Campaigns and Super PACs

.....political ads changed over the last 60 years? Please use examples from the 1960's, 1980's and 2000's to support your answer. In the beginning when TV was first used in the United States by the public, political ads were scarce. In the 1940's and even through into the 1960's presidential candidates reached out to meet voters, shaking hands and holding town-hall debates. (Suggett) It was a commitment to vie for presidency. However, as time passed and the mid 1960's brought some changes, political candidates aimed to ramp things up.

There was a need to address the masses in a more convenient form and so Lyndon B. Johnson aired the "Daisy Girl" commercial, effectively becoming the most controversial political ad of the time, and one of the most memorable. (Fowler, et al.) From there, change came to political ads in the form of negative ads such as the 1980 presidential campaign where Carter and Reagan broadcasted commercials aimed at proving their opponent was unfit for the job.

The 2000's continued this trend, however, marketing and commercials increased, both in quality and quantity. Memorable strategies included Gore's criticism of Bush's planned tax cuts and Bush's claim Gore administration would dent the budget surplus. (Baker) 2. Has the US Supreme court case of Citizens United vs.

Federal Election Commission (2010) changed the landscape of interest group influence or is it largely the same as it was before? The Citizens United ruling was released early in 2010 (January), and removed the union and corporate ban on producing financing electioneering and independent expenditures (Dunbar). It allowed unions and corporations to spend an unrestricted sum on ads as well as other political tools, making it easier to defeat individual candidates based on money and exposure.

The decision was a 5-4 and while it made it easier to pay for the public sway of candidates, it still did not affect company and labor contributions, keeping such activity illegal. (Dowling and Miller) Although contributions are illegal, that does not keep wealthy people from donating to super PACs and then these super PACs spend on political campaigns. Super PACs must report donations. However, there is less restriction for nonprofits and business leagues that can accept donations without disclosing too much information.

(Smith and Powell) If it is not their primary activity, these groups can influence political outcomes more so than ever before. 3. What non-traditional power center (political parties or interest groups) wields more power in the modern age, and why? There is an easy answer. Interest groups are the ones that wield more power.

This is because although the beginnings of interest groups were about voicing concerns of individuals to political parties, it has become (thanks to court rulings and an increase in wealth for certain people) a means of gaining political control through contributions and donations. (Holyoke) Studies state the wealthy 'elites' have more say in politics than any average American. "rich individuals and business-controlled interest groups largely shape policy outcomes in the United States.

The analysts found that when controlling for the power of economic elites and organized interest groups, the influence of ordinary Americans registers at a "non-significant, near-zero."" (LICHTMAN) Although political parties hold power in the government, they need funds to campaign. Presidential candidates, people in Congress, need money to advertise. (Cigler, et al.) Advertising allows their reach to expand across the country. An expanded reach leads to more votes and a higher likelihood of gaining office. 4. We are going to put our campaign strategist hat on now.

First, what is the electoral college? Do you think that if Bernie Sanders would have been the Democrat nominee, he would have beaten Trump in the general election (please include at least two states that Trump won which could have changed the outcome in your analysis)? The electoral college refers to a process not a place. ("U. S. Electoral College, Official - What is the Electoral College?") Consisting of 538 electors, 270 are required to win presidency. Electors are usually selected by a candidate's political party.

The process includes selection of electors, meeting, and voting for the President and Vice President. Bernie Sanders would not have won. First, he did not have the money or popularity that Clinton had. Second, his views were too extreme to appeal to conservatives. (Sanders) There is a reason why Clinton beat him and clearly beat him. It was because he did not have the support he needed. Although looking at the electoral results, PA and Florida may have gone to Bernie if he would have become the nominee.

However, even with being the most popular politician in 2017 (Hasan), he did not have enough reach support during the election season. His reach was mainly on people who do not vote. Works Cited Baker, Frank W. Political Campaigns and Political Advertising: A Media Literacy Guide. Greenwood P, 2009.