The fundamental problem in running a challenger's campaign is that the incumbent is a lawmaker whose every action is covered by the news media. Incumbents have a HUGE built-in publicity advantage; the only way a challenger can counter that is by spending money on ads and events.
The secondary problem in today's U.S. election system is that the 2 largest political parties have baked all sorts of advantages for themselves into the law--for example, for a long time party committees were allowed to collect and spend a lot more money than independent committees. Citizens United did away with this distorting advantage, making it easier for people to organize support for challenger candidates outside of political parties.
> Incumbents have a HUGE built-in publicity advantage
This isn't true 100% of the time. In recent years people have been pretty eager to vote out incumbents, in some cases in favor of people who can barely speak in complete sentences...
> the only way a challenger can counter that is by spending money on ads and events.
There's also the press.
That last bit is interesting, thanks.
edit: I remain amused at what people will downvote
The secondary problem in today's U.S. election system is that the 2 largest political parties have baked all sorts of advantages for themselves into the law--for example, for a long time party committees were allowed to collect and spend a lot more money than independent committees. Citizens United did away with this distorting advantage, making it easier for people to organize support for challenger candidates outside of political parties.