I think an incumbents best advantage has to be the name recognition. When you have already been in office people will recognize your name. It will be easier for people to vote for you knowing that you have already been in office and the country hasn't fallen apart. People like to choose people they already know. When they see your name on the ballot they might vote for you just cause they know who you are.
I agree that name recognition is a great advantage for incumbents. This name recognition lends itself to greater campaign funds. I think that the advantage in campaign spending is even more important than name recognition. Page 372 of the Edwards book says that although there is a continuous debate on whether PACs "buy" votes in Congress, everyone agrees that at the very least, PACs seek access to policymakers. Thus, they give most of their money to incumbents. This increase in funds serves as an advantage over incumbents' opponents.
I agree that both name recognition and greater campaign funds are important advantages; however, I think that credit claiming is even more important. Page 370 of the Edwards book states that credit claiming is when there is public record of what the incumbents support and not support on legislation. The incumbents can use these records to influence the public's decision on who they want to vote for.
I agree with everyone, but I would also like to add that incumbents also have an advantage because they know how to structure their campaigns. Knowing how to structure a campaign is very important and could be the difference between winning or losing an election. Having experience with this is a great advantage, especially if you had previously won.
I agree with Mallory in that receiving campaign funds from PACs is the greatest advantage because in campaigning, money is everything. You cannot rely on your own funding, you must rely on others to support you. Without the money, there is no campaign. This gives an advantage to incumbents and a challenge to other candidates since PACs tend to support incumbents
Although the previous mentions of name recognition, credit claiming and campaign spending are all ‘advantages’ for incumbents, I think that facing weak opponents is an important advantage. Incumbents are likely to have to face weak opponents, as mentioned on page 371 of the Edwards book. Potential opponents are unlikely to risk challenging members of the House of Representatives and those that do challenge are also usually not well known or not well qualified. With that being said, I think that facing weak opponents is an important ‘advantage’.
I agree with that! Some incumbents run unopposed. This is such an advantage. If you have no opponent or a very weak one, your job just got a whole lot easier. As a rookie trying to run against an incumbent this would create a problem,because they have already beat others in these elections.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteI think an incumbents best advantage has to be the name recognition. When you have already been in office people will recognize your name. It will be easier for people to vote for you knowing that you have already been in office and the country hasn't fallen apart. People like to choose people they already know. When they see your name on the ballot they might vote for you just cause they know who you are.
I agree that name recognition is a great advantage for incumbents. This name recognition lends itself to greater campaign funds. I think that the advantage in campaign spending is even more important than name recognition. Page 372 of the Edwards book says that although there is a continuous debate on whether PACs "buy" votes in Congress, everyone agrees that at the very least, PACs seek access to policymakers. Thus, they give most of their money to incumbents. This increase in funds serves as an advantage over incumbents' opponents.
DeleteI agree that both name recognition and greater campaign funds are important advantages; however, I think that credit claiming is even more important. Page 370 of the Edwards book states that credit claiming is when there is public record of what the incumbents support and not support on legislation. The incumbents can use these records to influence the public's decision on who they want to vote for.
DeleteI agree with everyone, but I would also like to add that incumbents also have an advantage because they know how to structure their campaigns. Knowing how to structure a campaign is very important and could be the difference between winning or losing an election. Having experience with this is a great advantage, especially if you had previously won.
DeleteI agree with Mallory in that receiving campaign funds from PACs is the greatest advantage because in campaigning, money is everything. You cannot rely on your own funding, you must rely on others to support you. Without the money, there is no campaign. This gives an advantage to incumbents and a challenge to other candidates since PACs tend to support incumbents
ReplyDeleteAlthough the previous mentions of name recognition, credit claiming and campaign spending are all ‘advantages’ for incumbents, I think that facing weak opponents is an important advantage. Incumbents are likely to have to face weak opponents, as mentioned on page 371 of the Edwards book. Potential opponents are unlikely to risk challenging members of the House of Representatives and those that do challenge are also usually not well known or not well qualified. With that being said, I think that facing weak opponents is an important ‘advantage’.
ReplyDeleteI agree with that! Some incumbents run unopposed. This is such an advantage. If you have no opponent or a very weak one, your job just got a whole lot easier. As a rookie trying to run against an incumbent this would create a problem,because they have already beat others in these elections.
Delete