How Does Financialization Influence Elections

859 Words4 Pages

The Financialization of US Politics:

Özge Taylan*

We have heard a lot of talk and discussions about campaign finance and the effect of money in US politics in specific elections since the last few elections. The financialization of the American economy and politics has in rapid increase, which has repercussion on elections. Does money actually influence elections? The answer is Yes, then, how does financialization, which is an increasing trend in the world in general, echoes in US politics especially in elections?

The 2016 US presidential election, held on November 8th, is viewed curiously throughout the world as one of the most unusual presidential elections in history. Donald J. Trump, the outcome of the struggle between former Secretary …show more content…

In other words, financialization refers to the growing role of financial instruments, markets, actors and institutions in the functioning of national and international economies. the growth in financialization is result of the development, public policy choices and the sectors of finance, real estate and insurance that are politically active. How is this happening in terms of elections? The very recent election gives us obvious clues: The need for large quantities to enter American elections, donations, the appearance duration of candidates on TV channels and the media have an important role to …show more content…

Since we live in the era of “social media”, “apps” and “airtime”, candidates try to collect votes against their competitors on the discussion platforms. In these platforms, the airtime is very important which is equivalent to “money”, as of the tight race starting from January particularly in battleground states like Ohio, Florida, and Pennsylvania. The prominent element of battle among candidates is the campaign donations and airtime. The candidates stand up against each other on the campaign trail, over the airwaves and election TV debates watched by millions of people. Millions of dollars were spent on advertising and a ripple of excitement state-by-state campaigning by candidates. According to the Tyndall Report, Trump and Clinton’s campaigns are the two stories among the twenty that got the most “airtime” in 2016. The report continues by adding that what was unusual was the coverage of Donald Trump (1144 mins.) with more than twice as much airtime as Hillary Clinton (506 mins). This is a huge gap considering its effects on