Doctoral Dissertation Research in Political Science: The Persistence of Presidential Campaigns in the Public Agenda

University Of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison WI

Investigators

Abstract

Scholars of American politics continue to debate whether campaigns and elections really matter. After all, the outcomes of campaigns can be predicted by presidential approval and economic factors a year before the election (Gelman and King, 1993; Lewis-Beck and Rice, 1992). Accordingly, it is argued that the influence of campaigns on the polity must be minimal. This doctoral dissertation research project argues that presidential campaigns do matter. They matter not just for the election outcomes, but also for public policy by influencing the public agenda after the election and by establishing the criteria by which presidents are evaluated subsequently. Campaigns influence governing largely through the persistence of campaign messages in the public consciousness. The researcher draws on the literatures on campaign effects, public opinion formation, agenda setting, and presidential evaluation to address the link between democratic elections and public policy. Using newly collected rolling-cross section survey data collected during the 2000 presidential campaign and after, the investigator tests three basic hypotheses while allowing for individual variation. The first is the themes emphasized by presidential candidates become increasing important to the public. The second is the winner's themes persist in the public agenda and into his administration. The third is that the campaign themes establish the bases for presidential evaluations. In sum, presidential campaigns do not simply respond to the public agenda; they play an important role in setting it. The public does not merely attend to the campaign agenda; it holds the president accountable after the election.