A Promise Fulfilled? Open Primaries and Representation

Abstract

Academics and political practitioners alike have long concerned themselves with the representativeness of primary electorates. Hoping to moderate the ideological extremity of primary voters, state parties have increasingly adopted more open primary eligibility rules. This article explores the extent to which open and modified‐open primaries actually attract a more representative electorate than their closed counterparts. Using state‐level exit poll data from 1988 through 2000, we compare the ideological, age, and income representation of primary electorates with general election voters. We find that open primaries result in the ideological convergence of the parties’ primary electorates, although the extent of this convergence is contingent upon the candidate choices within individual election years. Notably, open primaries are responsible for the inclusion of younger participants in both parties’ primaries. While reformed primary structure may weaken party control over the nomination process, it clearly results in more moderate and more representative primary electorates.

New forms of political participation. Changing demands or changing opportunities to participate in political parties?

“…The impact and effectiveness of such consultations remain to be demonstrated and members themselves are often cautious. Indeed, despite claims that inclusivity would increase democracy, there is evidence that neither widening of the selectorate, nor ballots or consultations, have contributed to a decentralisation of power (Katz, 2001;LeDuc, 2001;Pennings and Hazan, 2001;Kaufmann et al, 2003;Kenny, 2009). Observers expected that participation would decline over time as party members realised that reforms have left their individual influence more or less unchanged (Hopkin,p.…”

Voter Behavior in California’s Top Two Primary

“…2 Kaufmann, et-al (2003) look at a much broader set of primaries across the United States from 1988 thru 2000, and study the impact of alternative primary configuration not on the ideology of legislators, but on the ideological composition of the voters who choose them. They compare the ideological position of primary voters in each party with supporters of each party's candidate in the 1 I thank Woo Chang Kang for valuable research assistance.…”

Primaries and Candidates: Examining the Influence of Primary Electorates on Candidate Ideology

“…3 These control variables account for candidate type (Jacobson, 1990;Jacobson and Kernell, 1983) (Gerber and Morton, 1998;Kaufmann, Gimpel and Hoffman, 2003;McGhee et al, 2014). We exclude all nonpartisan primaries.…”

“…Primaries lack party cues and attract less media coverage, so they tend to attract more politically engaged, partisan, and ideologically extreme voters than do general elections (Kaufmann, Gimpel and Hoffman, 2003;Fiorina, Abrams and Pope, 2006;Abramowitz and Saunders, 2008). These primary voters may draw candidates' attention because elected officials tend to represent the interests of engaged constituents more than disengaged constituents (Bafumi and Herron, 2010;Burden, 2004).…”

“…Primaries tend to draw participation from activist voters who are more ideologically extreme than general election voters at large or even general election voters of the same party affiliation (Kaufmann, Gimpel and Hoffman, 2003). However, because there are few ways of consistently measuring the ideological preferences of candidates who participate in primaries, scholars have been left guessing whether the preferences of candidates who win primaries more closely match the preferences of their primary electorate or their general electorate.…”