why are us election campaigns so far ahead?
Posted: Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:20 am
In england campaigns are only a few weeks before elections, i know the us is a bigger country but does it really need almost 2 years of campaigning?
This is the first time the campaigns have ever been anywhere near this long. Partly this is because of our silly primary system, where states have started to jockey for position so they can have a greater influence on the primaries. If your state is one of the first to have primaries, candidates concentrate their efforts there hoping that early victories will carry them through, gaining them more support, and depending on people doing "strategic voting", where they might like one candidate, but don't believe that candidate will have the resources or support, so people often vote instead for a "top-tier" candidate. A hypothetical example of this for a Democrat this year might be: "I really like Mike Gravel or Kucinich, but they aren't doing well in the polls. I really don't like Hilary, so instead of "wasting" my vote on someone who can't win, I think I'll vote for Obama. He's not my favorite candidate, but he's better than Hilary and has the support and resources to beat her."
Another reason might be that there's no clear "heir apparent" this year. Usually some Vice President gets the nod for one of the party primaries, making it almost a non-issue, but this year both parties' primaries are wide open.
Then of course there's just money. It takes such a ridiculous amount to run a campaign, that candidates probably feel like they need to start early to start loading up the bank. Once one candidate declares a candidacy, the others feel like they need to keep up, so they can fill up their campaign "war chest" with funds.
Those are some reasons off the top of my head.