Divisive Nominating Mechanisms and Democratic Party Electoral Prospects

Lengle, James I.; Owen, Diana; Sonner, Molly W.

doi:10.2307/2960311

Cited by 53 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…9 Going back to the existing measures of primary intensity, our definition is consistent with the accounts of Lengle et al (1995) and Dwyer (2009). According to Lengle et al the nomination process is more visible when the nominee is elected through primaries than when he is elected through caucuses; therefore, presumably voters get more information about candidates when the latter participate in primaries rather than in caucuses.…”

Section: Interpretations and Modeling Choicessupporting

confidence: 61%

“…In addition to the inconclusive empirical results, there is no consensus in the literature about how to measure primary intensity. Some studies define it using the distribution of primary votes (Bernstein (1977)), others distinguish between two nominating processes -caucuses and primaries -and argue that caucuses by their nature are less divisive than primaries (Lengle, Owen, and Sonner (1995)), while still others suggest that the length of time that a presidential primary lasts is an indicator of the intensity of the battle (see Dwyer (2009) 4 ).…”

Section: Divisive-primary Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Flip-Flopping, Intense Primaries and the Selection of Candidates

Agranov

2011

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present a model of two-stage elections in which candidates can choose different platforms in primaries and general elections. Voters do not directly observe the chosen platforms, but rather infer the candidates' ideologies from signals made during the campaign (debates, speeches), where a larger number of signals corresponds to a higher-intensity campaign. This model captures two patterns: (1) the "post-primary moderation effect," in which candidates pander to the party base during the primary and shift to the center in the general election; and (2) the "divisive-primary effect," which refers to the detrimental effect of intense primaries on a party's general-election prospects. These effects are obtained in spite of the fact that primary voters are forward-looking and take into account that a more extreme candidate has a smaller chance of winning the general election than a moderate one does.

show abstract

Section: Interpretations and Modeling Choicessupporting

confidence: 61%

Section: Divisive-primary Effectmentioning

confidence: 99%

Flip-Flopping, Intense Primaries and the Selection of Candidates

Agranov

2011

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because these candidates 3 Scholarly work on the effect of divisive primaries on general election outcomes yields mixed results. Kenney and Rice (1987) and Lengle et al (1995) find evidence that a divisive primary hurts the eventual nominee's performance in the general election while Atkeson (1998) and Stone et al (1992) find that divisive primaries have little effect if any. To some extent, it does not matter what the data indicate.…”

Section: The Cost Of Continuing a Losing Candidacymentioning

confidence: 95%

Explaining the Decision to Withdraw from a U.S. Presidential Nomination Campaign

2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We contend that a candidate's decision to exit from a U.S. presidential nomination campaign is a function of three sets of considerations: the potential for profile elevation, party-related costs, and updated perceptions of competitiveness. We analyze data from eleven post-reform presidential nomination campaigns and find support for all three considerations. Specifically, our results suggest that in addition to candidates' competitiveness, the decision to withdraw is a function of candidates' closeness to their party and ability to raise their profile. At the same time, some of our results contradict the conventional wisdom regarding presidential nomination campaigns, as we find no evidence that media coverage or cash on hand directly affect the duration of a nomination candidacy.

show abstract

“…In aggregate analyses states with divisive primaries lend less support to the party's candidate in the fall election (Kenney and Rice 1987;Lengle 1980;Lengle, Owen, and Sonner 1995). However, more care is needed in accounting for preexisting divisiveness in state party electorates which could cause both divisive primaries and fall defections.…”

Section: Connectionsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Presidential Nomination Politics in the Post-Reform Era

Norrander

1996

Political Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since 1980, more than 175 scholarly articles, chapters, or books have been published about the post-reform presidential nomination system. Numer ous authors investigate primary rules, media coverage, candidates, voters, or momentum. Less well covered are the subjects of interest groups, win nowing of candidates, campaign contributors, and connections to other phases of the presidency Research on presidential nominations has to con tend with an ever-changing environment as rules change, candidates exit the contests, and the primary season progresses from February through June. This environmental complexity adds to the challenge of investigating the first phase of the presidential selection process. Coupling this environ mental complexity with a lack of consensus among scholars on measure ment, model building, and theory leads to contradictory findings in a number of areas. Nevertheless, much has been learned about the patterns of presidential nominations.

show abstract

Divisive Nominating Mechanisms and Democratic Party Electoral Prospects

Cited by 53 publications

References 24 publications

Flip-Flopping, Intense Primaries and the Selection of Candidates

Flip-Flopping, Intense Primaries and the Selection of Candidates

Explaining the Decision to Withdraw from a U.S. Presidential Nomination Campaign

Presidential Nomination Politics in the Post-Reform Era

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About