VII.               Nominating a President

1.       Major parties must balance the desire to win the presidency and lead the nation with the need to compromise with extreme factions (perhaps hurting the party itself) to avoid having them leave.

                                                               i.      In old days, when party leaders controlled or heavily influenced candidate selection, it was easy to ignore the extremists, but lately, with weakened leader control, it has been much harder.

2.       Oddly, often, party delegates and candidates have different and sometimes opposite opinions and views from the normal party members (the public).

                                                               i.      The main question is why certain elements of minority groups are represented at conventions, NOT why delegate and public opinion are so different.

3.       Before, party leaders chose delegates, but after 1972, more and more primaries and caucuses, or meetings of party followers, occurred more often, thus letting people chose candidates who may or may not have the qualifications or the connection to the public as before.

                                                               i.      Only the most dedicated members attend caucuses.

4.       Delegates are no longer “in it for the money” or there to help their won re-election prospects, and today’s delegates tend to be issue-oriented activists.

                                                               i.      Thus, they might not choose a candidate with similar views to the public, since they themselves don’t share similar views with the public; on the other hand, this new trend increases the chance for those with strong policy preferences to play a role in the party and decreases the chance that they will leave the party out of dissatisfaction.

5.       Basically, since now, convention delegates are mostly ideological activists, the presidential nominating system has changed dramatically from what it was in the mid-1960s.