Nationalize or Localize: Senatorial Incumbent and Challenger Differences in Issue Prioritization
Location
Guzman 110
Start Date
4-19-2018 3:20 PM
End Date
4-19-2018 3:35 PM
Student Type
Undergraduate
Faculty Mentor(s)
Gigi Gokcek, Ph.D.
Presentation Format
Oral Presentation
Abstract/Description
How do politicians choose which issues to discuss in an election? Studying campaign behavior is important to understanding how political campaigns target voters and prioritize issues. Senate candidates normally attempt to either nationalize the election or emphasize state issues in their campaigns. How do Senate incumbent and challenger candidates differ in terms of issue prioritization? I hypothesize the challengers attempt to nationalize the election, while the incumbents generally focus their efforts on state issues. Political conventional wisdom indicates challengers typically try to nationalize the election by attempting to criticize the incumbent for either supporting or voting against the current presidential administration. In contrast, incumbents tend to focus on state issues because they have the ability to claim credit for work done in their state, and usually know their constituency better than the challenger. However, current literature is inconclusive, therefore requiring further research. This study is qualitative and uses content analysis to examine political ads from five different senate elections in 2014: Arkansas, Colorado, North Carolina, New Hampshire, and Alaska. The data is compelling as it reflects trends during a midterm election of a second term presidency in which the constituents appear to be rising against the current party in power.
Nationalize or Localize: Senatorial Incumbent and Challenger Differences in Issue Prioritization
Guzman 110
How do politicians choose which issues to discuss in an election? Studying campaign behavior is important to understanding how political campaigns target voters and prioritize issues. Senate candidates normally attempt to either nationalize the election or emphasize state issues in their campaigns. How do Senate incumbent and challenger candidates differ in terms of issue prioritization? I hypothesize the challengers attempt to nationalize the election, while the incumbents generally focus their efforts on state issues. Political conventional wisdom indicates challengers typically try to nationalize the election by attempting to criticize the incumbent for either supporting or voting against the current presidential administration. In contrast, incumbents tend to focus on state issues because they have the ability to claim credit for work done in their state, and usually know their constituency better than the challenger. However, current literature is inconclusive, therefore requiring further research. This study is qualitative and uses content analysis to examine political ads from five different senate elections in 2014: Arkansas, Colorado, North Carolina, New Hampshire, and Alaska. The data is compelling as it reflects trends during a midterm election of a second term presidency in which the constituents appear to be rising against the current party in power.