Updating "The Making of the Presidential Candidates 2004"

The 2004 Presidential Election proves to be a campaign that fails to play by the rules as explained in “The Making of the Presidential Candidates 2004”. In Chapter 1, Bush and Mayer explain the consequences in front-loading in relation to the 2000 Presidential Election while in chapter 2, Corrado and Gouvea talk about how presidential campaigns are financed under the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act. They make predictions into what they expect the 2004 Presidential Election to look like since it is the first presidential election which must adhere to significant campaign finance reform signed into law four years ago. This paper will update their work and compare the 2000 and 2004 Presidential Election processes. 

The presidential election process has changed dramatically because of front-loading. Front-loading is the trend in which more states schedule primaries and caucuses earlier in the presidential election calendar. These states receive more attention from the candidates and the media. They receive financial gain as media organizations and candidate staff members spend money for shopping, food, lodging, and gas. States that have moved up the date of their primary or caucus receive on average between $4,000 and $12,000 per day (Busch & Mayer, 2004). 

In 1972, it took twelve weeks into the primary season for 65%, a clear majority, of the delegates to select which candidate they would support in the upcoming election. It took only five weeks in 1996 to get 65% of delegates while in 2000 it took seven weeks for 60% of the delegates to select a candidate (Busch & Mayer, 2004). 

Many states have followed New Hampshire’s lead and moved their primary up.