专业名词_百度文库
两大类热门资源免费畅读
续费一年阅读会员，立省24元！
评价文档：
上传于||暂无简介
大小：26.92KB
登录百度文库，专享文档复制特权，财富值每天免费拿！
你可能喜欢经济学里有什么有趣或者奇葩的结论？
【QuinnSure的回答(244票)】:
原文在这里：（需科学上网）并已附在文末。
我的回答是二手自 的内容
对评论区的几点回应：
1. 为什么双方要为了十亿美金放弃潜在的所有Soft Money？在巴菲特的原文中已经提到了，2000年总的软钱是360M， 一方就是180M，1B=1000M相当于5~6次竞选所需要的全部金额，在有折现的情况下这笔钱足以超出潜在的软钱收益。
2. 关于许多进一步讨论，主要还是说，这个例子只是作为一个模型。共和党民主党的议员数目也好，是否串通也好，咱们现在不考虑这些，因为首先就不可能有这样古怪的亿万富翁吧。
实际上，巴菲特此文的本义并不是介绍亿万富翁如何影响政治——相反，他只是借一个非常诡异的例子（这个Eccentric Billionaire）来说明，不应当让金钱影响选举，选举应当坚持其本来的原则，正如他在一开始就说的，他长期以来都在发现被低估的股票，而不是去获取政治影响力。
-----------------------
今年，亿万富翁Donald Trump宣布竞选总统。坐拥九十亿美元身价的川普宣称自己很有钱，因而竞选资金完全不需要依靠捐赠（尽管实际上他还是募捐了不少钱），因而可以避免以往总统和政党受到经济力量把持的状况。
然而，亿万富翁想要影响政党的决策，并不是一定要通过捐钱的方式。聪明的亿万富翁可以不花一分钱达到自己的目的，他要做的只是利用一下囚徒困境。
政党在议会斗争中，不可避免地需要大量的资金支援。这种资金被分为硬钱(Hard money)和软钱(Soft money)。硬钱的捐赠是收到联邦选举委员会的严格监控的，这些钱被用于“Political Campaign”即政治宣传活动；软钱则不受监控，但这些钱只能用于“Party Building”政党建设。两者的区别有些微妙，不过反正是政党所需要的资金，自然是多多益善。由于硬钱的额度收到限制，软钱成为各政党募捐的更重要来源，其额度也一再上扬。
2000年，美国国内又掀起了一波提议禁止软钱或加强对软钱监管的呼声。假定现在有一个法案（Bill）计划禁止软钱，而且这个法案即将进入国会进行最终投票。对于两个政党来说，显然禁止软钱是要他们的命，可以想见相当一部分议员将会投反对票。那么，亿万富翁是否能够在这里插上手呢？
另一位远比川普著名的亿万富翁Warren Buffett（沃伦·巴菲特），在《纽约时报》上刊登了一片假想这种场景的文章，名为《The Billionaire's Buyout Plan（亿万富翁的买断计划）》，其中写道：
Suppose some eccentric billionaire(not me, not me!) makes the following offer. If the bill is defeated, this E.B. will donate $1Billion in soft money to the party that delivers the most votes to getting the reform passed.
假定有一个古怪的亿万富翁（不是说我，不是说我！）做出了如下的承诺：如果法案没有通过，这位古怪的亿万富翁将会捐赠十亿美元给投出更多支持票的政党。
简便起见，我们假定国会里只有一个民主党议员和一个共和党议员，再假定需要两人都支持才能通过法案，这样就构成了一个博弈，其支付矩阵如下图所示：
我们可以看到，这其实是一个经典的囚徒困境博弈：我们可以看到，这其实是一个经典的囚徒困境博弈：
对于民主党议员来说：
1. 如果共和党议员选“支持”：
1）如果自己选择“反对”，法案无法通过，共和党获得十亿美元，自己一分钱没有，结果是比对方少了十亿美金；
2）如果自己选择“支持”，法案通过，双方都没有拿到钱，也都无法再获得软钱，双方打了个平手；
综合1）2），应该选择“支持”。
2. 如果共和党议员选择“反对”：
1）如果自己选择“反对”，法案无法通过，什么都不变，平手。
2）如果自己选择“支持”，法案还是无法通过，还能多拿十亿美金。
综合1）2），应该选择“支持”
所以无论共和党议员选什么，民主党议员都应该选“支持”，这被称为“占优策略（Dominant Startegy）”。同理，共和党议员也应选择“支持”，最后我们得到了一个纳什均衡：均选择“支持”。
但是，从图上就可以看出：均选择“支持”并不是最优解，最优解应该是均选择“反对”。法案通过了，双方虽然表面都没拿到那十亿打了个平手，但是双方都没得拿软钱了，比原来的处境更加糟糕。
更加气人的是，因为法案通过了，那位古怪的亿万富翁按照约定，也不需要付那十亿美元。
这才是经济力量控制政治的真谛啊~
-------------------以下是原文----------------
For five decades, I've looked for undervalued stocks. But if I'd been interested in the biggest bargain around, which I wasn't, I would have bought political influence. For many a year, it was far cheaper than anything to be found in the stock market. A relatively modest contribution -- say, $25,000 -- was enough to make the donor a V.I.P. in the political world. And really big amounts? As a fund-raising senator once jokingly said to me, ''Warren, contribute $10 million and you can get the colors of the American flag changed.''
Markets correct, though. Politicians began exploiting the soft money loophole, and pricing became more efficient. Soft money contributions jumped from $86 million in the 1992 election cycle to an expected $360 million in the current one. That's a growth rate worthy of Silicon Valley: 20 percent annually.
And the game has barely started. For most supplicants, cost still lags ridiculously far behind value. American business spends $200 billion a year on advertising to influence consumers. In many industries -- communications, tobacco, banking, pharmaceuticals and insurance among them -- political influence can sometimes be of similar commercial importance. It also matters critically to such professionals as lawyers, doctors, and teachers. Absent reform, these interest groups will continue to ante up for political influence, accepting the soaring prices that the vendors demand.
These vendors, however, maintain that it's all O.K. They argue that a contribution may buy access and empathy but are shocked -- shocked! -- at the thought that it could influence their vote.
Perhaps. But let me suggest a fanciful thought experiment to test their position. Suppose that a reform bill is introduced, raising the limit on individual contributions to federal candidates from $1,000 to, say, $5,000 but prohibiting contributions from all other sources, among them corporations and unions. These entities could still encourage their employees, stockholders, or members to contribute personally, but could do no more -- a ban, incidentally, that applied to them until the ''soft money'' dodge was introduced in 1978. Such a bill would be far from a panacea for all campaign finance ills, of course, but it would at least be a start.
Why should this bill stand a chance in a Congress enraptured with the status quo? Well, just suppose some eccentric billionaire (not me, not me!) made the following offer: If the bill was defeated, this person -- the E.B. -- would donate $1 billion in an allowable manner (soft money makes all possible) to the political party that had delivered the most votes to getting it passed. Given this diabolical application of game theory, the bill would sail through Congress and thus cost our E.B. nothing (establishing him as not so eccentric after all).
The beauty of this plan is that it would highlight the absurdity of claims that money doesn't influence Congressional votes. What a $1 billion promise would buy here is a ''counter-revelation'' among legislators, who'd be induced by the offer to shift their position on campaign finance by 180 degrees so as to prevent the money from being delivered to the opposition party. When the roll call began, Republicans and Democrats alike would, in this scenario, suddenly find merit in a reform that they had previously classified as somewhere between repulsive and un-American.
This hypothetical exercise, it should be noted, does not expose the legislators who now oppose reform as evil or corrupt -- but only as human. How many of us push for laws that are clearly injurious to our self-interest? I can assure you that I've never looked for ways to make retention of my job less secure. Why should legislators?
Would a system that allows an E.B. to influence legislation by a $1 billion promise make sense? Of course not. And neither does a system that allows an anything-but-eccentric individual, corporation or union to achieve similar influence by a large check. Only individuals vote -- and then just once per election. Let only individuals contribute -- with sensible limits per election. Otherwise, we are well on our way to ensuring that a government of the moneyed, by the moneyed, and for the moneyed shall not perish from the earth.
Warren E. Buffett is chairman of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.
【王宸的回答(12票)】:
我想最有趣的应当是逆向选择吧
试想当人们能够自由地在网络上表达言论的时候，例如网易、今日头条等新闻端，排在前面的言论往往是一些比较极端的言论。原本按赞数来排列答案的目的是希望能够最代表读者的意见排在前面，但事实上代表大多数的言论变成了沉默的大多数（相比那些极端言论所得的赞数，这些言论并没有得到很多赞）反而让极端言论代表了大多数
而且每个网站都希望能够留下优质用户，而由于上面的原因，造成了每个用户都觉得网站变得极端了而选择离开，而离开的并不是那些发表极端言论的人，相反由于他们的言论变成了“大多数”，他们会认为自己的言论代表了网站，并得到了“鼓励”，比之前发表更多更极端的言论，而离开的恰恰是那些优质用户
综上所述，每个网站都要吃枣药丸的，能够延缓药丸的时间就要看管理层是否能够降低逆向选择了
而知乎目前正处于第一阶段（第一个原因）正往第二阶段过渡（第二个原因）
所以知乎吃枣药丸
【陈雨昂的回答(9票)】:
1.多数票规则中的投票悖论
例. 假设有三个选民（甲, 乙, 丙），他们就导弹供给量（A.少量导弹；B.适量导弹；C.大量导弹 ）进行投票。他们各自对每个选项的偏好（用First, Second, Third表示）如下：
【投票过程】
【投票过程】
A与B之间投票：A两票，B一票。A胜出。
B与C之间投票：B两票，C一票。B胜出。
C与A之间投票：C两票，A一票。C胜出。
形成了投票循环（悖论）。也就是说，最终的投票结果与每项投票的先后顺序有关！
这使得议程操纵（Agenda manipulation）成为可能。
这个例子中投票悖论形成的原因是：乙是一个双峰偏好者。
【补充知识】
单峰偏好：如果选民偏离其最满意的结果，不论偏离的方向如何，其效用是下降的。
双峰偏好：如果选民偏离其最满意的结果，其效用先降后升。
不过，存在双峰偏好者并不一定导致投票悖论，此处暂且按下不表。
2.阿罗不可能定理（Arrow's Impossibility Theorem）
不妨想象一下一个标准的民主社会应该符合哪些条件——
阿罗的设想是：
理性条件（R, rationality）
（1）完备性：对于任何两个物品，个人的偏好应该能够进行排序；
（2）传递性：也就是说，若A优于B，B优于C，则A优于C。
帕雷托原则（P, Pareto principle）
社会对每个人的偏好做出反应，若每个人都认为A优于B，则社会的排序必须是A优于B。
无限制领域条件（UD, unrestricted domain)
所有可能的结果均可进行排序。不能拒绝那些具有特殊偏好（包括双峰偏好者）的人加入集体决策，不能剥夺他们的投票权。
无关备选对象的独立性（IIA，Independence of irrelevant alternatives）
社会对A和B的排序只取决于个人对A和B的排序，与其他方案无关
非独裁性（ND,non-dictatorship)
社会选择不能只体现单个人的偏好。有一个人的偏好是A优于B，而其他人是B优于A，则集体不应该因为那个人是独裁者而选择A优于B。
以上5个条件看起来非常合理，仿佛都是一个合意的民主社会需要满足的。
重点是！阿罗不可能定理告诉我们！满足以上所有标准的民主社会是不存在的！
这个定理告诉我们，不该高估民主的集体选择过程的效率。
（想到再补充。
【baohu的回答(3票)】:
“”没有的，只有被“玩坏”的。我从书中为大家整理了一些有趣的经济学现象。逗大家开心开心。
正如美国经济学家萨缪尔森所说：“学习经济学并非要让你变成一个天才，但是不学经济学，那么命运很可能会与你格格不入。”萨缪尔逊还说，如果能教会鹦鹉说“需求”和“供给”两个词，那这只鹦鹉就可以成为一个经济学家了。
1:审丑经济学
以一部《丑的美学》而被奉为现代丑学开创人的罗森·克兰兹说：“吸收丑是为了美而不是为了丑。” 个人认为，这里的美应该指一个美好的结果。审丑的目的是什么？是追求经济利益。
丑，从来不是最终的结果，而只是实现套现的一个过程。
成功的人物代表：芙蓉姐姐，凤姐，她们确实“成功”了。
按照国人的观点，节俭是一种美德，既然是美德，为什么还会产生悖论呢？这就是经济学家看问题的独特之处。
节俭悖论告诉我们：节俭减少了支出，迫使厂家削减产量，解雇工人，从而减少了收入，最终减少了储蓄。储蓄为个人致富铺平了道路，然而如果所有人都加大储蓄，将使整个社会陷入萧条和贫困。在艰难时势下，个人的合理行为（节俭）对整个经济来说可能是灾难性的。由于大家都在存钱，很多省吃俭用者最终将会失业。
节俭对于经济增长并没有什么好处：公众节俭→社会总消费支出下降→社会商品总销量下降→厂商生产规模缩小，失业人口上升→国民收入下降、居民个人可支配收入下降→社会总消费支出下降……
需要注意的是，节俭悖论倡导的消费，是一种积极理性的消费，而不是盲目的无限制的消费，那样必将导致极其严重的后果。
3经济学事实上一门使人幸福的学问
英国著名的戏剧家肖伯纳曾经说过一句名言：“经济学是一门使人生幸福的艺术。”经济学家阿尔弗雷德·马歇尔认为，经济学中蕴涵着“逐渐消除贫困和无知的希望”，作为一门“财富的学科”，“追求幸福”是经济学的伟大目标。
我们关心经济学，最重要的是，“经济”和“财富”是一脉相承的。虽然懂经济学不一定会让你成为富翁，虽然金钱不能解决所有的问题，但这世上能像金钱一样能左右人的东西还是少之又少。钱不是万能的，没有钱却是万万不能的。看懂经济学，会让你离财富更进一步，经济学就是幸福学！
4最后一碗汤最难喝——边际效用递减
俄国的克雷洛夫写过一则寓言《杰米扬的汤》。说的是有一个叫杰米扬的人，他做的鱼汤非常鲜美，他本人也以此为荣。有一次，一个朋友来拜访他，他给朋友做了香喷喷的鱼汤，“上面漂着一层油，像琥珀一样”，里面都是“鲟鱼片和内脏”。朋友很快喝完一碗，在朋友刚放下碗时，杰米扬又端来了第二碗。朋友边喝边和他聊天，很快第二碗也下肚了。为了表示自己的热情，杰米扬又盛了第三碗。朋友实在是不想喝了，可耐不住他的热情，终于勉强喝完。当看到杰米扬又端出了一碗汤时，朋友最后吓跑了，从此再也不敢到杰米扬家做客了。
对于这个客人而言，喝第三碗汤时与喝第二碗汤、第一碗汤相比，他的满足感是依次递减的，这就是边际效用递减规律。边际学派认为，人们在资源有限的情况下，不能使全部欲望得到满足，他们只能根据欲望的重要性进行分配。
5麦当劳经营的是快餐，又是房地产。
麦当劳之所以开一家火一家，第一是地点，第二是地点，第三还是地点。
麦当劳那套科学合理的经营快餐的程序、店面摆设的规则、店铺选址的秘诀，并利用麦当劳响当当的牌子以特许经营的方式扩张。
在很大程度上麦当劳已变成了一家经营房地产的企业，在全球100多个国家拥有数万块黄金地段，是个房地产运营高手。
6人人利他的思想和行为是不会在现实经济中出现的。（当然，自利并不完全等于自私。）
我国清代小说《镜花缘》一书杜撰了一个君子国。在君子国里，人人都大公无私，绝不存有半点私心。
君子国也有交易行为，但卖者却少要钱，而买者却要多给钱。以下是其中的一幕场景：
买东西的人说：“我向你买东西所付的钱已经很少了，你却说多，这是违心的说法。”
卖东西的人说：“我的货物既不新鲜，又很平常，不如别人家的好。我收你付价的一半，已经显得很过分，怎么可能收你的全价？”
买东西的人说：“我能识别好货物，这样好的货物只收半价，太有失公平了。”
买东西的人又说：“如果你真想买，就照前价减半，这样最公平。如果你还说这价格太低了，那你到别的商家那儿去买，看还能不能买到比我儿这更贵的货物。”
他们一番争执不下，买东西的人给了全价，拿了一半的货物转身就走。卖主坚决不让走，路人驻足观看，都说买东西的人“欺人不公”。最后，买东西的人拗不过大家，只好拿了上等与下等货物各一半才能离开。
经济学认为所有人都是理性经济人，就是一切行为的目标只为个人利益最大化。因此，“君子国”中的人人利他的思想和行为是不会在现实经济生活中出现的。理性经济人，又称作“经济人假设”，经济学正是在理性经济人的假设下研究资源既定时的利益最大化问题。
也许有人会有这样的疑问：人人都是理性经济人，都是理性且自利的，社会秩序不会变得紊乱？以亚当·斯密为代表的经济学家给出了回答：“他追求自己的利益，往往使他能比在真正处于本意的情况下更有效地促进社会的利益。”也就是说，人人都是理性经济人，更能在客观上维护社会的秩序。
7在经济生活中，我们都是理性的经济人，只不过这种理性一般是有限理性。理性人的主观意愿就是最大限度地为自己谋福利，但能不能谋到福利是另一回事。所以，这个世界根本不存在“我不爱利的人”，标榜自己与世无争的人，都是相对的。
&&&&&本文固定链接:
【上一篇】
【下一篇】
您可能还会对这些文章感兴趣！
最新日志热评日志随机日志Soft Money是什么意思啊？_百度知道
Soft Money是什么意思啊？
ft ˈmʌmʌni] nsoft money[英] [s&#596. 纸币;ft ˈni] [美] [s&#596
其他类似问题
为您推荐：
其他1条回答
对于政府及机构; 目前，指对一个项目或为特殊目的而进行的一次性融资2、银或其他金属硬币;&nbsp.指纸币;&&nbsp，如您满意;&&&nbsp，请采纳为最佳答案哟://&&nbsp。高顿祝您生活愉快同学你好，可报考“期货投资分析”科目。&nbsp、纸币1; 再次感谢您的提问;&nbsp://zhidao，分别是“期货基础知识”与“期货法律法规”上述两科考试通过后;&&/c/gaodunzhidao" target="_blank">高顿企业知道，很高兴为您解答;&&nbsp。&& 希望我的回答能帮助您解决问题。&nbsp.baidu，期货从业人员资格考试科目为两科.baidu！　　SoftMoney软通货.com/c/gaodunzhidao" href="&nbsp，更多财会问题欢迎提交给<a title="http，相对金
压面机的相关知识
等待您来回答
下载知道APP
随时随地咨询
出门在外也不愁【策马翻译】美国选举常见术语
缺席投票（Absentee
缺席投票能够让无法前往投票站投票的选民参加投票。选民可因不同原因无法在选举日当天前往投票站，例如身居国外、身患疾病、在旅行途中或服兵役等。缺席投票让登记选民可以邮寄自己的选票。联邦法律《服役公民与海外公民缺席投票法》（Uniformed
and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting
Act）确定了总统大选举的缺席投票规则。所有其他类型选举的缺席投票规则由各州制定，因而有所不同。在俄勒冈州，所有选举投票都以邮寄方式进行，但选民也可以选择亲自前往郡投票站投票。
公民表决提案（Ballot
initiative）
公民表决提案（有些州使用proposition，即“提案”一词）是美国直接民主的实例，公民可以以这种方式提出立法措施或修订州宪法。一些提案旨在废除现行的某项州法。各州对将提案付诸选举投票所需要的签名人数有不同规定。这些提案在大多数、但不是在所有情况下，需经简单多数批准。另见公民复决（征询民意提案）。
博客（Blog）
博客为网上博客（weblog）的缩写，是一种在线日志。候选人利用博客向浏览其网站的人介绍自己的活动。其他人使用博客跟踪竞选议题和动态。政治博客由博客人（blogger）编写，他们以自身的观点发表评论和张贴消息。政治博客如同一般博客一样，反映多种声音。
蓝州（Blue
蓝州一词指大多数选民通常支持民主党候选人和民主党政策的州。另见红州。
巴克利诉瓦莱奥案（Buckley
v. Valeo）
巴克利诉瓦莱奥案导致1976美国最高法院对竞选资助法作出具有里程碑意义的裁决。该裁决维持了《联邦竞选法》(Federal
Election Campaign
Act）中有关财务披露、捐款限制以及总统大选公共资金的规定。法院推翻了该法对竞选开支的限制，但运用公共资金的总统候选人自愿接受的开支限额不在此涵盖范围。因此，这项裁决使国会议员候选人（无公共资金）的竞选开支不受限制，也使支持或反对某一候选人——但不与任何候选人或竞选活动协作——的个人或团体可以无限额地投入资金。这项裁决还确定，对没有接受公共资金的候选人在竞选活动中使用个人资金不必有任何限制。另见《麦-法因戈尔德法》。
预选会议/核心小组（Caucus）
预选会议是地方级会议，在这个会议上，一个政党在市、镇或者郡县中的注册党员对支持本党哪一位候选人作出决定。在州选举或全国联邦职位竞选中，这些地方会议意见的总汇结果决定了该州党员所支持的候选人。Caucus一词也用来指由一些民选官员基于共同目标组成的团体，旨在为支持共同的政治议程作政策规划，例如著名的“国会黑人核心小组”（Congressional
Black Caucus）和“国会拉美裔核心小组”(Congressional Hispanic
Caucus）。这两个小组的成员分别致力于讨论和推进各自选民群体的利益。
挑战者（Challenger）
挑战者指与现任官员竞争该职位的候选人。另见现任官员。
公民联合会诉联邦选举委员会案（Citizen
United v. Federal Election Commission）
最高法院2010年对此案的裁决确立，股东和其他群体享有与他们作为个人会享有的相同权利。法院还裁定，政府不得限制这些群体为支持或批评政治候选人作出的开支规模。另见超级政治行动委员会。
非开放式初选（Closed
指两大政党（民主党和共和党）将某位候选人提名为本党竞选某一职位的正式候选人的党内选举。非开放初选只限于举行选举的政党的注册党员参加投票。无党派选民收到在同日进行的有关其他事项和无党派竞选的选票。另见初选。
燕尾提举力（Coattails）
“燕尾提举力”是从绅士长礼服后面的下摆（即“燕尾”）引申而来。在美国政治中，它指一位声望高的在职官员或竞选公职的候选人，借自己的实力给本党其他候选人增加得胜机会的能力。也就是说，这位候选人有能力让其他人借自己的声望同时取胜。
代表大会（Convention）
在总统大选年，当各州的初选与预选会议结束后，各政党分别集会选举一位总统提名人——通常情况下是在初选中获胜并获得最多的与会代表支持的人。总统提名人通常选择一名竞选伙伴作为副总统候选人，但总统提名人也可以不推荐任何人选，而由与会代表推举副总统候选人。
会后弹升（Convention
指共和党或民主党全国代表大会决定总统候选人提名后的几天内，民意调查表明该候选人声望上升的现象。
选民（Constituency）
一位政府官员所代表的人民就是他/她的选民。这个词有时仅指那些投票选出该官员的选民。总统的选民包括全体美国人民;
一位市长的选民包括该市或该镇的居民。
辩论（Debate）
有两个或两个以上对立方参加的安排有序的讨论会。在美国政治生活中，辩论逐渐成为候选人阐述其本人及所属政党的观点并回答媒体或观众提问的电视转播节目。辩论也可通过广播电台、因特网或在社区集会场所进行。辩论可在各级政府公职人员的选举中进行。
分掌政府（Divided
government）
分掌政府指总统属于一个政党，而国会至少有一院（参议院或众议院）由反对党控制的政治局面。此种情况也可能发生在州一级，即州长属于一个党，而州议会由另一党控制。在美国政府制度中常常出现两党分掌局面。
选举协助委员会（Election
Assistance Commission）
选举协助委员会根据2002年《帮助美国投票法》（Help America Vote
Act）成立，主要作为选举信息全国交流中心和资源中心。它也审视联邦选举的管理和程序。
选举团（Electoral
总统和副总统通过选举团制度选举产生，这个制度规定给予每个州与其国会议员人数等同的选举人票。哥伦比亚特区有3张选举人票。在总计538张选举人票中，一名总统候选人必须获得至少270票才能当选。
联邦竞选法（Federal
Election Campaign Act）
这项1971年制定的法律确立了联邦选举的资金规则，曾于1974年、1976年及1979年三度修订。该法要求候选人及政治委员会公开资金来源及开支情况，同时制定了联邦选举期间接受捐款及使用开支的规则；它还对使用公共资金资助总统竞选作出了规定。
联邦选举委员会（Federal
Election Commission）
联邦选举委员会是一个独立的监管机构，负责管理和执行联邦竞选财务法。联邦选举委员会包括在参议院建议和同意的情况下由总统任命的6名委员。联邦选举委员会基于1974年对《1971年联邦竞选法》的修正案设立。
前置（Front-loading）
前置是指大选年中将州预选会议和州初选的日程安排越来越提前于全国大选日的做法。一个州希望通过将其初选日期提前，为该州属意的总统候选人造成有决定意义的声势，以便对政党的总统提名具有格外的影响力。
领先者（Front-runner）
在任何选举或提名过程中呼声最高或最有可能获胜的候选人被称为领先者。
僵局（Gridlock）
在政治运作中，一个政党或一个派别制造障碍，阻止或严重阻碍就立法或政策问题达成妥协的情况被称为僵局。
硬钱/软钱（Hard
money/Soft money）
硬钱/软钱这两个名词用来区分受制于和不受制于联邦竞选财务法律约束的竞选资金。硬钱是指由个体或团体直接向竞选联邦职务的候选人提供的捐款。此类捐款受到法律约束。软钱是指不受法律规定约束的捐款，只能用于公民活动，如动员选民登记、政党建设活动、行政管理费用以及用于支持州和地方候选人。法律规定，“软钱”捐款不得用于直接支持竞选联邦职务的候选人。美国最高法院于2003年裁决支持2002年国会通过的对软钱捐款的限制。另见《麦凯恩-法因戈尔德法》。
《哈奇法》（Hatch
《哈奇法》限制美国联邦政府行政部门和哥伦比亚特区政府的雇员，以及从事与联邦资助项目有关工作的州和地方雇员的政治活动。根据这项立法，有关雇员可以为候选人的竞选活动捐款，但是不得利用官方权势来影响选举，包括不得在工作时索取或接受政治捐款以及从事政治活动——其中包括穿戴或展示政治宣传品。受《哈奇法》管辖的雇员可以在非党派选举中竞选职位，例如参加许多学校的董事会选举，但不得在党派选举中参选。
《帮助美国投票法》（Help
America Vote Act）
为了解决在2000年总统选举中遇到的投票问题，国会通过了《帮助美国投票法》。这项立法鼓励州和地方政府淘汰打卡及杠杆投票机。根据《帮助美国投票法》的规定，自2003年以来已向州拨款29亿美元，用于改进选举程序。这项立法还设立了选举协助委员会（Election
Assistance Commission），为管理联邦选举以及选举法和选举项目提供支持。
赛马（Horse
对竞选活动的一种比喻，用于描述旗鼓相当的角逐，并传达出人们观看竞技比赛时的激动情绪。
现任官员（Incumbent）
目前在职的个人被称为现任官员。从历届选举看，现任官员获选连任的机率高于平均水平。
无党派人士（Independent）
不属于任何政党的候选人或选民被称为无党派人士。
跛脚鸭（Lame
跛脚鸭是指一位处于从选举其继任者到其继任者上任的这段时期内的民选官员。这位官员的政治地位因其任期将满而减弱。
压倒性胜利（Landslide）
获胜候选人的得票数远远高于竞争对手，称为压倒性胜利。
对等资金或公共资金（Matching
funds or public funding）
同意限制其竞选开支的总统候选人可以获得公共资金资助。来自个人的、总计不超过250美元的捐款可以带来从总统选举竞选基金（Presidential
Election Campaign
Fund）中拨出的对等资金。此项基金来源包括由有资格的纳税人在所得税申报表上自愿认捐的每人3美元。另见纳税人认捐机制。
《麦凯恩-法因戈尔德法》（McCain-Feingold）
正式名称为《两党竞选改革法案》（Bipartisan Campaign Reform
Act）。《麦凯恩-法因戈尔德法》是根据两位主要参议院发起人（亚利桑那州的共和党人麦凯恩和威斯康星州的民主党人法因戈尔德）命名，旨在消除“软钱”对候选人竞选联邦职务的影响。该法取消了过去允许使用软钱帮助候选人竞选联邦职务的“漏洞”（即立法疏漏）。另见硬钱/软钱。
负面广告（Negative
负面广告是指为争取选民而进行的破坏对手形象、攻击对方人品或攻击对手在某些问题上的政绩的宣传。
被提名人（Nominee）
被其他人推选参加职位竞选的人称为被提名人。被提名人可以在初选或预选会议中产生。如果一个政党只有一名参选人申请竞选政治职位，则无须进一步选举，该参选人直接成为该党的被提名人。
开放式初选（Open
在开放式初选中所有登记选民均可投票，不论他们登记自己是民主党人、共和党人还是无党派人士。另见初选。
政纲（Platform）
政纲是指一个政党有关其原则和目标的正式书面声明，在总统选举提名过程中形成并公布，经该党全国代表大会通过。另一个较宽泛的用法是指候选人在一系列政治议题上的立场。
简单多数票（Plurality）
简单多数票是选举中确定获胜者的方式之一。简单多数票指的是，一个候选人获得的选票票数多于任何对手、但可能没有超过总票数的一半。例如，如果一位候选人赢得30%的选票，另一位候选人也赢得30%的选票，而第三位候选人赢得40%的选票，那么，第三位候选人就赢得了简单多数票，成为获胜者。
政治行动委员会（Political
Action Committee）
政治行动委员会隶属公司、工会或其他组织，与政党没有直接关系。这些委员会捐款给候选人，并从事其他与选举有关的的活动，旨在推动某些具体立法议程。政治行动委员会的资金来自会员、雇员或股东的自愿捐款。近年来，政治行动委员会在影响力和数量上有明显增加：1976年有608个；2010年有大约5400个。
民意调查（Poll/polling）
公共民意调查是指民意调查公司通过向随机抽选的一批公民提出一系列标准问题而进行的调查。正确的调查应能反映对整体人口具有代表性的各种观点和持这些观点的人口比例。公共民意调查能够显示许多美国人如何看候选人及议题。另见导向性民意调查。
初选（Primary）
初选是州一级选举。选民在初选中选出隶属于某一政党、将在今后大选中与另一政党的候选人展开竞争的候选人。初选可以是“开放式”（Open），即允许州里任何一名登记选民参加投票决定政党候选人；也可以是
“非开放式”（closed），即只允许属于某一政党的登记选民投票选举该党的候选人。另见非开放式初选和开放式初选。
提案（Proposition）
见选票提案和公投。
抗议票(Protest
投给第三党候选人的票，意不在选举该候选人，而是表达对两个主要政党的候选人的不满。
公共资金（Public
见对等资金。
导向性民意调查（Push
这是一种公共民意调查技巧，通过向选民提出有关一个议题或一位候选人的某类具体问题，对可能的竞选主题进行试探。另见民意调查。
选区重划（Redistricting）
指在州内对选举国会众议员的选区范围进行重新划分。州内的民主党人和共和党人都力图掌控重新划分选区的法律和政治机制——通常是经由州立法机构，以便让重划选区给自己的政党带来选举优势。
红州指大多数选民通常支持共和党总统候选人和共和党政策的州。另见蓝州。
公民复决（Referendum）
州立法机构将是否批准某一立法措施交由选民投票决定的做法被称为公民复决，亦称征询民意提案，或公投。这个词与提案或表决提案等经常交替使用。
单一席位选区（Single-member
district）
单一席位选区是美国选举产生联邦和州议员的现行体制，即每一选区有一个议员席位；得票最多的候选人当选。“单一席位”制意味着一个选区只能有一个政党获胜。欧洲实行比例代表制（proportional
system），其选区范围相对大得多，可使数个候选人基于各党得票比例同时当选。
软钱（Soft
见硬钱/软钱。
话语片段（Sound
话语片段是指竞选公职的候选人说过的可被引用的原话片断，被广播和电视新闻节目反复使用。负面广告经常使用对立候选人的话语片段，以突出其某一不受欢迎的立场。
政治化妆师（Spin
指由竞选班子雇用的媒体或政治顾问，用以确保让候选人在任何情况下都得到最佳宣传报道。这些媒体顾问的作用是把一种情形或事件朝着对自己一方尽可能有利的方向
“发挥”。
意向测验/投票（Straw
poll/vote）
指一种非正式调查投票，用于预测正式投票的结果或衡量公职候选人在未来竞选中的相对实力。意向投票结果良好可以给候选人打气，但并不一定预示着以后的成功。
摇摆选民（Swing
不忠于某一特定政党的选民对一个议题或候选人的立场如何“摇摆”，可能对选举结果具有决定作用。摇摆不定的选民经常会在今后的选举中改变自己的选择。
超级政治行动委员会（Super
这一类型的政治行动委员会可以从选择保持匿名的捐助者那里征集数额不受限制的捐款，但是不得直接向具体的竞选活动捐款，也不得与候选人或政党进行协调。另见公民联合会诉联邦选举委员会案。
超级星期二（Super
“超级星期二”
这一用语从1988年开始流行，当时一些南方州联合起来，举行了第一次有影响力的大规模地区初选，以期提升南方各州在总统候选人提名程序中的重要性，减弱艾奥瓦预选和新罕布什尔初选等早期投票结果的影响。今天，该用语的意义已经较为宽泛，多指在总统初选季节不同地区于一个或数个星期二可能举行的数场州级初选。这些集中举行的初选意义重大，因为这种大规模的投票结果会产生一大批全国党代会代表，可能导致角逐总统候选人的某些人士脱颖而出或被迫出局。2012年的“超级星期二”为3月6日。但是，由于一些州已将初选日期提前，因此今年“超级星期二”的重要性将不如往年。
纳税人认捐机制（Taxpayer
check-off system）
纳税人认捐机制允许美国纳税人在缴纳年度联邦所得税时捐款3美元，作为资助总统竞选的公共资金。如有意提供此项捐款，纳税人只需在税表中勾选有关栏目即可。提供此项捐款并不增加或降低个人所得税，只意味着纳税人同意将3美元的税款存入总统竞选基金。另见对等资金。
任期限制（Term
任期限制指公职人员或议员可担任某一职务的时间限度。美国总统的任期不得超过两任（8年）。然而，对美国国会参议员或众议员均无任期限制。某些州和地方的公职也有任期限制。
第三党（Third
除自19世纪晚期以来一直主宰美国政治的共和党和民主党以外的、拥有一定民众支持并对选举结果产生影响的任何一个政党均被称为第三党。
拆分投票（Ticket
splitting）
所谓“拆分投票”是指在同一次选举中将选票投给不同政党的候选人，例如将总统票投给民主党候选人，而将参议员票投给共和党候选人。由于这些选民在同一张选票中选择了两个或多个政党的候选人，因此被视为“拆分”选票。
现场交流会（Town
hall meeting）
现场交流会，亦称社民会议，是指一位现任官员或一位公职候选人与通常是当地人的普通民众举行的非正式会议，人们在会上向官员或候选人直接提问。
跟踪调查（Tracking
跟踪调查是一种民调形式，可帮助候选人在竞选活动的不同阶段了解或“跟踪”选民的情绪变化。调查开始时，民调人员连续三晚向同样人数的选民提问，例如每晚400人，三晚共1200人。在第四天晚上，民调人员再采访另外400人，将他们的反馈意见输入资料库，同时删除第一晚的反馈意见，以此类推。因此，跟踪调查始终保持最后三晚获得的1200人的反馈意见。竞选班子可以逐渐对整个民调资料进行分析，从中了解某些竞选活动对选民态度产生的影响。另见民意调查。
Glossary of U.S. Election Terms
28 December 2011
Absentee voting
Absentee voting allows voters who cannot come to polling
places to cast their ballots. A variety of circumstances, including
residency abroad, illness, travel or military service, can prevent
voters from coming to the polls on Election Day. Absentee ballots
permit registered voters to mail in their votes. The Uniformed and
Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act, a federal law, governs
absentee voting in presidential elections. Absentee voting rules
for all other elections are set by the states, and vary. In Oregon,
all elections are conducted by mail, but voters have the option of
voting in person at county polling stations.
Ballot initiative
Ballot initiatives are an example of direct democracy in
the United States, in which citizens may propose legislative
measures or amendments to state constitutions. Some initiatives
propose the repeal of existing state laws. States vary in the
number of signatures they require to place an initiative on the
ballot. These initiatives (also called “propositions” in some
states) are subject to approval by a simple majority in most, but
not all, cases. See alsoReferendum.
Short for weblog, a blog is an online journal. Candidates
use blogs to tell visitors to their websites about their
activities. Others use blogs to follow the development of campaign
issues or events. Political blogs are created by “bloggers,”
individuals who post commentary and news from their own
perspective. Political blogs, like blogs in general, reflect a
broad spectrum of opinion.
Blue state
Blue state is a term used to refer to a U.S. state where
the majority of voters usually support Democratic candidates and
causes. See alsoRed
Buckley v. Valeo
The legal challengeBuckley
v. Valeoresulted in a landmark 1976 U.S. Supreme Court
decision on campaign finance law that upheld the Federal Election
Campaign Act’s financial disclosure requirements, contribution
limits and provision for public funding of presidential election
campaigns. The court struck down spending limits in the law, except
for the limits accepted voluntarily by presidential candidates who
receive public funds. Thus, the ruling allowed for unlimited
spending by congressional candidates (they do not receive public
funds) and by persons or groups who campaign for or against a
candidate, but who do not coordinate their activities with any
candidate or campaign. The ruling also said that candidates who do
not receive public money do not have to limit campaign spending of
their own personal funds. See alsoMcCain-Feingold.
A caucus is a meeting at the local level in which registered
members of a political party in a city, town or county gather to
express support for candidates. For statewide or national offices,
those recommendations are combined to determine the state party
nominee. The term also is used to describe a group of elected
officials with a common goal that meets to plan policy in support
of a shared political agenda. Two well-known examples of such
groups are the Congressional Black Caucus and the Congressional
Hispanic Caucus, whose members discuss and advance the interests of
their respective constituencies.
Challenger
A challenger is a candidate who runs for political office against a
person who currently holds that office (the incumbent). See
alsoIncumbent.
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission
This 2010 Supreme Court decision affirmed
shareholders and other groups of people enjoy the same rights that
they would have if they were acting as individuals. The court also
ruled that the government cannot restrict how much such groups can
spend to support or criticize political candidates. See
Closed Primary
Candidates from the two major political parties
(Democratic and Republican) compete to be their parties’ nominee
for an office in a primary election. Closed primaries are
restricted to voters registered as a member of the party holding
the election. Unaffiliated voters receive ballots for other
measures and nonpartisan contests that occur on the same date. See
alsoPrimary.
The expression “coattails” is an allusion to the rear panels (or
“tails”) of a man’s coat. In American politics, it refers to the
ability of a popular officeholder or candidate for office, on the
strength of his or her own popularity, to increase the chances for
victory of other candidates of the same political party. This
candidate is said to carry others to victory on his or her
coattails.
Convention
In presidential election years, after state primaries and caucuses
have concluded, the political parties gather to select a
presidential nominee — usually the candidate who secured the
support of the most convention delegates, based on victories in
primary elections. The presidential nominee usually chooses a
running mate to be the candidate for vice president, but the
presidential nominee can throw open the vice presidential selection
process to the convention delegates without making a
recommendation.
Convention bounce
An increase in a presidential candidate’s popularity, as indicated
by public-opinion polls, in the days immediately following his or
her nomination for office at a national convention.
Constituency
The people a government official represents make up his or her
constituency. The term sometimes is used to refer only to those
individuals who voted to elect the official. The president’s
constituency comprises all A a mayor’s constituency
comprises the people who reside in the town or city.
A structured discussion involving two or more opposing sides is a
debate. In American politics, debates have come to be associated
with televised programs at which candidates present their own and
their parties’ views in response to questions from the media or
members of the audience. Debates also may be held via radio, the
Internet or at a community meeting place. They can be held among
those who seek elective office at any level of government.
Divided government
A situation in which the U.S. president is a member of one
political party and at least one chamber of Congress (either the
Senate or the House of Representatives) is controlled by another
party is called a divided government. This situation also can exist
at the state level, with one party controlling the governorship and
another controlling the state legislature. Divided government
occurs frequently in the U.S. political system.
Election Assistance Commission
Established by the Help America Vote Act of 2002, the Election
Assistance Commission serves primarily as a national clearinghouse
and resource for information on elections. It also reviews federal
election administration and procedures.
Electoral College
The president and vice president are selected through the electoral
college system, which gives each state the same number of electoral
votes as it has members of Congress. The District of Columbia gets
three electoral votes. Of the total 538 votes available, a
candidate must receive 270 to win.
Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA)
A 1971 law that governs the financing of federal
elections, the Federal Election Campaign Act was amended in 1974,
1976 and 1979. The act requires candidates and political committees
to disclose the sources of their funding and how they spend their
it regulates the contributions received and expenditures
made during federa and it governs the public
funding of presidential elections.
Federal Election Commission (FEC)
This independent regulatory agency is charged with administering
and enforcing federal campaign finance law. The FEC consists of six
commissioners appointed by the president with the advice and
consent of the Senate. The FEC was established by the 1974
amendment to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971.
Front-loading
The practice of scheduling state party caucuses and state primary
elections early in the calendar year, well in advance of the
general election, is called front-loading. By moving its primary to
an early date, a state hopes to lend decisive momentum to its
preferred presidential candidate and thus have disproportionate
influence on a party’s nomination.
Front-runner
A candidate in any election or nomination process who is considered
most popular or most likely to win is called the front-runner.
In politics, when a political party or faction creates obstacles
that block or severely hinder compromise on legislation or policy
issues, the situation is described as gridlock.
Hard money/Soft money
Hard money and soft money are terms used to differentiate
between campaign funding that is, and is not, regulated under
federal campaign finance law. Hard money describes donations by
individuals and groups made directly to political candidates
running for federal office. Such contributions are restricted by
law. Soft money refers to donations not regulated by law that can
be spent only on civic activities such as voter-registration
drives, party-building activities, administrative costs and in
support of state and local candidates. “Soft money” contributions,
by law, may not be used to directly support a candidate for federal
office. The U.S. Supreme Court in 2003 upheld congressional
restrictions passed in 2002 on soft money contributions. See
alsoMcCain-Feingold.
The Hatch Act places restrictions on political activity by
employees of the executive branch of the U.S. federal government,
District of Columbia government, and state and local employees who
work in connection with federally funded programs. Under the act,
employees are permitted to contribute to a candidate’s campaign,
but are restricted from using official authority to influence an
election, including soliciting or receiving political contributions
and engaging in political activity — including wearing or
displaying political promotional materials — while on duty.
Employees covered by the Hatch Act may run for office in a
nonpartisan election, such as many school board elections, but are
prohibited from running in a partisan election.
Help America Vote Act (HAVA)
Congress passed HAVA to address voting problems encountered in the
2000 presidential election. The act encourages state and local
governments to eliminate punch-card and lever voting machines.
Under HAVA, states have received $2.9 billion since 2003 to improve
their election processes. The law also established the Election
Assistance Commission to provide support to the administration of
federal elections, as well as election laws and programs.
Horse race
Used as a metaphor for an election campaign, “horse race” is used
to describe a close contest and conveys the feeling of excitement
that people experience when watching a sporting event.
An individual currently holding a position is the incumbent.
Historically, incumbents have enjoyed a better-than-average chance
of being re-elected.
Independent
A candidate or voter not affiliated with a particular political
party is termed an independent.
The term lame duck refers to an elected official during the time
period between the election that chose the official’s successor and
the date the successor assumes office. Such an individual is in a
weakened position politically due to the impending expiration of
his or her term.
A victory in which one candidate’s votes far surpass those
of other candidates is called a landslide.
Matching funds or public funding
Public money can be given to presidential candidates who
agree to limit their spending on the campaign. Contributions from
individuals in which the aggregate amount contributed by the
individual is $250 or less are eligible to be matched on a dollar-
for-dollar basis from the Presidential Election Campaign Fund. This
fund includes proceeds from the voluntary check-off of $3 per
person from income tax returns of eligible taxpayers. See
alsoTaxpayer
check-off system.
McCain-Feingold
Formally titled the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, the
McCain-Feingold law is named after its two chief Senate sponsors,
John McCain, a Republican from Arizona, and Russell Feingold, a
Democrat from Wisconsin, who sought to remove “soft money” as an
influence on candidates running for federal office. The law
eliminated “loopholes” (or legislative oversights) that in the past
allowed the use of soft money to aid candidates running for federal
office. See alsoHard
money/Soft money.
Negative ads
These advertisements try to persuade voters to choose a
candidate by making the opposing candidate look bad, by attacking
either the opponent’s character or record on the issues.
A person selected by others to run for office is the nominee.
Nominees may be selected in primary elections or caucuses. When
only one candidate from a party has filed to run for a political
office, that candidate becomes the party’s nominee without any
further selection process.
Open primary
An open primary is one in which all registered voters may
vote, regardless of whether they are registered as Democrats,
Republicans or Independents. See alsoPrimary.
Platform refers to a political party’s formal written
statement of its principles and goals, put together and issued
during the presidential nomination process and affirmed during the
party’s national political convention. Less formally, it can also
refer to a candidate’s position on a set of political issues.
A plurality is one method of identifying the winning
candidate in an election. A plurality occurs when the votes
received by a candidate are greater than those received by any
opponent but can be less than a majority of the total vote. For
example, if one candidate receives 30 percent of the votes, a
second candidate also receives 30 percent and a third receives 40
percent, the third candidate could win the election by a plurality
of the votes.
Political Action Committee (PAC)
PACs are political committees not related directly to a
political party, but rather affiliated with corporations, labor
unions or other organizations. The committees contribute money to
candidates and engage in other election-related activities so as to
promote specific legislative agendas. Funds are gathered by
voluntary contributions from members, employees or shareholders.
PACs have increased significantly in influence and number in recent
years: In 1976, there were 608 PACs; in 2010, there were about
Poll/Polling
A public opinion poll is created when a polling firm
contacts a sample group of randomly selected citizens and asks a
series of standard questions. If executed properly, the poll’s data
reflect the range of opinions and the portion of the population
that holds them in a manner representative of the full population.
Public opinion polls provide an idea of what many Americans think
about various candidates and issues. See alsoPush
A state-level election in which voters choose a candidate
affiliated with a political party to run against a candidate who is
affiliated with another political party in a later, general
election. A primary may be either “open” — allowing any registered
voter in a state to vote for a candidate to represent a political
party, or “closed” — allowing only registered voters who belong to
a particular political party to vote for a candidate from that
party. See alsoClosed
primaryandOpen
Proposition
initiativeandReferendum.
Protest vote
A vote for a third-party candidate made, not to elect that
candidate, but to indicate displeasure with the candidates of the
two major political parties.
Public funding
SeeMatching
Push polling
A public-opinion polling technique that is used to test
possible campaign themes by asking very specific questions about an
issue or a candidate is call push polling. See alsoPoll/Polling.
Redistricting
The process of redrawing the geographic boundaries of
congressional districts, the electoral districts within states from
which members of the House of Representatives are elected, is
called redistricting. Democrats and Republicans at the state level
compete to get hold of the legal and political mechanisms of
redistricting — usually by controlling the state legislature. By
doing so, they can redraw boundaries of congressional districts in
ways that will lend an electoral advantage to their own party.
Red state refers to a U.S. state where the majority of
voters usually support Republican candidates and causes. See
Referendum
A measure referred to voters by a state legislature
proposing that specific legislation be approved or rejected is a
referendum. The terms referendum, proposition and ballot initiative
frequently are used interchangeably.
Single-member district
Single-member district describes the current arrangement
for electing national and state legislators in the United States in
which one candidate is elected in each
winner is the candidate with the most votes. The “single-member”
system allows only one party to win in any given district. Under
the proportional system popular in Europe, much larger districts
are used and several members are elected at one time, based on the
proportion of votes their parties receive.
Soft money
money/Soft money.
Sound bite
A sound bite is a brief, very quotable remark by a
candidate for office that is repeated on radio and television news
programs.Negative
adsfrequently use sound bites to highlight an unpopular
stance taken by an opposing candidate.
Spin doctor
A media adviser or political consultant employed by a
campaign to ensure that a candidate receives the best possible
publicity in any given situation is called a spin doctor. When
these media advisers practice their craft, they are said to be
“spinning” or putting “spin” on a situation or event to present it
as favorably as possible for their side.
Straw poll/vote
An unofficial vote that is used either to predict the
outcome of an official vote or to measure the relative strength of
candidates for office in a future election is called a straw poll
or straw vote. A good showing in a straw vote can give a candidate
a boost, but does not necessarily predict later success.
Swing voters
Voters not loyal to a particular political party sometimes
can determine the outcome of an election by “swinging” one way or
the other on an issue or candidate. Swing voters often reverse
their choices in a subsequent election.
This type of political action committee (PAC) is allowed to raise
an unlimited amount of money from donors who can choose to remain
anonymous. Super PACs are not allowed to donate directly to
individual campaigns or coordinate with candidates or political
parties. SeeCitizens
United v. Federal Election Commission.
Super Tuesday
Widespread use of the phrase “Super Tuesday” dates from
1988, when a group of Southern states banded together to hold the
first large and effective regional group of primaries in order to
boost the importance of Southern states in the presidential
nomination process and lessen the impact of early votes in the Iowa
caucus and New Hampshire primary. Today, the meaning of the phrase
is blurred, a reflection of the fact that, during the presidential
primary season, there may be several groups of state primaries in
various regions falling on one or more Tuesdays. These groupings
are important because the weight of such a large, simultaneous vote
tends to make or break would-be presidential nominees because so
many convention delegates are selected at once. In 2012, Super
Tuesday is March 6 but, because some states have moved their
primaries to earlier dates, it will be less “super” than in past
elections.
Taxpayer check-off system
The taxpayer check-off system allows U.S. taxpayers to contribute
$3 of their annual federal income tax payment to a public fund for
financing presidential elections. To contribute, taxpayers simply
check a box on their tax return that says that they want to
participate in this system. Making the contribution does not raise
or lower an individual’ it simply deposits $3 of the tax
payment into the presidential election campaign fund. See
alsoMatching
Term limits
Term limits involve restricting the number of years an
officeholder or lawmaker may serve in a particular office. There is
a term limit for the U.S. president, who may serve no more than two
consecutive terms, or eight years total. There are no term limits
for those who serve in the U.S. Senate or House of Representatives.
Some state and local offices are subject to terms limits.
Third party
Any political party that is not one of the two parties
that have dominated U.S. politics since the late 19th century — the
Republican Party and the Democratic Party — and that receives a
base of support and plays a role in influencing the outcome of an
election is referred to as a third party.
Ticket splitting
Voting for candidates of different political parties in
the same election, for instance by voting for a Democrat for
president and a Republican for senator, is called splitting the
ticket. Because these voters support candidates from more than one
political party, they are said to “split” their votes.
Town hall meeting
A town hall meeting is an informal gathering of an officeholder or candidate
for office with a group of people, often local, in which the
audience directly questions the officeholder or candidate.
Tracking survey
A type of public-opinion poll that allows candidates to
follow or “track” voters’ sentiments over the course of a campaign
is called a tracking survey. For the initial survey, the pollster
interviews the same number of voters on three consecutive nights —
for example, 400 voters a night for a total sample of 1,200 people.
On the fourth night, the pollster interviews 400 more voters, adds
their responses to the poll data, and drops the responses from the
first night. Continuing in this way, the sample rolls along at a
constant 1,200 responses drawn from the previous three nights. Over
time, the campaign can analyze the data from the entire survey and
observe the effect of certain events on voters’ attitudes. See
alsoPoll/Polling.
转自互联网
请关注@策马翻译Jenny
已投稿到：
以上网友发言只代表其个人观点，不代表新浪网的观点或立场。}