Line 167: | Line 167: | ||
'''Candidates''' for the [[United States Democratic Party|Democratic Party]]: |
'''Candidates''' for the [[United States Democratic Party|Democratic Party]]: |
||
<center><gallery perrow="3"> |
<center><gallery perrow="3"> |
||
Image:Hillary Rodham Clinton-cropped.jpg|[[Hillary Rodham Clinton|Hillary Clinton]], [[U.S. Senator]] from [[New York]] and former [[First Lady of the United States|First Lady]] ([[Hillary Rodham Clinton presidential campaign, 2008|Campaign Article]], [http://www.hillaryclinton.com Campaign Site]) |
Image:Hillary Rodham Clinton-cropped.jpg|[[Hillary Rodham Clinton|Hillary Clinton]], [[U.S. Senator]] from [[New York]] and former [[First Lady of the United States|First Lady]] ([[Hillary Rodham Clinton presidential campaign, 2008|Campaign Article]], [http://www.hillaryclinton.com Campaign Site]) |
||
⚫ | |||
Image: |
Image:ObamaBarack.jpg|[[Barack Obama]], [[U.S. Senator]] from [[Illinois]], and former [[Illinois State Senator]] ([[Barack Obama presidential campaign, 2008|Campaign Article]], [http://www.barackobama.com/ Campaign Site]) |
||
⚫ |
Image:John Edwards, official Senate photo portrait.jpg|[[John Edwards]], former [[U.S. Senator]] from [[North Carolina]] and [[U.S. Presidential election, 2004|2004 Democratic Vice Presidential candidate]] ([[John Edwards presidential campaign, 2008|Campaign Article]], [http://johnedwards.com/ Campaign Site]) |
||
Image:Dennis Kucinich.jpg|[[Dennis Kucinich]], [[U.S. Representative]] from [[Ohio]] ([[Dennis Kucinich presidential campaign, 2008|Campaign Article]], [http://www.dennis4president.com/ Campaign Site]) |
|||
Image:Mike Gravel.jpg|[[Mike Gravel]], former [[U.S. Senator]] from [[Alaska]] and [[Alaska House of Representatives|Speaker of the Alaska House of Representatives]] ([[Mike Gravel presidential campaign, 2008|Campaign Article]], [http://www.gravel2008.us/ Campaign Site]) |
|||
</gallery></center> |
</gallery></center> |
| ||
| ||
Electoral college votes for 2008 |
The United States presidential election of 2008, scheduled to be held on November 4, 2008, will be the 56th consecutive quadrennial election for president and vice president of the United States. This presidential election schedule coincides with the 2008 Senate elections, House of Representatives elections, and gubernatorial elections, as well as many state and local elections.
Under Article Two of the United States Constitution, as amended by the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution, an Electoral College will elect the president. These electors are appointed by mechanisms chosen by each state's legislature (prevailingly, by popular vote of the voters of each state). The individual who receives a majority of votes for president — 270 votes are needed for a majority — will be the president-elect of the United States; and the individual who receives a majority of electoral votes for vice president will be the vice president-elect of the United States. If no presidential candidate receives a majority in the Electoral College, then the president-elect will be selected by a vote of the House of Representatives, with each state receiving a single vote. If no vice presidential candidate receives a majority, then the vice president-elect will be selected by a vote of the Senate. Although rare, these latter scenarios have occurred twice in America's history, in 1825 and 1837.
As in the 2004 presidential election, the allocation of electoral votes to each state will be partially based on the 2000 Census. The president-elect and vice president-elect are scheduled to be inaugurated on January 20, 2009.
When a United States President leaves office, his vice president is usually considered a leading candidate and likely nominee to succeed him. In 2001, Vice President Dick Cheney announced that he would never run for president, a statement he re-iterated in 2004. While appearing on Fox News Sunday, Cheney stated: "I will say just as hard as I possibly know how to say... If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve." [1] The 2008 election will therefore mark the first time since the 1928 election in which there is neither an incumbent president nor an incumbent vice president running for his party's nomination in the presidential election. [2] The 1952 election was the last time neither the incumbent president nor incumbent vice president ran in the general election, after President Harry S. Truman bowed out following his loss in the New Hampshire primary and Vice President Alben Barkley then sought but failed to win the Democratic nomination. [3] (Truman's name was on the New Hampshire primary ballot but he did not campaign. He lost to Tennessee Senator Estes Kefauver and formally withdrew his name from consideration.)
In the three most recent presidential administrations featuring an outgoing two-term president — those of Eisenhower, Reagan, and Clinton — the incumbent vice president has immediately thereafter run for president. ( Richard Nixon lost the 1960 election, George H. W. Bush won the 1988 election, and Al Gore lost the 2000 election.) [4] [5]
In the 1968 election, Lyndon B. Johnson initially decided to seek re-election. He entered the New Hampshire primary and won. However, he had a national poll conducted, which yielded results not in his favor. Therefore, in a nationally televised speech, Johnson announced to the public that he would not seek re-election. Incumbent Vice President Hubert Humphrey then chose to run and was the eventual Democratic Party nominee. Had LBJ stayed in the race and won (and completed his second elected term), he would have served more than nine years. The 22nd Amendment didn't disqualify him for a second elected term, as he had served only 14 months of John F. Kennedy's unexpired term. [4] The other recent Vice Presidents, such as Dan Quayle and Walter Mondale, have also sought the office of president at various times. Mondale succeeded his President, the one-term Jimmy Carter, as his party's candidate, and Quayle was unsuccessful in winning the nomination. [5]
Unless there is an unexpected change on the Republican vice presidential ticket, 2008 is the first presidential election since 1972 which will not feature a Dole or Bush running for either president or vice president.
The reported cost of campaigning for President has increased significantly in recent years. One source reported that if the costs for both Democratic and Republican campaigns are added together (for the Presidential primary election, general election, and the political conventions) the costs have more than doubled in only eight years ($448.9 million in 1996, $649.5 million in 2000, and $1.01 billion in 2004). In January 2007, Federal Election Commission Chairman Michael Toner estimated that the 2008 race will be a "$1 billion election," and that to be "taken seriously," a candidate needed to raise at least $100 million by the end of 2007. [6]
Although he has said that he will not be running for president, published reports indicate that billionaire and New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg has been considering a presidential bid with $1 billion of his own fortune to finance it. [7] Should Bloomberg decide to run as an independent, he would not need to campaign in the primary elections or participate in the conventions, greatly reducing both the necessary length and cost of his campaign.
With the increase in money, the public financing system funded by the presidential election campaign fund checkoff has not been used by many candidates. So far, John McCain [8], Tom Tancredo [9], John Edwards [10], Chris Dodd [11], and Joe Biden [12] have qualified for and elected to take public funds in the primary. Other major candidates have eschewed the low amount of spending permitted and have chosen not to participate.
In late April, Huffington Post, Yahoo!, and Slate magazine announced that they would be hosting one Democratic and one Republican debate for Presidential hopefuls. The debates are proposed to be held after Labor Day and hosted by Charlie Rose. Of the debates, Arianna Huffington remarked "It was clear to me, the 2008 campaign was going to be dominated by what's happening online — new technologies, new media like never before." [13]
Yahoo! Answers has become a platform for an ongoing Q & A process for voters to ask and answer questions posed by presidential candidates and US voters [14]
Many of the presidential candidates have been trying to connect with younger voters, through YouTube [15], MySpace [16], and Facebook [16]. Republican Ron Paul [17] [18] and Democratic Party candidate Barack Obama have been the most active in courting the Internet. [19] On December 16, 2007, Ron Paul collected more money on a single day through Internet donations than any presidential candidate in US history with over $6 million. [20] [21] [22]
The Internet has also been used to make anonymous attacks on candidates, such as those made in the Barack Obama media controversy. [23]
CNN and YouTube hosted a debate between the Democratic presidential candidates on July 23, 2007 at The Citadel in Charleston, South Carolina, and a debate between the Republican presidential candidates on November 28, 2007 at the Mahaffey Theatre in St. Petersburg. [24] Questions came primarily from YouTube viewer submitted videos, with 39 questions asked of the Democrats and 31 of the Republican candidates about divisive issues respective to each party. In the Democratic debate, most observers agreed that none of the candidates debating particularly outshone their rivals, doing nothing to challenge Hillary Clinton's position as the Democratic race's front-runner. [25]
Voter fraud was alleged after the New Hampshire primary when it was revealed that precincts counting ballots by hand produced different results than precincts which counted ballots electronically. [26] The story initially was only reported online, but later drew the attention of mainstream news outlets. Most observers have concluded that demographic trends influence both a community's means of counting ballots, and which candidates the community is likely to support. As a result, most mainstream news outlets and politicians are skeptical that any fraud affected the races' outcomes, dismissing the assertion otherwise as a "conspiracy theory." [27] Nevertheless, a recount has been initiated, paid for by Democratic candidate Dennis Kucinich and Republican Albert Howard. [28] The Deputy Secretary of State, David Scanlan, said a Republican recount will cost $57,600 and a Democratic recount, with more votes cast, will cost $67,600. [29]
In many of the towns and wards, the vote counts have been identical. Some minor changes have been made when voters didn't follow directions and marked ballots that were impossible for the machines to read. The one major exception has been Ward 5 in Manchester, where votes for all the major candidates dropped significantly after the recount. Clinton's total went from 683 to 619, Obama's went from 404 to 365, and other candidates saw similar drops [30]. Excluding the results of Ward 5 the error rate was less than 1% [31]. The reason for Ward 5 was the poll worker added the vice presidential and presidential totals before reporting [32] Howard, according to his campaign Web site, some of his primary objectives include banning electronic voting. [33] Quin Monson, assistant professor in the Department of Political Science at BYU stated "There are people that don't trust the technology, His [Dennis Kucinich's] request for the recount is likely a response to that crowd." [34]
Federal law requires reporting of funds spent and raised for elections. Potential candidates harboring serious intentions of running in the 2008 election had to create and register a campaign committee before receiving contributions. As the first candidates began filing the paperwork, other politicians felt a pressure to build support before a front-runner emerged, spurring on further declarations of candidacy. News media coverage and attendant "buzz" would increase around certain individuals, and those without an active campaign (and not just a legal status as a candidate) risked being regarded non-contenders. Most potential candidates formed exploratory committees or announced their candidacies outright by November 2006. The goals of these committees were media attention and fund-raising. Broadcast media discussions by various pundits and a series of events sponsored by the different parties during 2007, including debates, straw polls, and other events were staged to give voters a chance to get to know the candidates. The Democrats, for example, hosted a series of candidate forums and debates in Nevada, which began on February 21, as well as a debate in South Carolina on April 26.
The Republican Party also planned events for the candidates, for example, the televised debate at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in California on May 3, was the first of a series that would last through the summer and fall, and after the traditional Ames Straw Poll in Iowa on August 11, Tommy Thompson withdrew from the race after faring poorly there.
"Front runner" status is dependent on the news agency reporting, but by October 2007, the consensus listed about six candidates as leading the pack. For example, CNN lists Clinton, Edwards, Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Obama, and Mitt Romney as the front runners. [35] The Washington Post listed Clinton, Edwards and Obama as the Democratic frontrunners, "leading in polls and fundraising and well ahead of the other major candidates." [36] MSNBC's Chuck Todd christened Giuliani and McCain the Republican front runners after the second Republican presidential debate. [37]
Three candidates, Clinton, Obama, and Romney, raised over $20 million in the first three months of 2007, and three others, Edwards, Giuliani, and McCain, raised over $12 million, the next closest candidate was Bill Richardson, who raised over $6 million. [38] In the third quarter of 2007, the top four GOP fund raisers were Romney, Giuliani, Thompson, and Paul. [39] Paul set the GOP record for the largest online single day fund raising on November 5, 2007. [40] [41] Hillary Clinton set the Democratic record for largest single day fund raising on June 30, 2007. [42]
According to a poll featured on ABC News and released February 2007, 65 percent of respondents stated that they are following the 2008 election closely, a very high number considering that the election was more than a year away.
Delegates to national party conventions are selected through direct primary elections, state caucuses, and state conventions. The process continues through June, but in previous cycles, the Democratic and Republican candidates were effectively chosen by the March primaries. This is due to winning candidates collecting a majority of committed delegates to win their party's nomination. Most third parties select delegates to their national conventions through state conventions.
Both parties have adopted rules to prevent early primaries and have acted to strip some or all delegates from states that have disobeyed.
February 5, 2008, one month before the traditional Super Tuesday, looks set to be a decisive date, as up to twenty states, with half of the population of the United States among them, are moving to hold their primaries on what is being called Tsunami Tuesday, National Presidential Primary Day, Giga Tuesday, The Unofficial National Primary or Super Duper Tuesday. [43] [44] [45] [46] [47]
Template:Future election candidate Politicians with ambition have begun to express formally their desire for the presidency in the form of " exploratory committees," which allow the hopeful to raise money and travel without having to follow certain financial restrictions mandated by federal law. With official events, such as debates and candidate forums, beginning as early as February 2007, the status of a candidate will be based on whether or not he or she is invited. Several minor candidates in the past have tried to litigate their way in, generating some publicity but little public support.
Politicians who have expressed interest in a 2008 candidacy and have not ruled it out qualify for listing in the "Potential candidates" sections. Candidates marked with a † have not registered with the Federal Election Commission for a presidential campaign.
Candidates for the Democratic Party:
Withdrawn candidates:
Candidates for the Republican Party:
Additional third tier candidates have filed with the FEC - See main article.
Withdrawn candidates:
Candidates for the Constitution Party:
Candidates for the Green Party ( Official Press Release):
Draft candidates
Candidates for the Libertarian Party:
Draft candidates:
Self-declared potential candidates:
The Socialist Party USA nominated Brian Moore† of Florida for president, and Stewart Alexander† of California for vice-president, at the party's St. Louis convention, October 19-21, 2007. [64]
The Socialist Workers Party nominated Róger Calero for president, and Alyson Kennedy for vice-president. [65]
No official candidate for the newly formed Unity08 Party had been announced, but the two most frequently mentioned prospects were Mayor of New York City Michael Bloomberg and Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel.† [66] [67] Former U.S. Senator Sam Nunn† has expressed possible interest in seeking the party's nomination. [68]
The Unity08 organization suspended (but did not abandon) its efforts to seek a Presidential candidate in January 2008, citing a lack of funds [69].
Candidates running as Independents:
Draft candidates
Self-declared potential candidates
The Compact, if passed by states representing a controlling majority of the electoral college, would require states cast their electoral votes for the national popular winner, essentially shifting the election to a popular vote. The existing system is argued to encourage candidates to cater to swing states, discourage voter turnout, and allow candidates not popularly elected to take office as happened in the elections of 1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000. As of January 13, 2008, Maryland and New Jersey have enacted the law. [80] It is highly unlikely that the NPV could take effect in time for the 2008 election.
In 2007, Rep. Thomas M. Davis (R- VA) introduced the " DC Fair and Equal House Voting Rights Act of 2007" in the United States House of Representatives. If enacted, the act would have the effect of increasing the size of the electoral college by one. The bill's primary purpose is to give House representation to the District of Columbia, alongside an additional electoral college vote award to Utah in order to balance the addition. The Congressional Research Service has determined that if passed, the bill would likely be found unconstitutional, on the suggested basis that Congress does not have the authority to grant a Representative to the District. [81]
The bill also grants, for partisan balancing, an additional House seat to Utah, which very narrowly missed gaining another seat in the 2000 census, and increases Utah's electoral votes by 1, since Utah is likely to vote Republican and the District of Columbia is likely to vote Democratic. However, this will only be valid until the next census, when the extra seat will be reapportioned like all other seats. The District of Columbia's electoral vote count would remain unchanged at three, as required by the 23rd amendment. The likely effect of the change, if enacted, on the 2008 presidential election would be to give a +1 advantage to the Republican candidate: Utah has not been carried by a Democratic presidential candidate since 1964, and in the most recent election gave the Republican 71% of the vote. Even though the size of the electoral college would increase to 539, a candidate would still need 270 electoral votes to win.
There is a proposed initiative in the state of California to alter, in time for the 2008 election, the way the state's electoral votes for president are distributed among presidential candidates. Under the proposed measure, it would switch from a winner-takes-all system to a system under which every candidate receives electoral votes based on their percentage of the popular vote in California. The Democratic Party has opposed this, saying that it will give an unfair advantage to Republicans and is tantamount to electoral fraud.
As of September 27, 2007, efforts to get the initiative on the ballot appeared to be dead. [82] However, it gained new life in late October 2007, when a new organization began raising the money thought needed to get the initiative on the ballot. [83]
In order to appear on the June 3, 2008, ballot, the initiative must garner approximately 434,000 signatures by February 4, 2008, according to California's Secretary of State. [84] However the signatures were not submitted in time for the June 3 ballot which means it can appear at the earliest on the November 4, 2008 ballot.
Pundits and political experts have identified certain battleground states where close votes might prove crucial to the outcome of the election. These states could include, but may not be limited to:
The potential battleground states listed above control a total of 207 electoral votes. Of the states that are not expected to be competitive, 148 electoral votes ( Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Wyoming) have been expected to go to the Republican party, while 183 ( California, Connecticut, D.C., Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington) are expected to go to the Democrats. Any of these may become competitive as the election progresses.
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |work=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help)
Line 167: | Line 167: | ||
'''Candidates''' for the [[United States Democratic Party|Democratic Party]]: |
'''Candidates''' for the [[United States Democratic Party|Democratic Party]]: |
||
<center><gallery perrow="3"> |
<center><gallery perrow="3"> |
||
Image:Hillary Rodham Clinton-cropped.jpg|[[Hillary Rodham Clinton|Hillary Clinton]], [[U.S. Senator]] from [[New York]] and former [[First Lady of the United States|First Lady]] ([[Hillary Rodham Clinton presidential campaign, 2008|Campaign Article]], [http://www.hillaryclinton.com Campaign Site]) |
Image:Hillary Rodham Clinton-cropped.jpg|[[Hillary Rodham Clinton|Hillary Clinton]], [[U.S. Senator]] from [[New York]] and former [[First Lady of the United States|First Lady]] ([[Hillary Rodham Clinton presidential campaign, 2008|Campaign Article]], [http://www.hillaryclinton.com Campaign Site]) |
||
⚫ | |||
Image: |
Image:ObamaBarack.jpg|[[Barack Obama]], [[U.S. Senator]] from [[Illinois]], and former [[Illinois State Senator]] ([[Barack Obama presidential campaign, 2008|Campaign Article]], [http://www.barackobama.com/ Campaign Site]) |
||
⚫ |
Image:John Edwards, official Senate photo portrait.jpg|[[John Edwards]], former [[U.S. Senator]] from [[North Carolina]] and [[U.S. Presidential election, 2004|2004 Democratic Vice Presidential candidate]] ([[John Edwards presidential campaign, 2008|Campaign Article]], [http://johnedwards.com/ Campaign Site]) |
||
Image:Dennis Kucinich.jpg|[[Dennis Kucinich]], [[U.S. Representative]] from [[Ohio]] ([[Dennis Kucinich presidential campaign, 2008|Campaign Article]], [http://www.dennis4president.com/ Campaign Site]) |
|||
Image:Mike Gravel.jpg|[[Mike Gravel]], former [[U.S. Senator]] from [[Alaska]] and [[Alaska House of Representatives|Speaker of the Alaska House of Representatives]] ([[Mike Gravel presidential campaign, 2008|Campaign Article]], [http://www.gravel2008.us/ Campaign Site]) |
|||
</gallery></center> |
</gallery></center> |
| ||
| ||
Electoral college votes for 2008 |
The United States presidential election of 2008, scheduled to be held on November 4, 2008, will be the 56th consecutive quadrennial election for president and vice president of the United States. This presidential election schedule coincides with the 2008 Senate elections, House of Representatives elections, and gubernatorial elections, as well as many state and local elections.
Under Article Two of the United States Constitution, as amended by the Twelfth Amendment to the United States Constitution, an Electoral College will elect the president. These electors are appointed by mechanisms chosen by each state's legislature (prevailingly, by popular vote of the voters of each state). The individual who receives a majority of votes for president — 270 votes are needed for a majority — will be the president-elect of the United States; and the individual who receives a majority of electoral votes for vice president will be the vice president-elect of the United States. If no presidential candidate receives a majority in the Electoral College, then the president-elect will be selected by a vote of the House of Representatives, with each state receiving a single vote. If no vice presidential candidate receives a majority, then the vice president-elect will be selected by a vote of the Senate. Although rare, these latter scenarios have occurred twice in America's history, in 1825 and 1837.
As in the 2004 presidential election, the allocation of electoral votes to each state will be partially based on the 2000 Census. The president-elect and vice president-elect are scheduled to be inaugurated on January 20, 2009.
When a United States President leaves office, his vice president is usually considered a leading candidate and likely nominee to succeed him. In 2001, Vice President Dick Cheney announced that he would never run for president, a statement he re-iterated in 2004. While appearing on Fox News Sunday, Cheney stated: "I will say just as hard as I possibly know how to say... If nominated, I will not run; if elected, I will not serve." [1] The 2008 election will therefore mark the first time since the 1928 election in which there is neither an incumbent president nor an incumbent vice president running for his party's nomination in the presidential election. [2] The 1952 election was the last time neither the incumbent president nor incumbent vice president ran in the general election, after President Harry S. Truman bowed out following his loss in the New Hampshire primary and Vice President Alben Barkley then sought but failed to win the Democratic nomination. [3] (Truman's name was on the New Hampshire primary ballot but he did not campaign. He lost to Tennessee Senator Estes Kefauver and formally withdrew his name from consideration.)
In the three most recent presidential administrations featuring an outgoing two-term president — those of Eisenhower, Reagan, and Clinton — the incumbent vice president has immediately thereafter run for president. ( Richard Nixon lost the 1960 election, George H. W. Bush won the 1988 election, and Al Gore lost the 2000 election.) [4] [5]
In the 1968 election, Lyndon B. Johnson initially decided to seek re-election. He entered the New Hampshire primary and won. However, he had a national poll conducted, which yielded results not in his favor. Therefore, in a nationally televised speech, Johnson announced to the public that he would not seek re-election. Incumbent Vice President Hubert Humphrey then chose to run and was the eventual Democratic Party nominee. Had LBJ stayed in the race and won (and completed his second elected term), he would have served more than nine years. The 22nd Amendment didn't disqualify him for a second elected term, as he had served only 14 months of John F. Kennedy's unexpired term. [4] The other recent Vice Presidents, such as Dan Quayle and Walter Mondale, have also sought the office of president at various times. Mondale succeeded his President, the one-term Jimmy Carter, as his party's candidate, and Quayle was unsuccessful in winning the nomination. [5]
Unless there is an unexpected change on the Republican vice presidential ticket, 2008 is the first presidential election since 1972 which will not feature a Dole or Bush running for either president or vice president.
The reported cost of campaigning for President has increased significantly in recent years. One source reported that if the costs for both Democratic and Republican campaigns are added together (for the Presidential primary election, general election, and the political conventions) the costs have more than doubled in only eight years ($448.9 million in 1996, $649.5 million in 2000, and $1.01 billion in 2004). In January 2007, Federal Election Commission Chairman Michael Toner estimated that the 2008 race will be a "$1 billion election," and that to be "taken seriously," a candidate needed to raise at least $100 million by the end of 2007. [6]
Although he has said that he will not be running for president, published reports indicate that billionaire and New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg has been considering a presidential bid with $1 billion of his own fortune to finance it. [7] Should Bloomberg decide to run as an independent, he would not need to campaign in the primary elections or participate in the conventions, greatly reducing both the necessary length and cost of his campaign.
With the increase in money, the public financing system funded by the presidential election campaign fund checkoff has not been used by many candidates. So far, John McCain [8], Tom Tancredo [9], John Edwards [10], Chris Dodd [11], and Joe Biden [12] have qualified for and elected to take public funds in the primary. Other major candidates have eschewed the low amount of spending permitted and have chosen not to participate.
In late April, Huffington Post, Yahoo!, and Slate magazine announced that they would be hosting one Democratic and one Republican debate for Presidential hopefuls. The debates are proposed to be held after Labor Day and hosted by Charlie Rose. Of the debates, Arianna Huffington remarked "It was clear to me, the 2008 campaign was going to be dominated by what's happening online — new technologies, new media like never before." [13]
Yahoo! Answers has become a platform for an ongoing Q & A process for voters to ask and answer questions posed by presidential candidates and US voters [14]
Many of the presidential candidates have been trying to connect with younger voters, through YouTube [15], MySpace [16], and Facebook [16]. Republican Ron Paul [17] [18] and Democratic Party candidate Barack Obama have been the most active in courting the Internet. [19] On December 16, 2007, Ron Paul collected more money on a single day through Internet donations than any presidential candidate in US history with over $6 million. [20] [21] [22]
The Internet has also been used to make anonymous attacks on candidates, such as those made in the Barack Obama media controversy. [23]
CNN and YouTube hosted a debate between the Democratic presidential candidates on July 23, 2007 at The Citadel in Charleston, South Carolina, and a debate between the Republican presidential candidates on November 28, 2007 at the Mahaffey Theatre in St. Petersburg. [24] Questions came primarily from YouTube viewer submitted videos, with 39 questions asked of the Democrats and 31 of the Republican candidates about divisive issues respective to each party. In the Democratic debate, most observers agreed that none of the candidates debating particularly outshone their rivals, doing nothing to challenge Hillary Clinton's position as the Democratic race's front-runner. [25]
Voter fraud was alleged after the New Hampshire primary when it was revealed that precincts counting ballots by hand produced different results than precincts which counted ballots electronically. [26] The story initially was only reported online, but later drew the attention of mainstream news outlets. Most observers have concluded that demographic trends influence both a community's means of counting ballots, and which candidates the community is likely to support. As a result, most mainstream news outlets and politicians are skeptical that any fraud affected the races' outcomes, dismissing the assertion otherwise as a "conspiracy theory." [27] Nevertheless, a recount has been initiated, paid for by Democratic candidate Dennis Kucinich and Republican Albert Howard. [28] The Deputy Secretary of State, David Scanlan, said a Republican recount will cost $57,600 and a Democratic recount, with more votes cast, will cost $67,600. [29]
In many of the towns and wards, the vote counts have been identical. Some minor changes have been made when voters didn't follow directions and marked ballots that were impossible for the machines to read. The one major exception has been Ward 5 in Manchester, where votes for all the major candidates dropped significantly after the recount. Clinton's total went from 683 to 619, Obama's went from 404 to 365, and other candidates saw similar drops [30]. Excluding the results of Ward 5 the error rate was less than 1% [31]. The reason for Ward 5 was the poll worker added the vice presidential and presidential totals before reporting [32] Howard, according to his campaign Web site, some of his primary objectives include banning electronic voting. [33] Quin Monson, assistant professor in the Department of Political Science at BYU stated "There are people that don't trust the technology, His [Dennis Kucinich's] request for the recount is likely a response to that crowd." [34]
Federal law requires reporting of funds spent and raised for elections. Potential candidates harboring serious intentions of running in the 2008 election had to create and register a campaign committee before receiving contributions. As the first candidates began filing the paperwork, other politicians felt a pressure to build support before a front-runner emerged, spurring on further declarations of candidacy. News media coverage and attendant "buzz" would increase around certain individuals, and those without an active campaign (and not just a legal status as a candidate) risked being regarded non-contenders. Most potential candidates formed exploratory committees or announced their candidacies outright by November 2006. The goals of these committees were media attention and fund-raising. Broadcast media discussions by various pundits and a series of events sponsored by the different parties during 2007, including debates, straw polls, and other events were staged to give voters a chance to get to know the candidates. The Democrats, for example, hosted a series of candidate forums and debates in Nevada, which began on February 21, as well as a debate in South Carolina on April 26.
The Republican Party also planned events for the candidates, for example, the televised debate at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in California on May 3, was the first of a series that would last through the summer and fall, and after the traditional Ames Straw Poll in Iowa on August 11, Tommy Thompson withdrew from the race after faring poorly there.
"Front runner" status is dependent on the news agency reporting, but by October 2007, the consensus listed about six candidates as leading the pack. For example, CNN lists Clinton, Edwards, Giuliani, Fred Thompson, Obama, and Mitt Romney as the front runners. [35] The Washington Post listed Clinton, Edwards and Obama as the Democratic frontrunners, "leading in polls and fundraising and well ahead of the other major candidates." [36] MSNBC's Chuck Todd christened Giuliani and McCain the Republican front runners after the second Republican presidential debate. [37]
Three candidates, Clinton, Obama, and Romney, raised over $20 million in the first three months of 2007, and three others, Edwards, Giuliani, and McCain, raised over $12 million, the next closest candidate was Bill Richardson, who raised over $6 million. [38] In the third quarter of 2007, the top four GOP fund raisers were Romney, Giuliani, Thompson, and Paul. [39] Paul set the GOP record for the largest online single day fund raising on November 5, 2007. [40] [41] Hillary Clinton set the Democratic record for largest single day fund raising on June 30, 2007. [42]
According to a poll featured on ABC News and released February 2007, 65 percent of respondents stated that they are following the 2008 election closely, a very high number considering that the election was more than a year away.
Delegates to national party conventions are selected through direct primary elections, state caucuses, and state conventions. The process continues through June, but in previous cycles, the Democratic and Republican candidates were effectively chosen by the March primaries. This is due to winning candidates collecting a majority of committed delegates to win their party's nomination. Most third parties select delegates to their national conventions through state conventions.
Both parties have adopted rules to prevent early primaries and have acted to strip some or all delegates from states that have disobeyed.
February 5, 2008, one month before the traditional Super Tuesday, looks set to be a decisive date, as up to twenty states, with half of the population of the United States among them, are moving to hold their primaries on what is being called Tsunami Tuesday, National Presidential Primary Day, Giga Tuesday, The Unofficial National Primary or Super Duper Tuesday. [43] [44] [45] [46] [47]
Template:Future election candidate Politicians with ambition have begun to express formally their desire for the presidency in the form of " exploratory committees," which allow the hopeful to raise money and travel without having to follow certain financial restrictions mandated by federal law. With official events, such as debates and candidate forums, beginning as early as February 2007, the status of a candidate will be based on whether or not he or she is invited. Several minor candidates in the past have tried to litigate their way in, generating some publicity but little public support.
Politicians who have expressed interest in a 2008 candidacy and have not ruled it out qualify for listing in the "Potential candidates" sections. Candidates marked with a † have not registered with the Federal Election Commission for a presidential campaign.
Candidates for the Democratic Party:
Withdrawn candidates:
Candidates for the Republican Party:
Additional third tier candidates have filed with the FEC - See main article.
Withdrawn candidates:
Candidates for the Constitution Party:
Candidates for the Green Party ( Official Press Release):
Draft candidates
Candidates for the Libertarian Party:
Draft candidates:
Self-declared potential candidates:
The Socialist Party USA nominated Brian Moore† of Florida for president, and Stewart Alexander† of California for vice-president, at the party's St. Louis convention, October 19-21, 2007. [64]
The Socialist Workers Party nominated Róger Calero for president, and Alyson Kennedy for vice-president. [65]
No official candidate for the newly formed Unity08 Party had been announced, but the two most frequently mentioned prospects were Mayor of New York City Michael Bloomberg and Nebraska Senator Chuck Hagel.† [66] [67] Former U.S. Senator Sam Nunn† has expressed possible interest in seeking the party's nomination. [68]
The Unity08 organization suspended (but did not abandon) its efforts to seek a Presidential candidate in January 2008, citing a lack of funds [69].
Candidates running as Independents:
Draft candidates
Self-declared potential candidates
The Compact, if passed by states representing a controlling majority of the electoral college, would require states cast their electoral votes for the national popular winner, essentially shifting the election to a popular vote. The existing system is argued to encourage candidates to cater to swing states, discourage voter turnout, and allow candidates not popularly elected to take office as happened in the elections of 1824, 1876, 1888, and 2000. As of January 13, 2008, Maryland and New Jersey have enacted the law. [80] It is highly unlikely that the NPV could take effect in time for the 2008 election.
In 2007, Rep. Thomas M. Davis (R- VA) introduced the " DC Fair and Equal House Voting Rights Act of 2007" in the United States House of Representatives. If enacted, the act would have the effect of increasing the size of the electoral college by one. The bill's primary purpose is to give House representation to the District of Columbia, alongside an additional electoral college vote award to Utah in order to balance the addition. The Congressional Research Service has determined that if passed, the bill would likely be found unconstitutional, on the suggested basis that Congress does not have the authority to grant a Representative to the District. [81]
The bill also grants, for partisan balancing, an additional House seat to Utah, which very narrowly missed gaining another seat in the 2000 census, and increases Utah's electoral votes by 1, since Utah is likely to vote Republican and the District of Columbia is likely to vote Democratic. However, this will only be valid until the next census, when the extra seat will be reapportioned like all other seats. The District of Columbia's electoral vote count would remain unchanged at three, as required by the 23rd amendment. The likely effect of the change, if enacted, on the 2008 presidential election would be to give a +1 advantage to the Republican candidate: Utah has not been carried by a Democratic presidential candidate since 1964, and in the most recent election gave the Republican 71% of the vote. Even though the size of the electoral college would increase to 539, a candidate would still need 270 electoral votes to win.
There is a proposed initiative in the state of California to alter, in time for the 2008 election, the way the state's electoral votes for president are distributed among presidential candidates. Under the proposed measure, it would switch from a winner-takes-all system to a system under which every candidate receives electoral votes based on their percentage of the popular vote in California. The Democratic Party has opposed this, saying that it will give an unfair advantage to Republicans and is tantamount to electoral fraud.
As of September 27, 2007, efforts to get the initiative on the ballot appeared to be dead. [82] However, it gained new life in late October 2007, when a new organization began raising the money thought needed to get the initiative on the ballot. [83]
In order to appear on the June 3, 2008, ballot, the initiative must garner approximately 434,000 signatures by February 4, 2008, according to California's Secretary of State. [84] However the signatures were not submitted in time for the June 3 ballot which means it can appear at the earliest on the November 4, 2008 ballot.
Pundits and political experts have identified certain battleground states where close votes might prove crucial to the outcome of the election. These states could include, but may not be limited to:
The potential battleground states listed above control a total of 207 electoral votes. Of the states that are not expected to be competitive, 148 electoral votes ( Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Wyoming) have been expected to go to the Republican party, while 183 ( California, Connecticut, D.C., Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maryland, Maine, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington) are expected to go to the Democrats. Any of these may become competitive as the election progresses.
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help); Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |work=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help)
{{
cite web}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help)
{{
cite news}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help)