Political Science 140B

The American Presidency

Professor Scott C. James

Midterm Study Guide

A.

General Information: The midterm exam will consist of four questions. All questions will be taken
directly from the study guide below. Experience tells me that a complete answer generally runs
between 1 and pages in a standard large bluebook (depending on the particulars of the question).

B.

Components of an effective answer: A complete answer will accomplish three objectives: 1)

define the central concepts and elaborate their important constituent features, 2) illustrate general
points with specific examples or other empirical information (where such information exists), and
3) situate your overall response within the important themes of the course (why should someone
care about this question?).

C.

Some additional points to consider: Recognize that you will have roughly 18 minutes per
question. This means you must be selective in what you say. Make some decisions about what
is and what is not important to communicate. Communicating with precision is also crucial; it is a
measure of your command of the material (precision encompasses clarity and economy of
expression, good grammar, and good spelling). Finally, avoid long intros, conclusions, and other
forms of filler. No B.S. just get to the point. Space and time management is an essential
component of this type of exam.

Midterm Study Questions

1)

In his chapter, The Evolution of the Presidency, James discusses the tradition of executive
prerogative and the doctrine of salus populi as two extra-constitutional sources of authority
available to presidents seeking a broad interpretation of Article IIs vesting clause. What is
the Article II vesting clause and how do these two Founding-Era resources aid presidents
seeking greater independence and discretion in American politics?

2)

What are the president's emergency powers and in what political context was the concept
first authoritatively declared. How have subsequent presidents employed and expanded
upon the concept? (James article)

3)

Contrast the treatment of executive power in the eras of "radical" and "conservative"
republicanism. To what extent do the characteristics of the new American presidency established
in 1789 draw from each republican strain?

4)

Clarify the distinction between "interpretation" and "demagoguery" in the political thought of
Woodrow Wilson. In comparison to other public offices, why does the presidency seem so well
suited to these forms of popular leadership? (Tulis)

5)

Jeffrey Tulis identifies two "constitutional presidencies"an "old way" and "a new way" of
exercising presidential leadership. What are the key differences that distinguish these modes of
presidential leadership in Congress? In what way can Theodore Roosevelt's campaign for the
Hepburn Act be said to suggest an effective "middle way" model of presidential leadership?

6)

What is the "winner-take-all" rule and what is its significance to Electoral College competition?
Discuss its impact on both third-party presidential bids and the allocation of candidate effort
between large states and small states.

7)

In "The Faulty Premises of the Electoral College," George Edwards III critiques several popular
justifications for the retention of the Electoral College (EC). Two of these are the claims that the EC is

"attentive to and protective of states' interests," especially small state interests, and that it is "an
essential bulwark of federalism." Summarize Edwards' response to these two pro-EC propositions?
8)

As the election of George W. Bush in 2000 demonstrates, it is possible for the most popular presidential
candidate nonetheless to lose the general election in the Electoral College. Explain why such outcomes
are possible in the American system of presidential selection. Are such divergences between national
vote totals and seat shares peculiar to Electoral College politics? Explain with reference to the U.S.
House of Representatives or the U.S. Senate.

9)

Describe the impact of the McGovern-Fraser reforms on the presidential nomination system.

10)

Describe the goals and the key elements of the campaign finance reforms of the early 1970s. Explain
their impact on the dynamics of candidate campaigns for their party's presidential nomination. How have
"bundling" and SuperPACs affected both the goals of reform and the dynamics of campaign finance by
primary candidates?

11)

Explain the concept and significant features of "the invisible primary." What has its impact been on the
selection of party nominees in presidential primaries. How is this process distinct from the "visible" or
"formal" primary? In what way is the emergence of the invisible primary related both to the emergence
of the contemporary presidential primary process and to its frontloaded nature?

12)

What is the "bandwagon effect" (or momentum) in the presidential primary process? What features of
the primary system help account for this dynamic? How have candidates sought to minimize its impact?
Your answer should include references to media coverage patterns, voter information processing, and
"frontloading."

13)

Using the video "True Believers" as your source, identify and briefly discuss two factors that help explain
Howard Dean's rise to front-runner status in the period leading up to the start of 2004 presidential
primary season. Identify and briefly discuss three factors that help account for its collapse.

14)

What does Brendan Doherty mean by the permanent campaign? How does the practice of presidential
fundraising illustrate this phenomenon and why has this practice increased over time? Who benefits
from presidential fundraising and how does the allocation of benefits change over the course of a
presidents time in office? What are the implications (pros and cons) for governance that results from
the presidents reoccupation with fundraising?

15)

Brendan Doherty writes that [t]he geography of presidential fundraising does not follow the incentives of
the Electoral College. Discuss. How do the characteristics of strategic travel differ when presidents
are raising money and when they are pursuing votes? How do Republican and Democratic presidents
differ in terms of states they neglect in the competition for votes? What do these differences reveal
about the priorities of presidential travel?

16)

In The Presidency and the Nomination Process, Lara M. Brown argues that crises of legitimacy and
candidate agency are central variables propelling institutional change in the presidential nomination
process. Explain with special attention to the congressional caucus system, the national party
convention, and the modern presidential primary system. According to Brown, what are the some of the
most salient candidate characteristics that mark the current system?

Model Answer for Midterm and Final Exam

(Spring Quarter 2009)

(From John Aldrich, John D. Griffin, and Jill Rickershauser, The Presidency and the Election Campaign:
Altering Voters Priorities in the 2004 Election. In, Michael Nelson, ed., The Presidency in the Political
System, CQ Press, 8th edition, 2006).

Question: How do John Aldrich, et al. explain the candidate strategy of pursing independents and
undecided voters in presidential elections. How does this approach differ from a strategy of issue
ownership? What effects do these strategies have on election campaign issues and voter policy priorities?

Answer: Aldrich et al. argue that in presidential elections the base of each of the major parties tends to make
up its mind early with regard to the partisan direction of its vote. As strong partisans, these voters not only
choose early, they tend not to change their mind subsequently. The base still has to turnout to vote in
November, so issue appeals are not unimportant. But Aldrich maintains that because independents and
undecideds have weak partisan moorings and do not make up their minds until late in the campaign, party
candidates have strong incentives to deemphasize issues of importance to the party base and make the
campaign centrally about issues of high salience to swing voters.
This explanation for the dynamics of campaign strategy differs from the theory of issue ownership. The issue
ownership model holds that parties have longstanding and well-defined reputations among voters with regard
to the management of specific issue areas (e.g., voters see Democrats as better on the economy; they see
Republicans as better on foreign policy). These reputations are fairly durable from election period to election
period and change only slowly over time. Because voters perceive different issue competencies between the
parties, the real question in any given election becomes which of the owned issues will emerge as most
salient with the American electorate and dominate the campaign environment. In any given election, each
party tries to persuade voters that the issue(s) they own are the most pressing issue facing the nation. In
doing so, parties hope to hold their base and attract enough independents and weak partisans who trust the
party on that issue to emerge victorious in November.
Against the issue ownership model, Aldrich et al. argue that parties stress issues that are owned by
independents and undecided (i.e., issues that have a high salience with these groups in the current election
period). Even more contrary to the issue ownership argument, Aldrich maintains that, as a result of the
extensive campaigning, in the course of an election, these same issues come to dominate the thinking of
strong partisans as well (that is, they also come to see these issues as the most important issues facing the
country).
Empirically, Aldrich et al. show first, that independents and weak partisans make up their minds about whom
to vote for much later than do strong partisans. In 2004, less than 40% of independents made up their minds
before the first party convention, compared to almost 65% for strong Democrats and more than 50% for
strong Republicans. Moreover, the authors show that as the percentage of time candidates spent talking
about an issue increased, so too did the percentage of voters who viewed that issue as one of the nations
most important problems. Conversely, as the percentage of time candidates devote to an issue decreases,
so too do voter perceptions of that issues importance. In 2004, the issues examined included the economy,
terrorism, health care, and the Iraq War.
One reason this article is significant (there may be others) is that it elevates the role of campaigns in
elections. Elections are not decided simply by structural states (the economy; war and peace). Electioneering
itself matters (in the vernacular, there are demonstrated campaign effects that help determine the outcome
of an election). Issues initially salient with a small proportion of voters, through constant elite reinforcement,

become salient among a much wider proportion of the electorate, contributing to the final outcome of the
election.