Separate mandate

                Unusually, candidates from the same political party are not elected on a shared mandate. Whilst a policy platform might exist in some form, there is no manifesto akin to that used in parliamentary democracies such as the United Kingdom. Party labels are relatively weak in the states, elections are held at staggered intervals and the contest centers upon the candidates rather than the parties as such. Inevitably, this bears relevance towards our understanding of voting behavior.

                It is an observable trait of American politics that a candidate from the same party as the President may have little incentive to support the Head of State. Indeed, there may be a clear self-interest in placing a degree of ideological distance between themselves and the Prez. This is particularly noticeable within a state that traditionally leans towards a different party to that of the President. As a consequence, a Democrat standing for election in a red state may emphasize their opposition to Obama’s policies. That said; the President still has some leeway over members from his own party although this level of influence fluctuates over the electoral cycle. For instance, it is likely to be considerably higher in the immediate aftermath of his victory on the basis of the coattails effect. His political capital is also higher at that time. However, his influence is likely to wane as time goes on – particularly during the lame-duck stage.

                The relationship between the Head of State and a member of Congress from the same party as the President can be a complex one. The President might reasonably expect a degree of shared ideological ground with his party members in Congress, but he can never guarantee it. From the perspective of a House representative or Senator, offering support to the President comes with an electoral health warning. The President may well have to ‘persuade’ a member of his own party to support a particular policy, as was the case with Senator Ben Nelson in regards to Obamacare. It should also be noted that a congressional member from the opposing party to the President may seek to avoid siding with the administration in Washington DC regardless of the situation in question. Those that do risk the very real possibility of losing their party’s primary on the basis of ‘over-your-shoulder’ politics. These are all consequences of a system based upon a separate mandate, where candidates will always have a degree of independence from the party platform and have some autonomy from the party hierarchy in the nation’s capital.