - 50% - New Deal domestic issues (I), Democratic majority (P).
Dewey (R) - 45%- popular governor (C), dissatisfaction (I).
2 Independents: Strom Thurmond and Henry Wallace- 2% each- divided Dems

1952 - Eisenhower (R) - 55% - war hero (C). (Checker's Speech-Nixon)
Stevenson (D) - 45% - Korea, Communism, corruption hurt (I). Dissatisfaction hurts Dem.

1956 - Eisenhower (R) - 57% - personal popularity (C); peace and prosperity (I). Satisfaction helps.
Stevenson (D) - 43% - Democrat (P).

1960 - Kennedy - (D) - 50% - young, charismatic (C); time to move ahead (I); Democrat (P).
Nixon - (R) - 50% - popular VP (C); knowledgeable (C). (Debates hurt him)

1964 - Johnson (D) - 61% - Democrat (P); centrist (I); incumbent (C).
Goldwater (R) - 39% - too conservative (I); extreme, impulsive (C). (Convention divided)

1968 - Nixon (R) - 44% - Vietnam, unrest, crime, inflation (I). Dissatisfaction helps Rep.
Humphrey (D) - 43% - Democrat (P). (Divided Chicago convention)
Wallace (I) - 13% -

1972 - Nixon (R) - 61% - world leader, prosperity (I); popular (C). Satisfaction.
McGovern (D) - 39% - extreme liberal (I). (V.P. resigns-shock treatment)

1976 - Carter (D) - 51% - Democrat (P); stagnant economy, pardon (I). Dissatisfaction
Ford (R) - 49% - Conservatism helps (I). (Ford debate blunder-E. Europe)

1980 - Reagan (R) - 51% - Iran, Afghanistan, inflation, recession (I). Dissatisfaction hurts Dems
Carter (D) - 41% - poor leadership hurts Dems (C). (Reagan debate win-"there you go again")
Anderson, John (Indep)- 7%-

1984 - Reagan (R) - 59% - peace and prosperity (I), likeable person (C). Satisfaction, "It's Morning in America"
Mondale (D) - 41% - Democrat (P). (1st woman VP-Ferraro)

1988 - Bush (R) - 54% - peace and prosperity (I). Negative campaigning.
Dukakis (D) - 46% - too liberal (I); uninspiring (C). (Debate-anti-death penalty, iceman)

1992 - Clinton (D) - 43% - moderate "New Democrat" (I). Dissatisfaction helps Dems
Bush (R) - 38% - recession hurts (I). ("It's the economy, stupid"; Bush aloof at debate)
Perot (Indep) - 19% -

1996 - Clinton (D) - 50% - Good economy, (I) Satisfaction
Dole (R) - 41% - Old, uninspiring, uncaring (C). (Reps. Keep Congress)
Perot (I) - 9% -

2000 - Bush (R) - 50% - personable (C), compassionate conservative (I)
Gore (D) - 50% - arrogant (C), Clinton scandal (I), too liberal (I).

2004- Bush (R) - 51% - Decisive terrorist fighter helps Bush (I)
Kerry (D) - 48% - Flip-flopping liberal charge hurts Kerry (I)

2008- Obama (D) - 53% - Charismatic, articulate speaker (C)
McCain (R) - 46% - Financial Crisis, recession hurts (I)

2012- Obama (D)- 51%- middle class theme, people like me empathy (I); 38-32 Democratic exit poll advantage (P).
Romney (R)- 48%- rich man, takers 47% comment lacks empathy (C).

Note: R denotes Republican candidate, and D denotes Democrat.
I denotes issues, C is candidate, and P is party factor.
Numbers denote percentage of popular vote received.

TOPIC NINE: STATE ELECTORAL POLITICS

1) Stress your strengths, focus campaign on them.

Mabus was well educated, Auditor who fought corruption. Slogan- "Mississippi will Never be Last Again." Pro-education promises gets MAE endorsement.

Jack Reed in 1987 was "not a professional politician, I'm a businessman." Civic minded- Education Board. Has a family, long record of local community service, unlike opponent.

Fordice- "not a professional politician" stressed in TV ads. Stresses business background to business groups, even getting Gil Carmichael support.

Molpus let Fordice get jump on education issue, abandoned open government issue, stresses education late.

Musgrove campaign for governor in 1999. He trailed through most of the campaign, but then stressed elementary-secondary education issues and won.

Amy Tuck's campaign for lieutenant governor in 1999. She is a down-home country gal, and her campaign slogan was: "Me and my truck are for Amy Tuck."

Barbour's strength as a gubernatorial candidate in 2003 and as governor has been in promoting economic development which creates jobs, so he has stressed issues such as tort reform.

Attorney general Jim Hood's strength was his experience for the job at the relevant level of government, the state. Elected in 2003, he had been a two-term district attorney and a former assistant attorney general who had tried over 100 cases and secured over 4,000 convictions. Hood was endorsed by prominent state newspapers, one of which pointed out that his opponent had "tried two cases, neither in a state court."

In 2011 state elections, Lieutenant governor Phil Bryant, a champion of "transparent government," who as former state auditor had aggressively recovered funds from "corrupt officials", and who had established a pro-business image even earlier by writing a capital gains tax cut act as a state legislator, defeated African American Democrat and respected Hattiesburg mayor Johnny DuPree for governor (Mitchell 2011). Bryant touted his close work with popular Governor Barbour recruiting new jobs to the state and "being responsible with taxpayers' dollars by not spending money we don't have," while the state Republican Party sent out two mailings to its supporters, both touting Bryant's conservative values and one blasting DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz's visit to Mississippi in support of his opponent whose election was "so important to the liberal, national Democrats" (Harrison 2011, 1st quote; 2nd quote is in a mailing).

Also in the 2011 statewide offices. Victorious Agriculture Commissioner candidate Cindy Hyde-Smith, a stockyard owner and cattle farmer, boasted two terms as chair of the state senate agriculture committee, earning the Mississippi Farm Bureau's awards of Agriculture Legislator of the Year and also Ag Ambassador for her efforts to promote the state's catfish industry to other states (Salter 2011a). Another GOP woman for an open seat, Lynn Fitch, parlayed her executive directorship of the state Personnel Board, which has jurisdiction over 32,000 workers in 130 agencies, into the state Treasurer's position, boasting that she had cut her own budget but been able to do "more with less" (Nalley 2011). Thirty-six year old Tate Reeves, the two-term treasurer, boasting a fiscally conservative record and a reputation as a rising star in the state and national GOP, moved up to the lieutenant governorship's position without Democratic opposition (Salter 2011b). Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann, praised by the Clarion-Ledger for having "admirably served the public" by "ensuring that public lands are managed for the benefit of the public" was reelected without general election opposition (Clarion-Ledger 2011). Two other GOP officeholders reelected to their statewide offices were Auditor Stacey Pickering and Insurance Commissioner Mike Chaney.

Source material can be found on-line.

2) Avoid Negative Campaigning, Be Positive

Musgrove in 1999 lost ground after TV attacks on Mike Parker's congressional voting record. Musgrove won governorship only after stressing his commitment to public elemetary and secondary education.

Musgrove in 2003 lost the governorship to Haley Barbour after running negative TV ads for weeks that attacked Barbour as a "Washington lobbyist" and didn't even mention Musgrove's own name. Barbour ran an attractive TV ad with Thad Cochran praising him and laughing off the attacks.

Party switcher Republican Tuck was re-elected lieutenant governor in 2003 after Democrat Barbara Blackmon challenged her to sign an affidavid that Tuck had never had an abortion. (Tuck had been stressing her pro-life public stance.)

Attorney general Jim Hood was the target of negative campaign attacks by his Republican opponent. Hood's campaign ran an attractive TV ad with departing Attorney General Mike Moore endorsing him. Hood's successful campaign also stressed his extensive experience at the state level.

3) Avoid Divisive Primary, Be Gracious in Victory.

The GOP in many states is becoming as divisive as Democrats. They should remember Reagan's 11^th commandment: "Thou Shalt Not Speak Ill of a Fellow Republican."

Eric Clark praises Amy Tuck after he defeats her in runoff for State Secretary, Democrats unify, GOP beat.

Bitter Democratic gubernatorial primary in 1991, Dowdy-Mabus slugfest at Neshoba County Fair, Mabus crows over narrow primary victory.

Dye-Harper battle hurts Dye in 1991 Lieutenant Governor's race. Dye deathbed conversion on initiative-referendum.

4) Social Conservatism works in Mississippi.

Pro-life positions important, as former Secretary of State Eric Clark shows. Former lieutenant governor Eddie Briggs was hurt by his lack of passion on this issue.

Tough on crime- former Attorney General Mike Moore jailings, leads drug busts, for death penalty.

Stress moral values- Mike Moore ad showing Bible.

Ronnie Musgrove is "common sense conservative."

5) Accessibility and Openness is important.

Mike Moore invites youth groups into office, visits schools, Boy's State, etc.

Ronnie Musgrove numerous speeches to community organizations.

Eric Clark publicizes elections extensively.

Lieutenant Governor Eddie Briggs refuses to debate, refuses to disclose income tax forms, loses to Musgrove in 1995 race.

6) Bad economic times hurt incumbents.

Governor Mabus and Lieutenant Governor Dye both go down to defeat in 1991 general election.

Musgrove loses the governorship in 2003 after cutting higher education funding in three of his four years. Some higher education personnel switch their votes to the challenger.

7) Morning in America Campaigns help incumbents in good times.

Fordice benefits from good economy in 1995, non-divisive TV ads stressing booming economy and jobs.

Barbour was easily reelected governor in 2007 with 58% of the vote over social conservative John Arthur Eaves, who backed "voluntary, student-led school prayers" and promised to throw the "money changers" out of the state capital (Nossiter, 2007). In endorsing Barbour, the Clarion-Ledger pointed out that he had "done a good job of attracting new jobs as shown in his personal role in helping land the new Toyota plant" (the Clarion-Ledger, 2007: 4G). Barbour's decisive and confident leadership after Hurricane Katrina devastated the coast, when he publicly vowed that the coast would rebuild to be "better than ever," and his active fight for federal disaster funds won him the prestigious Governing magazine's award of Public Official of the Year. Even Mississippi's first African American congressman since Reconstruction, Mike Espy, ended up backing the Republican, as did other Democratic former officeholders, lieutenant governor Brad Dye and governor Bill Waller (Rupp, 2007: 1A, 6A).

Governor Phil Bryant was reelected governor in 2015 after a first-term repeatedly characterized by his personal involvement in economic development projects that gained considerable publicity.

8) Job performance trumps race as an issue.

Victories of three African-Americans in majority white or racially split districts. Supreme Court justice Fred Banks, a death penalty opponent, gains re-election, stressing experience, competency, and fairness. Harvey Johnson upsets white Democratic mayor of Jackson in primary, wins general election with 70% of vote. Former mayor of Vicksburg, Robert Walker, beats white Independent incumbent with 60% of vote.

GOP state candidate hurt by racist remark to editorial board, never leaves gate.

White running against black with a "He's One of Us" slogan hurt by media.

State Republicans do not want to play race card, since it backfires among whites concerned over state's historical bad image.

Defeats in 2003 of two African American candidates for statewide office were for reasons unrelated to their race. Blackmon lost by getting personal with Tuck on the abortion issue; she even refused to concede on election night when her chances had vanished. Gary Anderson was well qualified for Treasurer, but he lost to a white Republican who had much more campaign money than he did and therefore more name recognition.

9) Democrats must maintain a biracial coalition to win.

Appoint blacks to key positions, such as assistant secretary of state, attorney general, etc., College Board, state judgeships, supreme court. Have blacks in key campaign positions.

Visit black churches before the campaign. Establish ties with prominent blacks years ahead of time.

Molpus apologizes for 3 civil rights slayings.

Eric Clark campaigns for African-American Robert Clark in 1982, backs black caucus agenda in legislature.

Reject efforts to kill affirmative action, but stress importance of well qualified blacks and existence of many and need to reach out. Most white Democrats rejected Fordice's all white male College Board nominees, and overrode his veto of a telecommunications bond bill by changing bill's focus to economic development.

Bill Allain thanks NAACP for his 1983 governorship victory, after GOP candidate made homosexual charges.

Republicans should also seek black support. State GOP Charles Evers event. Establish Lincoln Day Dinners with black Republicans. Many blacks have conservative social values, fear crime, are religious, moral, and realize that self-help is key to personal success.

TOPIC TEN: SOUTHERN POLITICS

Print out and discuss chapter 3 of Shaffer unpublished book; discuss how the Republican Party has risen to win most southern states in presidential elections, a majority of congressional elections, and increasingly has come to control state legislatures and statewide offices below governor.

Print out and discuss chapter 15 of Shaffer unpublished book; discuss how southern Democratic congress members, senators, and activists have become more liberal over the past fifty years, helping to elect Republicans.