William_T._Bianco,_David_T._Canon]_American_Polit

328 Chapter 9 | Elections

or has helped your community benefit from desirable government projects), personal

characteristics (voting for the candidate whose personal characteristics such as age, race,

gender, ethnicity, religious beliefs, or background match your own), or pocketbook voting

(voting for the incumbent if the economy is strong and for the challenger otherwise).

Voters can also use multiple cues. Cues give people a low-cost way to cast what political

scientist and campaign consultant Samuel Popkin called a reasonable vote—a vote that,

more likely than not, is consistent with the voter’s true preference among candidates.^55

Studies have found that citizens who use cues and are politically well informed are more

likely to cast a reasonable vote than those who use cues but are otherwise relatively

politically ignorant. In essence, knowing something about the candidates and the issues

at stake in an election helps people select the right cue on which to base their vote.^56

On the one hand, the role that cues play in voting decisions is one reason why “the

fundamentals matter” in American elections. Because some people vote based on the state

of the economy, incumbent presidents are good bets to win reelection when economic

conditions are good and poor bets when the economy is in trouble. Similarly, because party

ID is often used as a cue, candidates are more likely to win if their party affiliation is shared

by the bulk of voters in their state or district. On the other hand, the use of cues also implies

that candidates (and campaigns) matter. For example, citizens may use a candidate’s

record in office to guide their vote decision, especially if the candidate makes this record

a central theme in his or her campaign speeches and advertising. In fact, many campaign

events and communications are designed to reinforce the impression that candidates

share voters’ concerns and values. For example, at several points during the 2016

campaign, Donald Trump tweeted pictures of his fast-food dinner on the campaign plane.

Moreover, because personal characteristics are used as a cue, some candidates have

a better chance of winning than others, because they have one or more cues that citizens

see as desirable. For example, some people voted for Hillary Clinton because she was a

woman; because of her political experience as First Lady, senator, and secretary of state;

or simply because she was a Democrat. Equally, some people voted for Donald Trump

because of his career as a businessman or because he was the Republican nominee. Table

9.5 offers some details on what kind of candidate characteristics attract voter support.

On the one hand, many voters consider a candidate’s military service as an asset. On the

other hand, Americans tend not to vote for a candidate who is a known atheist, has had an

extramarital affair, or is gay or lesbian. Of course, candidate information is only one of

the things a voter considers and some cues override others—businessman Donald Trump

won the presidency despite having never been elected to political office, being 70 years

old, and admitting to past extramarital affairs.

Who (Usually) Wins

All the strategies discussed so far are used to some extent in every election. In normal

elections, when congressional reelection rates are high, voters generally use cues that

focus on the candidates themselves, such as incumbency, partisanship, a personal

connection to a candidate, the candidate’s personal characteristics, or retrospective

evaluations. This behavior is consistent with what Tip O’Neill, Speaker of the House

from 1977 to 1987, meant when he said that “all politics is local”: many congressional

elections are independent, local contests in which a candidate’s chances of winning

depend on what voters think of the candidate in particular—not the president,

Congress, or national issues. It also explains why electoral coattails are typically very

weak in American elections and why so many Americans cast split tickets rather

than straight tickets. In the main, voting decisions in presidential and congressional

elections are made independently of each other.

Are you better off than you were

four years ago?

—Ronald Reagan, running for

president against incumbent

Jimmy Carter

coattails

The ability of a popular president

to generate additional support

for candidates affiliated with his

or her party. Coattails are weak

or nonexistent in most American

elections.

split ticket

A ballot on which a voter selects

candidates from more than one

political party.

straight ticket

A ballot on which a voter selects

candidates from only one political

pa r t y.

Full_10_APT_64431_ch09_296-339.indd 328 16/11/18 1:46 PM