Although citizens of the United States have the opportunity to vote for many different offices at the national, state, and local levels, the election of the president of the United States every 4 years is the focal point of the American political process. Because of the preeminent role of the president as the national leader in domestic and foreign policy and as the only elected official with a national constituency, the presidential contest receives the greatest attention from voters, politicians, and the mass media. Furthermore, because of the importance of the United States in international affairs, the U.S. presidential elections are followed with interest all over the world. Qualifications for Candidacy The formal qualifications for presidential candidacy are spelled out in Article II, Section 1, of the Constitution, which limits the presidency to natural-born citizens who have lived in the United States at least 14 years and who have reached the age of 35. There is some dispute as to the meaning of "natural-born," namely whether children born to U.S. citizens abroad are eligible. The 22D AMENDMENT (ratified in 1951) to the Constitution limits presidents to two terms. It was sponsored and promoted by conservatives, who objected to the four terms of office to which Franklin D. Roosevelt had been elected and who wanted to preclude any future president from remaining in office so long. Although the formal qualifications are straightforward and few in number, there have been many practical constraints on who may actually be considered a serious presidential aspirant. For example, no woman, black, or Jew has ever been the presidential nominee of a major political party. Only one Roman Catholic--John F. Kennedy in 1960--has been elected president. Kennedy's success laid to rest the notion that a Catholic could not be elected president, a belief that had been given credence by the overwhelming defeat of Alfred E. Smith, a Catholic who was the Democratic nominee for president in 1928. In addition to primarily being white male Protestants, most presidential candidates have had extensive political experience, although the nature of this experience has changed over time. Despite this, from the first president, George Washington, there has been a recurring tendency for the nation to elect war heroes. These include Andrew Jackson, William Henry Harrison, Zachary Taylor, Ulysses S. Grant, and Dwight D. Eisenhower. During much of U.S. history the office of state governor was the major springboard to a presidential nomination. For example, for 78 of the first 156 years (1789-1945) of the presidency, a former governor occupied the White House. Between the death of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1945 and the election of former Georgia governor Jimmy Carter in 1976, however, no former governor served as president, and only two governors were successful in capturing a presidential nomination--Thomas E. Dewey of New York in 1948 and Adlai E. Stevenson of Illinois in 1952 and 1956. The eclipse of the governorship as the main breeding ground of presidents was accompanied by a rise in the importance of the Congress (especially the Senate) and the vice-presidency. Between 1945 and 1989, five vice-presidents with backgrounds in the Congress became president: Harry S. Truman, Lyndon B. Johnson, Richard M. Nixon, Gerald R. Ford, and George Bush. In addition, John F. Kennedy's political background was entirely congressional. There are several reasons why fewer people rise from state governorships to the U.S. presidency than formerly. Presidential campaigns have become more national in scope; it is no longer as necessary to have candidates from one or two key states or to balance the ticket geographically. This emphasis on the national appeal of candidates now favors senators over governors because the former are at the heart of Washington media coverage, whereas many state governments receive only meager political coverage. Moreover, the increased involvement of the United States in world affairs since 1945 has led to a preference toward candidates with foreign-policy experience and expertise, a requirement more easily satisfied by senators than by governors, who do not deal with issues of foreign relations and national defense. In addition, senators have 6-year terms of office, compared to 2- or 4-year terms for governors; this gives senators a chance to plan a presidential bid without threatening their existing political base. Because the campaign for a presidential nomination often starts 2 years prior to the actual election, incumbent governors with day-to-day administrative responsibilities are hard pressed to devote much time to campaigning; former governors, on the other hand, may no longer have a substantial political base. The election of Jimmy Carter in 1976 and Ronald Reagan in 1980 may have served to turn attention once again to state governors (and former governors) as potential presidential aspirants, but Gov. Michael Dukakis of Massachusetts decisively lost the 1988 election. Although most presidential candidates since 1940 have held some prior major elected office, there are two notable exceptions--Wendell L. Wilkie, the Republican nominee in 1940, who came from a business background, and Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, the victorious Republican nominee in 1952 and 1956. Development of Presidential Campaigning Traditionally, the presidential campaigns have been the responsibility of the party organizations. Today, however, presidential candidates rely heavily on their own special campaign organizations and on various ad-hoc citizens' groups. Special attention is devoted to the mass media, particularly television, to bring campaigns to the voters. Media experts and marketing and public-relations specialists have taken key roles in the planning and conduct of a campaign, and their opinions frequently outweigh those of the political party organization. A prime example of the independent campaign organization was the Committee to Reelect the President, which ran the Nixon reelection effort in 1972. The Nixon campaign team was so concerned with ensuring a massive reelection victory for the president that other Republican candidates were forced mostly to fend for themselves, the Republican National Committee being for the time relatively powerless. The \Tprimary election\t system, increasingly important in choosing presidential nominees, is widely covered by the media and offers successful candidates the advantage of being already known to the television public by the time the campaign proper begins. Television-dominated campaigns have, however, hurt political parties in a number of ways. The media specialists who run such campaigns tend to be loyal to a candidate and not to the candidate's party; as a result the campaign supports a single candidate and not the entire ticket of the party. In addition, the heavy reliance on television allows a candidate to reach voters directly, thereby weakening the traditional function of the party as an information-providing intermediary between the candidate and the voters. Other developments have served to weaken the role of the political party in the presidential campaign. The growth of computerized direct-mail fund-raising techniques and computerized mail and telephone appeals have encroached on activities traditionally performed by the political party. Recent reforms in the areas of campaign financing and delegate selection to the nominating conventions (see \Tpolitical convention\t) have made the party less significant with respect to fund raising and candidate selection. The widespread use of television has had some positive consequences for campaigns; it certainly allows many more citizens to follow the campaign directly and perhaps get more of a personal insight into the candidates. Moreover, television tends to nationalize politics, making it difficult for a candidate to announce one set of promises in one section of the country and a contradictory set of claims in another region. Nevertheless, observers worry whether the prominence of television converts the campaign into a public-relations effort to package or market a candidate to the detriment of a serious discussion of the issues. The question is often raised whether an intelligent and competent candidate who is not photogenic and not adept at using television could be a serious contender for the presidency. Presidential candidates today tend to have such extensive travel schedules that the campaign takes on the appearance of an endurance contest. In the last half of the 19th century, however, life was less hectic for candidates, who often campaigned in a more relaxed manner. The relatively passive kind of electioneering was typified by the so-called front-porch campaign conducted by William McKinley in 1896, in which voters and party leaders came to see the candidate rather than vice versa. Thus McKinley is said to have received at his Canton, Ohio, home more than 300 delegations, totaling more than 750,000 people. Throughout the entire general-election campaign, McKinley seldom left Canton and never traveled outside Ohio. Despite McKinley's low-key campaign activities, he was victorious, although some of his advisors had been worried about the extremely active campaign being conducted by his opponent, William Jennings Bryan. One aspect of Bryan's campaign was to campaign from his private train, a forerunner to the famous whistle-stop campaign of Harry S. Truman in 1948. Today presidential candidates do little campaigning by train, but throughout the first half of the 20th century the railroads played a prominent role in campaigns, culminating in Truman's campaign. The president, his entourage, and reporters rode the train into communities large and small, many of which had never seen a presidential candidate in person. With the appropriate fanfare, the president gave a speech from the rear observation deck, and the party was on its way to the next destination. Citizens often lined up along the tracks to glimpse the president as he was passing through. Often, state and local candidates joined the presidential caravan to get some helpful publicity for their own races. The "Truman special" made two major cross-country swings, as well as many shorter trips. It was estimated that Truman traveled more than 48,000 km (30,000 mi) and was seen by more than 6 million people. These figures perhaps seem less impressive in today's jet and television era, but they were records for their time. Election Outcomes There have been many amazingly close races for the presidency--the Garfield-Hancock contest in 1880, for example--and several landslides--as in the Roosevelt-Landon contest of 1936--as well. Since 1956 election outcomes have swung dramatically, with landslide victories for Republicans (1956, 1972, and 1980) and Democrats (1964). There have been numerous oddities and quirks in presidential election outcomes. James Monroe was unopposed for reelection in 1820, whereas in 1824, Andrew Jackson led three challengers in the popular and electoral vote; because he lacked a majority of the latter, though, the election was decided in the U.S. House of Representatives, where he lost. With the presence of serious third- and fourth-party challengers, such candidates as Abraham Lincoln in 1860, Woodrow Wilson in 1912, and Harry Truman in 1948 have been elected president by less than a majority of the popular vote. Because of the operation of the \Telectoral college\t, Rutherford B. Hayes in 1876 and Benjamin Harrison in 1888 were elected president even though they received fewer popular votes than their leading challengers. The Carter victory in 1976 illustrates a possible consequence of the electoral college. Carter's vote plurality over Ford was about 1.7 million, with Carter receiving 50.1% of the total popular vote to Ford's 48.0%. His electoral-vote margin over Ford was much more substantial: 297 to 240, with one faithless Republican elector voting for Ronald Reagan--an example of the tendency of the electoral college to inflate the margin of the victor. Carter, however, came close to winning a respectable popular-vote margin while losing the electoral college and hence the presidency itself. Had Ford received approximately 12,000 more votes in Ohio and 8,000 more in Hawaii, the electoral votes of those states would have given him the presidency, assuming that the Reagan elector had remained loyal. Campaign Debates From time to time in U.S. history, presidential nominees of the major parties engage in debates. The most famous debates in American political history, those between Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A. Douglas in 1858, occurred when the two were candidates for the Senate from Illinois. Douglas won the Senate seat, although the debates served to create a national reputation for Lincoln and propelled him toward the presidential nomination in 1860, when Douglas again was his opponent. In 1960, John F. Kennedy and Richard M. Nixon met for four debates that were a milestone in presidential politics, primarily because of their vast television audience. More than 70 million Americans saw the first debate, and audiences of greater than 50 million people witnessed the other three. Studies of the effects of the debates generally indicate that only the first debate, in which Kennedy was viewed the winner, made any noteworthy impact on the outcome of the election. Probably the greatest consequence of the debates was to assure voters that the relatively young and inexperienced Senator Kennedy was capable of being president. Television debates were not held in 1964, 1968, or 1972 because of political considerations. In 1964, for example, the heavily favored incumbent (Johnson) saw little reason to risk his advantage in debate. His partisans in Congress refused to waive the equal-time provision that would have forced the television networks to give equal time to all the minor candidates--thus effectively killing the prospects for debates. Although it is rare for an incumbent president to provide a forum and publicity for his challenger, Presidents Ford in 1976, Carter in 1980, and Reagan in 1984 debated their challengers. In the first two cases polls showed the incumbents behind their opponents. In 1976 the televised debates probably had little effect on the election outcome. In 1980, Carter met Republican candidate Ronald Reagan in debate over one week before Election Day; Reagan's reassuring manner probably contributed to his electoral victory. In 1988, Democrat Michael Dukakis and Republican George Bush held two debates; observers generally agreed that they "won" one each. Campaign Issues The issues that have dominated presidential campaigns have varied dramatically over time, although certain themes recur in different forms. Certainly, the state of the economy and the nature of economic relationships are such themes, whether they be discussed in terms of prosperity versus depression, protection versus free trade, or cheap versus expensive money. Wars, their conduct, and their avoidance have also been critical issues in many elections. At times specific issues and slogans may dominate the presidential campaign, as slavery and related economic issues did in 1860. In more recent times the New Deal programs of Franklin D. Roosevelt and the Fair Deal of Harry S. Truman, along with Truman's attacks on the "do-nothing" Republican Congress, helped to keep the Democrats in power from 1932 to 1952. The Republicans were finally victorious with Eisenhower in 1952, emphasizing the Democrats' "Korea, Corruption, and Communism." In 1960, Kennedy propounded the New Frontier and talked of getting the "country moving again"; Lyndon B. Johnson spoke of the Great Society in 1964 and proposed comprehensive social-welfare programs. In 1980, Republican candidate Ronald Reagan made persistent inflation and the perceived decline of U.S. military might and international prestige the major issues in the campaign, easily defeating the incumbent, Jimmy Carter. Neither candidate in 1988 stressed crucial issues such as the budget and trade deficits. So much attention was devoted to matters like crime and patriotism that many voters considered it a "no-issue" campaign. On occasion, the candidates themselves become the crucial issue. Certainly, Barry M. Goldwater in 1964 and George S. McGovern in 1972 were put on the defensive by the widespread perception that they were extremists. Campaign Financing The cost of presidential campaigns rose so sharply between 1952 ($12 million) and 1972 ($114 million) that public financing of presidential campaigns was instituted for the 1976 election. A major reason for the increased cost was the heavier reliance on television and on computer technology. Convinced that Federal Corrupt Practices Act of 1925 and the \THatch Act\t of 1939 were inadequate to deal with this situation, Congress passed amendments (1974 and 1976) to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. These provided partial public funding during the primary season for candidates who met certain criteria and full public funding for the general election if candidates opted for public funding. The law also included tighter reporting provisions for contributions, limitations on individual and organizational contributions, funds for the parties' national nominating conventions, and the establishment of a Federal Election Commission (FEC) to enforce the law. The source of all public funds spent on the campaign is the Presidential Election Campaign Fund, which consists of moneys designated by citizens on their income-tax returns to be used for presidential elections. Although the FEC obliges presidential candidates to forego private fund raising and abide by spending ceilings to qualify for public money ($46.1 million each in 1988), both parties have used state party funds, technically allowed for "party building," to circumvent the restriction. Presidential Succession Although elections are the normal mechanism for the selection of the president and the vice-president, assassinations, resignations, and other unexpected occurrences can result in the accession of unelected presidents. The 25TH AMENDMENT to the Constitution details procedures for presidential and vice-presidential succession when there is a vacancy in either office or in the event that the president becomes incapacitated. When Vice-President Spiro T. Agnew resigned under pressure in 1973, President Richard M. Nixon nominated as vice-president Gerald R. Ford, who was subsequently confirmed by majority vote in both the House and the Senate. When Nixon resigned because of the Watergate scandal, Ford succeeded to the presidency and designated Nelson A. Rockefeller to be vice-president; he also was confirmed by both houses of Congress. Should the presidency and the vice-presidency become vacant simultaneously, the Speaker of the House and the president pro tempore of the Senate, in that order, are next in the line of succession, followed by members of the cabinet in a specified order. \THerbert\t B. ASHER Bibliography: Alexander, Herbert E., Financing Politics, 3d ed. (1984); Asher, Herbert B., Presidential Elections and American Politics: Voters, Candidates, and Campaigns since 1952, 4th ed. (1988); Barber, James David, The Pulse of Politics: The Rhythm of Presidential Elections in the Twentieth Century (1980); Boller, Paul E., Jr., Presidential Campaigns (1984); Congressional Quarterly, Inc., Presidential Elections since 1789, 4th ed. (1987); Drew, Elizabeth, Campaign Journal: the Political Events of 1983-1984 (1985); Elliott, E., Issues and Elections (1989); Goldman, Peter, Mathews, Tom, et al., The Quest for the Presidency, 1988 (1989); Heard, Alexander, and Nelson, Michael, eds., Presidential Selection (1987); Hess, Stephen, The Presidential Campaign, 3d ed. (1988); Kessel, John H., Presidential Campaign Politics, 3d ed. (1987); Luntz, F.I., Candidates, Consultants, and Campaigns (1988); Mickelson, Sig, From Whistle Stop to Sound Bite: Four Decades of Politics and Television (1989); Polsby, Nelson W., and Wildavsky, Aaron B., Presidential Elections, 7th ed. (1988); White, Theodore H., America in Search of Itself: The Making of the President 1956-80 (1982).