2. PA National Congressional Districts
3. Pennsylvania State House Map
4. Pennsylvania State Senate Map
5. Running for Higher Office – Previous
 Expected utility of winning a higher office - E(Uh)
 E(Uh) = phBh – Ch
 Expected utility of retaining the current, lower office -
 E(Ul) = plBl – Cl
 Under this assumption, an ambitious politician will
attempt to move to higher office when:
 E(Uh) = phBh – Ch >E(Ul) = plBl – Cl
 What is problematic about this assumption?
6. Running for Higher Office – A Two-Stage
 Maestas and colleagues argue that there is a stable
disposition, or function, that each legislator holds.
 Stage 1
 Progressive Ambition = f(E(UA)
 = pgenBmarg – Cmarg + M)
 Where pgenis the long-run probability of winning office
 Bmargis the expected gain from the target office
 Cmargis the expected costs from running for the target office
 M = personal motivations outside of the cost-benefit analysis
 Those who enter Stage 2 have already crossed a
threshold level of ambition.
 Stage 2 Pr(Run | Progressive Ambition > 0 = f(Pt, pgen,Ct,)
7.  f(E(UA)
 = pgenBmarg – Cmarg + M)
pgen Bmarg Cmarg M
winning the party
effectiveness in U.S.
Family-cost index Desire to make
social or business
chances of winning
the general election.
to current position in
Perception of district
Signals from party.
What is this
9. Moving to the Second Stage
 f(E(UA) = pgenBmarg – Cmarg + M)
 If f(E(UA)) > 0, then they are scored as „1‟ (i.e. ambitious)
 If f(E(UA)) ≤ 0, then then they are scored as „0‟ (i.e. not
N = 597
N = 263
N = 334
 How do the authors connect their findings to political
 What are the implications for their findings?
 What can they not determine from this study?
 How might this study be extended?
11. Making It: The Electoral Game
 Asking the right questions
 What constituency to win over
 How to become familiar to voters
 Which leaders or groups to garner support
 How to reach voters most effectively
 Choosing the message
 Effective, simple, repeatable brand
12. Messaging in Campaign Ads
 Sen. Ron Johnson (R – WI)
 “We‟re just a Wisconsin family worried about our country.”
 Washington outsider -
 Had enough of these phony political commercials?
 Sen. Jim Webb (D – VA)
 Appealing to the other side.
 Rep. Morgan Griffith (R – VA)
 Association - Obama Loves Rick Boucher -
 Policy - Cap and Trade -
13. Choosing the Wrong Message
 Daniel Freilich (D – VT) for Senate
 “I‟m on a Cow”
 Rep. Alan Grayson (D – FL)
 Taliban Dan -
 Paul R. Nelson (R – WI) for House
 Ron Kind, The Wrong Kind -
 CarlyFiorina (R – CA) candidate for Senate
 Demon Sheep -
 Way too far. http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-
 “I‟d rather wrestle a gorilla than ask anybody for fifty
cents.” Senator John Glenn (D - Ohio)
 Sources of Congressional candidate funds:
 1) Individual contributors
 $2,400 per candidate
 $45,600 per election
 2) PACS
 3) Party Committees
 4) Personal Funds
 Incumbents always do better. Why?
 House incumbents outspent challengers six times over in 2010.
 Senate incumbents outspent 11 times over in 2010.
 2012 Spending in PA Races
15. Can you buy votes?
 Not exactly.
 Spending is positively correlated with electoral success.
 Spending negatively correlated with electoral success.
 Spending matters less later in campaign races.
16. Campaign Techniques
 Air Wars
 Positive vs. Negative ads – what are the tradeoffs?
 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) of 2002
 Requires candidates personally appear with their advertisements.
 Evolving mass media
 “Word of mouth on steroids.”
 The Ground War
 “Pressing the flesh.”
 Get out the vote (GOTV) drives
 Parallel Campaigns
 Outside players – Freedom Watch – “Dina Titus must be from
 Citizens United v. FEC - Corporate spending
 Super PACs