All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Campaigning in Past Tense: How Candidate Background Alters Issue Agendas
Unformatted Document Text:  Again, my findings are consistent across the two different measures of issue agendas. But there are several limitations to these data. This study was limited to candidates seeking one office in one year. Future studies need to include more election years to examine if changes in the national issue agenda might change how campaigns formulate their issue agendas. Studying only Senate elections produces several problems. First, there are only 45 campaigns in the study, reducing the variation in campaign message strategies and candidate characteristics. For some of the issues, only a small handful of candidates had a reputation on the issue. If their campaigns were atypical in their use of reputational issues, the conclusions of this paper may not be robust. Further, Senators tend to serve on more committees and work on a larger set of issues than members of the House of Representatives. By only studying Senate candidates, the measure of candidate reputation may be artificially large. Increasing the number of cases is always a sound research strategy. But for this project, expanding the dataset to include House candidates and candidates from other election cycles in future versions of this paper will address these particular issues that could challenge the conclusions of this paper. Another objection is the concept of a candidate reputation, which is quite slippery. While it ia easy to assign a reputation on campaign finance to John McCain or Russell Feingold, authors of the famous campaign finance reform bill, it is not as easy to assign reputations across 100 Senators and many issues. Using the Almanac of American Politics provides a consistent measure for all Senators (and the assurance provided by the measure’s appearance in peer reviewed publications), it suffers from several limitations. The Almanac primarily focuses on what incumbents have done, which may limit the discussion of the reputation of challengers and open seat candidates. And since the Almanac is written by a small handful of authors (in the voice of its main author Michael Barone), it may not necessarily cover a candidate’s entire 17

Authors: Arbour, Brian.
first   previous   Page 19 of 30   next   last



background image
Again, my findings are consistent across the two different measures of issue agendas. But
there are several limitations to these data. This study was limited to candidates seeking one office
in one year. Future studies need to include more election years to examine if changes in the
national issue agenda might change how campaigns formulate their issue agendas. Studying only
Senate elections produces several problems. First, there are only 45 campaigns in the study,
reducing the variation in campaign message strategies and candidate characteristics. For some of
the issues, only a small handful of candidates had a reputation on the issue. If their campaigns
were atypical in their use of reputational issues, the conclusions of this paper may not be robust.
Further, Senators tend to serve on more committees and work on a larger set of issues than
members of the House of Representatives. By only studying Senate candidates, the measure of
candidate reputation may be artificially large. Increasing the number of cases is always a sound
research strategy. But for this project, expanding the dataset to include House candidates and
candidates from other election cycles in future versions of this paper will address these particular
issues that could challenge the conclusions of this paper.
Another objection is the concept of a candidate reputation, which is quite slippery. While
it ia easy to assign a reputation on campaign finance to John McCain or Russell Feingold,
authors of the famous campaign finance reform bill, it is not as easy to assign reputations across
100 Senators and many issues. Using the Almanac of American Politics provides a consistent
measure for all Senators (and the assurance provided by the measure’s appearance in peer
reviewed publications), it suffers from several limitations. The Almanac primarily focuses on
what incumbents have done, which may limit the discussion of the reputation of challengers and
open seat candidates. And since the Almanac is written by a small handful of authors (in the
voice of its main author Michael Barone), it may not necessarily cover a candidate’s entire
17


Convention
All Academic Convention is the premier solution for your association's abstract management solutions needs.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 19 of 30   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.