Election Year The Democratic Candidates example essay topic

The primaries are a set of elections in our country that determine the two candidates for the presidential election. Each state holds its own elections for the registered voters, and the candidates from each party are selected. Some states have different primary elections whether they are "open" or "closed". These two terms apply to what kind of voter participation is allowed. Closed primaries allow registered party voters to participate in that party's election whereas the open ones allow any registered voter to participate in one of the elections. This election year the democratic candidates are battling for the primaries with the hope of running against incumbent George W. Bush for the presidency.

At this point it is hard to say who is truly ahead in campaigning for the democrats. A good start is often helpful to a particular candidate but as George Bush showed us last election, it isn't everything. As of now four democratic candidates stick out as strong contenders. In terms of polling, Howard Dean, Wesley Clark, John Kerry, and Dick Gephardt stand in the lead thus far, with Joe Lieberman a close competitor. The polls, however, are all from different sources, including the Associated Press poll, a CNN / Times poll and some others, and the true leader will not be evident until the election is complete.

When examining what is going on here in terms of political analysis we must look at the lenses as we learned them from Low this semester. They are based on five simple principles: The Rationality Principle, the Collective Action Principle, the Institution Principle, the Policy Principle and the History Principle. By using these "lenses" se can look at the primaries in a way that can answer questions and explain what the election is really about and how it works so that we may all be more educated voters next term. This analysis brings up questions on the issues that the candidates stand for and how they will play out in the election. Each politician has their own goals in mind at the top of everything, and the rules that they have to play by shape the election until the voters, as best we can, choose our favorite candidate in terms of who meets our own interests best. So what are the interests of the individual candidates?

What do they want and how can they make an appeal to what the voters want? How do candidates get people together in supporting and voting? What rules do the candidates have to follow in their campaigns to get the support they need to win? What will the outcome of the election be and how can we explain it in terms of goals and procedures? And finally, what can we say about this election and its candidates in comparison to others in the past? So how does each of the candidates differ and how should we decide who to vote for?

At this point Dean has raised the most money for his campaign by a good amount with a total funding of 25,387,493 dollars as of November 18th and has thus far spent a total of 12,951,593 dollars (web ). He is one of the democratic candidates who have opted out of public funding, as Bush has also done. He stands for a change in campaign finance reform among one of which his reforms would be increasing the amount of public financing. This targets clearly his own interests (the Rationality Principle) because he knows he can gain more money by not using public funds, however, he knows that raising the amount of public funds would encourage more politicians to target smaller groups instead of just the wealthy contributors. This is what politics should be about, not who has the most money to buy the election. He believes in promoting healthcare.

"In the richest, most advanced country in the world in the 21st century, it's simply wrong for sick children to go without seeing a doctor because their parents can't afford it" (web). Dean feels civil rights and civil justices should be for everyone. He is also on board with many of the other democratic ideals including supporting women in our society, protecting the environment, and being a more ideal role model as a country to others which he feels we have not properly done under our current administration. In terms of funding John Kerry comes next on the list. Kerry has received a total of 20,043,631 dollars and has spent 12,098,642 dollars. Gephardt has funded 13,666,915 dollars and spent 7,782,314 dollars, and Clark has funded 3,491,108 dollars and spent only 107,259 dollars (web).

But funding isn't everything. Clearly last in the funding race, Clark ranks strongly with his campaign and is at the top right now with Dean. Clark, a retired military general, has some strong policies in mind for his campaign. He has been said to be ambiguous about his stance of America in the war, but according to his own website (web), he has said we need to "end the American monopoly. We have lost money and troops in this war and more importantly the support of some of our allies, making us an even bigger target. As a general this war is a very big issue to him as it is too many American families.

Clark is gathering a lot of voters by opposing this war and pledging to bring home the troops. He is a true democrat supporting the democratic social values but he is very serious about protecting the homeland and making America a safer place. Gephardt also follows the democratic ideology, but also poses some bold new ideas that might sway some of the democrats to his side. He has proposed an idea of an international minimum wage. He feels that this will protect American jobs (web).

Gephardt's focus is changing the balance of power in Washington. All the democratic candidates would agree with this, but Gephardt's ideas come from common ideals. He stresses healthcare, education and the hard worker. Gephardt is a strong candidate because his focus is on the problems that are going on in our own country more than worrying about others.

Our economy is a problem right now and Gephardt realizes this and has many policies to help solve this problem. John Kerry recently spoke at Stanford University. He talked about his policies to the young voters who are a strong group that do not get enough voter turnouts. He has also target the economy in his campaign. He feels we need to lead the way in technology to create new jobs and create an economy that is strong enough to be a global force. He is also for strong homeland security.

On his website, the first issue he target is restoring jobs to rebuild the economy. He also takes an interesting stance on the war here. He says, "What does it gain America to win a war and lose a peace?" (web). In education, Kerry takes a stand on college expenses.

He says that college should be affordable for all Americans. This is a good way to target this group of voters. Kerry understands that all Americans should have an equal opportunity for the best future and he targets Bush's tax cuts as taking away from our youth's future. In analysis of the above information it is important to keep in mind the five principles.

Using these lenses we can better understand why, how, and for whom these campaigns are occurring. Rationally, each candidate is running because they each want the chance to run against President Bush for a chance at the White House. Each of the principles can explain the actions taken by the individual candidates and enlighten us on what may be to come for the primaries. If each candidate has the goal of winning the primaries, they are going to do everything within their powers and the rules to get there. Campaign spending is a big issue here. The more money one candidate has the more places they can travel to and the more people they can talk with.

In this respect money can help gain a lot of support from groups that might not otherwise be affected a given politician. It is up to the voter talking to whomever to get across a message that coincides with what a particular voter wants. This targets the voters' personal and rational interests. This is really where the election is won and lost. No one can know exactly what it is that most people want from a candidate. But this is the point of the campaign.

This engages campaigns in collective action. If a certain candidate wants to win and to know what the majorities want, they need to gain support from the numbers. Collective Action can get people involved with jobs in a campaign and it can get polls across to see who is winning and to see what it actually is that people want. If a given politician cannot motivate people to follow him or her, he has no campaign to begin with. The issue for the politician is to see how the voters' interests can be met and pushed to register and vote.

Kerry has set a good example by speaking at a university because this will motivate this group of voters to get involved. That's what politics is all about in this country. The more people involved the more democratic the system actually is. Selective benefits also help parties and campaigns. If people can get something they want out of getting involved they will be more inclined to. Convincing people to get out and vote for you is itself a form of collective action.

As a politician one is trying to get people onboard with one's ideas. As the primaries are the first step towards the presidency, it is important to look at what institutions and rules lead the campaigns. The most important set of rules here are those concerning campaign finance. These are so important because with no regulations on funding for candidates, the election would be up for the highest bidder and that would show no democracy at all.

Dean has a good idea for this by raising the public funding match. Although he chose not to receive public financing this time it is only because he knows that this would lessen the amount of money he could gain otherwise. This is a key example of the Policy Principle in terms of policy in the Dean campaign. His personal interests met the institutions in place and he chose the best way around the circumstance. Why should he hinder his own campaign? His idea for campaign finance reform allows the public to match his funds on a five-to-one ratio (web).

It's in his interest to gain office and that way he is able to make a change that will be more democratic. The institutions that primarily deal with how the different campaigns work matter and they set up how the race will take place. Some of these rules are outlined in BCRA, the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002. These new regulations on soft-money, issue ads and hard-money have directly affected the campaigns of the democratic campaign. Because of the new restrictions on soft-money Dean and Kerry both declined public funding. They decided they could better fund their campaigns other ways.

Clark, joining the race later than the other candidates took his interest into account because at the time it wouldn't make sense for him to decline any public money he could earn. These regulations along with those on issue ads and disclosure have changed the way these men will campaign, and when each campaign's goal of winning meets that candidate's interests, the interests of their voters and the institutions in place for voting, a primary winner will be declared. The Policy Principle is hard to apply to the primaries right now because they aren't over yet, but this principle deals with the political outcome. We have no way of knowing this outcome until the election has taken place.

But once there is a democratic candidate in place against Bush, we can look back at how the primaries were carried out and see why and how the winner came to the top. This is what is interesting about politics. One can't really understand an event until the outcome of it has been decided. The procedures of the campaigns will explain why one candidate might have won over another. The policy is what happens when the political goals meet the institutions. In this case the campaigns goals will do all that they can within their rules to get as many voters to vote.

From here it is up to the voter's interests to vote for whomever while following the institutions of the voting procedures. When these two processes meet and the votes are counted a democratic winner will emerge. As for the last principle, the History Principle, looking back at what has worked in the past primaries and presidential elections can be a good idea. Candidates looking back can gain better knowledge of how to plan their own campaigns and analysts can better understand how things happen and how they work out. In the last election Bush declined public funding and was still able to win, and he also wasn't the front runner for the republican primaries at first. A big factor for this election for the History Principle is BCRA.

We know how campaign finance has played out and been used effectively in past elections, but this year BCRA is in place and changing how candidates finance their campaigns. This will be a big election to look back on next election to see what ways the candidates get funding properly and effectively. Are Dean and Kerry making a smart decision by passing on public funding or can the public funds be enough to get the candidate through on only the issues and policies they stand up for. This along with the outcome will become more evident after the primaries are done and the road to the White House continues step by step. The primaries are the first target for campaigns and the stronger these democrats can make their campaigns here the farther they will be able to go against Bush's power house. These primaries are very important for the democrats who desperately want to sway the power in Washington.

Between Dean, Kerry, Clark, Gephardt, and even Lieberman the people need to stick with their candidate. The country is very closely split for the democrats and the republicans, which make the split for democratic candidates even more crucial. The outcome of the primaries is crucial because if the democrats cannot all stand behind their candidate they cannot defeat Bush. This is a very competitive race and very important. This is where stronger parties are important. The democratic party needs to be strong and come together from the primaries to win the presidency if they want to be in a position to change anything..