This paper focuses on the analysis of financial resources such as fundraising and personal net worth in conjunction with media coverage as well as other aspects and the impact of money on the presidential elections in 2016. Money is an essential necessity in order to make a political campaign successful as it contributes to the name recognition of a candidate even more when the respective candidate has access to sufficient resources and thereby more access to voters than candidates with less financial resources and less financial contributions by others. In the 2016 presidential election process two well-known candidates have been nominated. Both already previously have made their mark and have become prominent members of the American society and media sphere.
The impact of finances in political processes is of interest to both scholars and laymen. Two major issues are mostly being focused on: “the sources of campaign contributions” and “the impact of campaign contributions on electoral outcomes”, meaning the relationship betweeen fundraising and the success within the respective election. The correlation between the number of votes and expenditures is crucial to the process of voting: “if campaign expenditures do not translate into votes, then expenditures are irrelevant”.
Since candidates are eager to raise more money than all the other candidates and since the public contributes to a candidate’s finances, money must matter within the framework of political elections, otherwise money would be ignored and not raised. It has been found that electoral outcomes are influenced by four factors: “campaign expenditures, incumbency, party strength, and idiosyncratic factors”, which are campaign styles, scandals, local issues and other factors. While generally higher expenditures lead to more votes, additional expenditures after having convinced apathetic supporters do not have a significant effect anymore, which means campaign expenditures function according to the principle of diminishing marginal returns.
Table of Contents
1 Introduction
2 Financial Aspects of Political Campaigning: Campaign Financing and Campaign Expenditures
3 The Presidential Election System, Campaign Fundraising and Endorsements
4 Correlations of Campaign Financing and Election Results
5 Trump’s Wallstreet and Clinton’s Silicon Valley?
6 Conclusion
7 Bibliography
Research Objectives and Key Topics
The paper examines the influential role of financial resources, fundraising capabilities, and personal net worth on the outcomes of the 2016 United States presidential election, exploring whether monetary advantages equate to electoral success.
- The relationship between campaign financing and voter access.
- The impact of personal wealth and fundraising on candidate prominence.
- The role of the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) in regulating campaign finance.
- Corporate endorsements and their influence on voter perception and candidate viability.
- The correlation between campaign expenditures and election outcomes in the primary and general election.
Excerpt from the Book
2 Financial Aspects of Political Campaigning: Campaign Financing and Campaign Expenditures
The impact of finances in political processes is of interest to both scholars and laymen (cf. Giles and Pritchard 71). Two major issues are mostly being focused on: “the sources of campaign contributions” and “the impact of campaign contributions on electoral outcomes” (ibid.), meaning the relationship betweeen fundraising and the success within the respective election. The correlation between the number of votes and expenditures is crucial to the process of voting: “if campaign expenditures do not translate into votes, then expenditures are irrelevant” (ibid.). Since candidates are eager to raise more money than all the other candidates and since the public contributes to a candidate’s finances, money must matter within the framework of political elections, otherwise money would be ignored and not raised. It has been found that electoral outcomes are influenced by four factors: “campaign expenditures, incumbency, party strength, and idiosyncratic factors”, which are campaign styles, scandals, local issues and other factors (cf. ibid.). While generally higher expenditures lead to more votes, additional expenditures after having convinced apathetic supporters do not have a significant effect anymore, which means campaign expenditures function according to the principle of diminishing marginal returns (cf. ibid.). Once all necessary voters are convinced any expenditures that exceed expenditures up until that point are irrelevant and do not lead to more voters.
Summary of Chapters
1 Introduction: This chapter outlines the thesis that financial resources are a necessity for political success, providing a high level of name recognition and access to voters for presidential candidates.
2 Financial Aspects of Political Campaigning: Campaign Financing and Campaign Expenditures: The chapter explores the theoretical impact of money on political processes, discussing the principle of diminishing marginal returns in campaign spending.
3 The Presidential Election System, Campaign Fundraising and Endorsements: This section analyzes the primary election system, the inequality inherent in the fundraising process, and the regulatory role of the Federal Election Campaign Act.
4 Correlations of Campaign Financing and Election Results: The author compares the personal net worth and fundraising success of various 2016 candidates, highlighting the financial gap between candidates like Donald Trump and others.
5 Trump’s Wallstreet and Clinton’s Silicon Valley?: This chapter investigates how endorsements from organizations and public figures impact candidate viability and public perception.
6 Conclusion: The conclusion summarizes the findings, noting that while finances have a significant impact, political agendas and ideological stances remain influential factors alongside monetary resources.
7 Bibliography: A comprehensive list of academic sources and media reports referenced throughout the paper.
Keywords
Campaign Finance, Presidential Election 2016, Fundraising, Campaign Expenditures, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Political Campaigning, Federal Election Campaign Act, Voter Access, Political Influence, Plutocracy, Election Outcomes, Primary Elections, Name Recognition.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this paper?
The paper investigates how financial resources, including personal wealth and fundraising, influenced the nomination and election processes during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign.
What are the central themes discussed?
Key themes include the correlation between money and electoral success, the importance of name recognition, the role of corporate endorsements, and the influence of campaign expenditures on voter behavior.
What is the main research question or goal?
The goal is to analyze the extent to which financial advantages can predict electoral success and whether the U.S. political system functions as a democracy or a plutocracy in this context.
Which scientific methodology is applied?
The author utilizes an analytical approach, reviewing existing political science literature and current data on campaign finances, delegate counts, and election results to draw comparisons between candidates.
What topics are covered in the main body?
The main body covers the mechanics of campaign financing, the primary election system, the personal net worth of candidates, and the impact of endorsements on campaign success.
What are the defining keywords of the work?
The work is characterized by terms such as campaign finance, fundraising, 2016 U.S. election, candidate expenditure, and political influence.
How does the principle of "diminishing marginal returns" apply to political campaigns?
The author argues that after a certain point of spending, additional funds do not significantly increase a candidate's vote share because the necessary core supporters are already convinced.
Why is Bernie Sanders considered a special case in the analysis?
Sanders is highlighted because he achieved significant prominence and maintained competitiveness despite having far fewer financial resources and receiving minimal PAC contributions.
How did Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton's financial situations compare?
The analysis notes that both were established candidates with high name recognition, though Donald Trump held a significantly higher personal net worth, while Hillary Clinton benefited from extensive political network support.
- Quote paper
- Lioba Frings (Author), 2017, The United States Presidential Election in 2016. How Did the Financial Resources Impact the Campaigns and the Results?, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.hausarbeiten.de/document/511822
