Disadvantages Of Clarifying Campaign Essay
Insurgent or Clarifying Campaigns: Testing Vavreck’s Campaign Typology
Theoretical Framework
For candidates running a clarifying campaign, one issue should be the focus of most of their attention: the economy, its good or bad state and how the candidate is either responsible for, or not responsible for that state. Clarifying candidates seek to be establish themselves as responsible for a good economy, or not responsible for the bad one, in order establish a link into the future. In the mind of a voter, a candidate who has contributed to a booming economy is likely to produce a similar result in the economy over the next four years. In the case of a bad economy, a clarifying candidate must make it clear why others, or outside forces, were responsible …show more content…
Firstly, clarifying candidates should focus on the economy above all other issues, and second, they should talk about it more than their opponent does. The first of these effects is obviously motivated in the self-interest of the candidate: linking yourself to a good economy or distancing yourself from a bad one will help you win votes. However, the second effect is more complicated. If a clarifying candidate fails to talk about the economy more than their opponent, they run the risk of allowing their opponent to shift the conversation into realms that are unfavourable to the clarifying candidate, such as what are the realistic chances of the candidate being able to maintain the good or fight off the …show more content…
While the opposition has many opportunities to create roadblocks to the passing of such legislation and policy, in the eyes of most voters, if it is your party’s budget, you are responsible for the results. This means that despite the difficult relationship that the Obama Administration has had with Congress, during his incumbency, and the role that Congress plays in passing the budget, it is ultimately the Obama Administration, and therefore the Democrats, who are seen as guiding the US economy. Therefore, the incumbent candidate benefits from a positive economy, and is harmed by a poor
Theoretical Framework
For candidates running a clarifying campaign, one issue should be the focus of most of their attention: the economy, its good or bad state and how the candidate is either responsible for, or not responsible for that state. Clarifying candidates seek to be establish themselves as responsible for a good economy, or not responsible for the bad one, in order establish a link into the future. In the mind of a voter, a candidate who has contributed to a booming economy is likely to produce a similar result in the economy over the next four years. In the case of a bad economy, a clarifying candidate must make it clear why others, or outside forces, were responsible …show more content…
Firstly, clarifying candidates should focus on the economy above all other issues, and second, they should talk about it more than their opponent does. The first of these effects is obviously motivated in the self-interest of the candidate: linking yourself to a good economy or distancing yourself from a bad one will help you win votes. However, the second effect is more complicated. If a clarifying candidate fails to talk about the economy more than their opponent, they run the risk of allowing their opponent to shift the conversation into realms that are unfavourable to the clarifying candidate, such as what are the realistic chances of the candidate being able to maintain the good or fight off the …show more content…
While the opposition has many opportunities to create roadblocks to the passing of such legislation and policy, in the eyes of most voters, if it is your party’s budget, you are responsible for the results. This means that despite the difficult relationship that the Obama Administration has had with Congress, during his incumbency, and the role that Congress plays in passing the budget, it is ultimately the Obama Administration, and therefore the Democrats, who are seen as guiding the US economy. Therefore, the incumbent candidate benefits from a positive economy, and is harmed by a poor