Primaries have been said to be an effective way in which candidates are chosen for president and vice president. Each state has control over what type of primary they use whether it be open, closed, non-partisan, run-off, or in the past blanket primaries. Even though there are many ways in which parties pick candidates, primaries still pose some problems. An example is from our book on p.75, it states that primaries do not help with competition. Incumbents also are rarely ever defeated in elections. One of the biggest components of elections is finances. This aspect tends to either make or break a candidate and their campaign.
Looking at the regulation of campaign finance, there are many concerns. The first is that the cost of running a campaign has risen so much that some candidates are seriously hurt to point that makes it impossible for them to run. The rising costs of campaigns also only lets the voters see the candidates and parties with large amounts of money. This could possibly be the reason why our country only has two major political parties. They have become so large and rich that there is no possible way for other candidates to come in and compete.
In some ways I feel that the regulations of money to campaigns are a good thing. There needs to be some sort of contribution limits otherwise there would be even less competition among parties. Also having restrictions helps prevent corruption and candidates from getting money illegally. As far as parties go the restrictions on them make them have to go out and work for the contributions and this I feel makes them stronger as a party. Parties have to work together to get voters to contribute.
In conclusion money matters in elections and it needs to be regulated. If it is not there is the possibility of corruption as well as a decrease in political competitiveness.