• Uming
Timing involves the question of when the candidate should direct his time, energy, and money to campaigning. Ideally’ the major campaign strategies have been put into place by the end of the summer, but these strategies are revised and updated as the campaign progresses. A staff of key advisers produce daily reports on shifb in public opinion across the nation and in particular regions. Accordii^iy, campaign trips are modified as the candidate’s campaign managing organization sees new opportunities.

• Targeting the Swing States and Floaters

Swing states arc the states that arc not considered to be firmly favoring the Democratic Party or Republican Party. And a number of voters — floaters — will change their mind about whom to support They may vote in one party’s primary, and then vote for the candidate from the other party in the general election. Candidates must devote much of their dme, attention, and television advertising money to win over the swing states and floacers.

• The Media Campaign

The general election campaign is largely a media activity. The media campaign consists of paid advertising, personal appearances on talk shows, presidential debates, and coverage on news broadcasts and in print media. Democratic Party candidate Barack Obama created a broad grassroots movement and a new method of media campaigning by mobilizing voters throu^i the Internet. Media campaigns may be highly professional, relying on public relations and advertising specialists, professional fundraisers, media consultants, and pollsters. The media help shape voters* opinions and choices.

The Cost of Presidential Campaigns and Sources of Campaign Financing

Individuals running for presidency in the twenty-first century face the challenge of raising funds in an era of increasingly expensive races. Presidential campaigns are extraordinarily expensive due to the professional campaigning and the hi^i costs of advertising. Take the 2008 presidential campa^n for example. More money was spent in this election than in any previous election. Overall, more than $1.6 billion was spent by 148 presidential candidates for all parties in the primary and general elections. Obama’s overall spending set a new record in presidential races of more than $500 million.

Fund raising to meet the high costs of campaigning is a big problem for any presidential candidate. Campaign funds may come firom a variety of sources, including public iunds, individuals’ corporations, interest groups, and candidates themselves.

The Electoral College: How Presidents Arc Elected

The campaign for the presidency has many aspects, but the goal is clear: winning a majority of the Electoral College. Being a uniquely American institution, the Electoral College consists of electors from each state who cast the final ballots that officially elect a president

Currently, the Electoral College is composed of 538 electors. Each state has a number of electors equal to the number of its senators and House representatives in the Congress. Additionally, the District of Columbia is given three electors, the same number of electors as the least populous state. (The electoral vote of the state is subject to change after each ten-year census. At present, the number of electors per state .ranges from 3 to 55.) These electors meet in their own state c^>itols to cast their votes in mid-December, following the general election on the first Tuesday after the first Monday of November. Each elector casts two votes: one for president and one for vice president. In order to be elected, a candidate must have a majority (currently 270) of the Electoral Votes. (If no candidate wins a majority, the House chooses the president and the Senate chooses the vice president.) The electoral vote lesults are counted and declared at a joint session of Congress, held on January 6 of the year succeeding the election.

Any eligible political party or independent candidate may nominate a slate of elector-candidates, usually at a state party convention. Usually speaking, party notables serve as elector-candidates. In most states on the general election day, voters in each state actually cast a single ballot for the slate of elector-candidates pledged to support the candidates for president and vicc-president nominated by their party at the national convention. The names of elector ~ candidates do not appear anywhere on the ballot, only the names of the presidential candidates and their parties, often started with the words “electors for”. In other words, voters indirectly vote for presidential and vice presidential candidates; it is these elector-candidates, rather than the presidential and vice presidential nominees, for whom the people vote in the election. Thus, a voter in 2008 technically was not voting John Mccain or Barack Obama but was instead voting a group of pledged electors equal in number to the size of the state’s congressional delegation. The slate of elector-candidates that wins the most popular voces in a state (not necessarily a majority) becomes the electors for that state and gets all of that state’s electoral votes (winncr-takc-all system). In December, those electors will formally choose the president and vice-president and are expected to follow the popular vote of thcir state. But the U.S. Constitution does not require that electors cast their vote for the winning presidential candidate in their state, and occasionally faithless electors vote for another candidate, althou^i none of them has ever changed the outcome.

The Electoral College was established by the founding Others when writing the Constitution. This system for indirectly electing the president was firstly based on recognition of “states, riots' The College allowed each state to determine for itself who could vote and it encouraged campaigns designed to win “states' In this sense, it reinforced the federal system. Second, an indirect system of election offered a safeguard against the possibility that a radical could be elected president Despite all the restrictions on the right to vote ac the time, the framers of the Constitution distrusted mass democracy. There were no mass media in those days, so it was unlikely that common citizens would know much about candidates. On the other hand, the members of the College were considered men of good character with a profound knowledge of national politics who would be able to identify and sclect prominent national statesmen to lead the nation.

The winner-take-all system, which has been mentioned above, is a notable feature of the Electoral College. It has been favored since the nineteenth century，as it tends to magnify the winning candidates' victory margin within states, and generally guarantees a national Electoral College majority for the winners. But interesdn珀y, under the system, it is possible for a candidate to be elected president without getting the hi^iest number of the popular votes. In American history, there have been four instances of presidents ever losing the popular vote but winning the electoral vote, thus being elected president. The most recent one is the election of 2000. A1 Gore, the Democratic candidate, won the nationwide popular vote, receiving 500,000 more votes than George W. Bush, the Republican candidate, but Bush won more electoral voles and became president.

Today, the Electoral College is controversial due largely to the fact that candidates with less total popular support can win election. Criticism also comes irom the fact that too much emphasis is placed on the heavily populated states like California and New York. But, supporters argue that the Electoral College is an important and distinguishing feature of the federal system, and protects the rights of smaller states. Over the years, numerous constitutional amendments have been submitted seeking a replacement or reform of the Electoral College. However, due to the difficuliy of amending the Constitution, no submission has ever successfiilly passed both houses of Congress. It is unlikely that there will be any constitutional changes in the near future that will alter the basic structure of the Electoral College.

Voting Behavior

When voters are casting ballots in presidential elections, they behave in certain distinct ways and exhibit obvious patterns. Surveys also show that voters cast ballots for and against candidates for a variety of reasons.

Voter Participation

Generally, less than 40 percent of the eligible adult population in the United States vote regularly, whereas 25 percent are occasional voters. Thirty-five percent rarely or never vote. Several factors are associated with voter participation rates.

Education is an important indicator of who will vote. The well-educated often have the “dme, money and skills” necessary to have the confidence to participate fully in the political system. A clear relationship between income and voting turnout rates (the proportion of the vodng-age public that votes) also exists. A hi^icr percentage of ddzens with hi^i incomes vote than do citizens with low incomes. Income level is, to some degree, connected to education level. Wealthy ddzens are also more likely than poor ones to think that the system works for them and that their votes make a difference. By contrast, low-incomc citizens often feel alienated from politics, possibly believing that conditions will remain the same no matter for whom they vote. There is also a correlation between age and voter participation rates. A much higher percentage of ddzens aged thirty and older vote than do ddzens younger than thirty, although voter turnout decreases over the age of seventy. An interest in politics much also be included as an important factor. Many citizens who vote have grown up in families active in politics. Conversely, many nonvoters were not tau^u the importance of politics and elections at a youngtr age. There are other nonvotcrs who arc just apathetic, possibly because of lack of pressing issues, or satisfaction with the status quo. Finally, perhaps people do not vote due to rising levels of distrust of government. Finally, it is believed that structural problems in the voting process also affect turnout. For instance, the United States places the burden of registration on the individual rather than on the government. Thus，the cost (in terms of dme and efFort) is higher in the U.S. than it is in other industrialized countries. Many nations automatically register all of their citizens to vote, but American ddzens must remember on their own to register.

Why Voters Vote the Way They Do?

How an individual votes is largely dependent on three major factors: party identification, candidate evaluation and issue voting.

Although more and more voters daim to vote for “the person, not the party” and label themselves as independents or only weak Democrats or Republicans, party identification remains one of the most important influences on voter choice. In presidential elections, the tendency to see the candidate of one’s own party as the “best choice” is very strong.

As American elections arc increasin^y portrayed as races focusing on the candidate and not necessarily the party, individual evaluations of candidates are becoming more and more important. Voters evaluate candidates in a variety of ways. Often, the media are critical in helping voters shape their evaluado didates. The race, gender, or ethnidty of a candidate is important for some voters.

voters are moved by a particular candidate’s views on certain issues. Some issues, such as gun control, abortion, or the U.S. involvement in war in Iraq, are easy ones where candidates often have clear stands to attract voters. And the economy docs appear to motivate many voters. Economic conditions at election dme 一 growth or decline in personal income, the unemployment rate, and so on 一 are related to the vote given the incumbent versus the challenger.