As you may know an individual is now allowed to give up to $5,400 to candidates—$2,700 for their primary campaigns, and another $2,700 for the general election—and up to $33,400 per year to national party committees in the 2016 cycle.
However as a result of the earlier SCOTUS decision in “Citizens United” that political expenditures do not corrupt the political process, neither do contributions to groups that make such expenditures. In July 2010 the Appeals Federal Court decision in “SpeechNow.org v. Federal Election Commission”. which concerned Unions’ rights’ to donate to elections; gave birth to the Super PACs “Technically known as independent expenditure-only committees, Super PACs may raise unlimited sums of money from corporations, unions, associations and individuals, then spend unlimited sums to overtly advocate for or against political candidates. Super PACs must, however, report their donors to the Federal Election Commission on a monthly or quarterly basis -- the Super PAC's choice -- as a traditional PAC would. Unlike traditional PACs, Super PACs are prohibited from donating money directly to political candidates.”
The other important influence motivator is the Polls. Unfortunately too many through the wording of the questions or selection of the pool can be manipulated to bring out desired results. In the Ledger’s war against Christie; they have gleefully pointed out his poor standings rarely focusing on the size or demographics of the poll.
Is must be understood that as the fringe bottom 12 or 13 drop out the shift of their supporters could create a drastic change in the poll standings. What we see today may not be a true indication of a candidate's electability.
We will follow up next time with Party candidates.