Unit 2 – Political Beliefs/Culture (AP Exam review)
I.

Political Culture
Shared Beliefs about gov’t
o Liberty
o Individualism
o Equality
o Civic Duty
o Political Efficacy (How much influence do we have on gov’t)
o Democracy
Ideology (liberal, conservative, socialist, libertarian)







Public Opinion
Elites/Attentive/Mass public
Measurement (elections/straw poll/scientific poll
Use of polls (inform public/candidates/office-holders/exit polls)
“Horse Race” mentality on part of media
Lack of political knowledge on part of mass public
Random Sampling/Sampling Error (1500-2000 respondents)
Opinions (stable/fluid/latent/polarized)

II.
III.





IV.




V.



Political Socialization
Family/Schools/Religion/Race/Income/Gender/Mass Media
Turnout – low in U.S.; higher in general election; voter fatigue
Barriers- Registration (now “motor voter”) / ballot fatigue/ excessive number
of elections/type of elections/young people have lowest turnout
Greatest predictor of voting (education) / income / age / race / gender
Other forms of political participation – petition, demonstration, local party
mtgs., campaign contributions, letters to editor
Elections
Open/Closed Primary
Factors affecting outcomes – Incumbency advantage (franking privilege,
campaign staff, name recognition, case work for constituents, pork barrel
legislation, PAC money and contributions)
Other factors – coattail effect, media, party affiliation, technology, campaign
consultants
House v. Senate (Senate is more competitive)
Electoral College
Rationale – desire to have best people select president
Plurality – Candidate with most popular votes wins all the electoral votes –
“winner take all” system; leads to concentration of attention in only
competitive states “swing states”
270 votes to win



VI.







VII.
Criticisms – president can win with a plurality of votes; not a majority
(Clinton “92), small states over-represented (Wyoming v. California), inhibits
3rd parties from running (Perot in “92 receives 0 electoral votes)
Alternatives – Direct election; each person’s votes counts; majority of votes
wins, proportional system gives proportion of states electoral votes
Opposition from minority/small states to abolish system
Campaign Finance
Federal Election Campaign Act (1974) – disclosure, subsidies, limitations
Contribution limits (Individuals - $1000; now $2500; PAC’s $5,000 per
candidate, per election, no cap)
Buckley v. Valeo (1976) – Struck down limit on campaign spending in
congressional races; upheld limit on campaign contributions
Hard Money v. Soft Money (Soft money is undisclosed/unlimited donations to
parties for party building activities) (527’s – organizations not affiliated w/
candidate or party who can spend unlimited amount on attack ads)
McCain-Feingold (2002) – Bans “soft” money to national political parties;
limits amount to state parties
Presidential Candidates can receive federal subsidies on matching fund basis
Cost of Campaigning has gone up.
Presidential Primary
 Primaries/Caucuses – Importance of Iowa, New Hampshire (“Front
loading” of primaries occurring due to pressure to be significant)
 President chooses V.P.; not the party convention like it used to
 “Balancing the ticket”
 Voters – in primaries, they are better educated and highly participatory –
criticism of elite bias
 Delegates at convention are more activist, ideological, more wealthy and
tend to under-represent nation at large