How Campaign Finance Affects Electoral Outcomes

(Name)
(Subject)
(Nature of Work)

I. Introduction An electoral candidate can win an election if he has plenty of campaign finances. This seems to be the common wisdom that people believe in when it comes to the electoral success of candidates. However, such a statement is not easily verifiable. In fact, there are several factors involved in the determination of whether or not there is a correlation between the campaign finances used by candidates and the probability of winning due to these funds. It has been the contention of majority that for a candidate to get a seat or win the presidency, it is important that he spend lavishly. If this is the case, then incumbents, who are generally the ones equipped with the biggest campaign funds, have edge over challengers. It is also an assurance to potential challengers that if they manage to put up campaign funds, whether from contributors or from their own pockets, they are already assured of a win in the elections. With the government structure the United States have, generalizing for all sectors of the government, particularly during the electoral races, will be quite complex. Moreover, though it is very easy to make assumptions, such arguments could start crumbling once empirical studies of various experts on the subject of political science come to light. Factors such as policy decisions, party affiliations, popularity, etc. play a role in the acquisition of campaign finances, necessitating the need for thorough analysis of how these factors affect the fund turn-out, thereby the election outcomes. That is, if the argument is true that huge campaign finances can make winning candidates. This research paper aims to give a clear presentation, backed by extensive data gathering, analysis and assessment of how, if at all, campaign