On one view, the main effect of a campaign is to enlighten voters about the means and ends dictated by “fundamentals” of competition in the current party system (Gelman and King, 1993; Zaller, 1998). The fundamentals assessed in this chapter are factors that endure across elections, indeed across decades. Some reflect party differences originating in the New Deal but reinforced by the policies of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society. Others reflect the “culture wars” of more recent decades. Importantly, enduring differences are also expressed geographically, in variation across states. This variation created, in turn, the possibility that the 2000 campaign would be a natural experiment on a continental scale. Identifying differences is only the starting point, however. For this book, fundamental factors are most interesting as they constrain, or fail to constrain, the dynamics of preferences over the campaign.

Is the electorate indeed best characterized as a field of polarized interests, such that the campaign's primary effect is to increase preexisting gaps in vote intention, as citizens are reminded of the proper means to ends they hold dear? To the extent that this is so, shifts induced by the campaign should be mainly offsetting and the scope for the campaign to shape the result should, correspondingly, be small. The campaign would not be very interesting as a field for strategic play and counter play. Strategic initiatives may occur and, taken individually, may have their intended effect.