Hostname: page-component-8678677fb7-h96qj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-10-12T00:40:38.147Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Representativeness of Primary Electorates

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 March 2018

John Sides ,
Chris Tausanovitch ,
Lynn Vavreck  and
Christopher Warshaw
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Primary voters are frequently characterized as an ideologically extreme subset of their party, and thus partially responsible for party polarization in government. This study uses a combination of administrative records on primary turnout and five recent surveys from 2008–14 to show that primary voters have similar demographic attributes and policy attitudes as rank-and-file voters in their party. These similarities do not vary according to the openness of the primary. These results suggest that the composition of primary electorates does not exert a polarizing effect above what might arise from voters in the party as a whole.

Keywords

primary electionspublic opinionrepresentationpolarization

Information

Type
Articles
Information
British Journal of Political Science , Volume 50 , Issue 2 , April 2020 , pp. 677 - 685
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Department of Political Science, George Washington University (email: jsides@gwu.edu); Department of Political Science, University of California Los Angeles (email: ctausanovitch@ucla.edu); Departments of Political Science and Communication, University of California Los Angeles (email: lvavreck@ucla.edu); Department of Political Science, George Washington University (email: warshaw@gwu.edu). A previous version of this article was presented at the 2014 Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Chicago, IL. We thank Larry Bartels and Chris Achen for inviting us to present work at a 2013 conference on representation at Vanderbilt University. At that time we had two separate articles on nominations, and the decision to collaborate directly resulted from conversations at this meeting. Data replication sets are available in Harvard Dataverse at https://dx.doi.org/10.7910/DVN/OQ64S8 and online appendices at https://doi.org/10.1017/S000712341700062X.

References

Abramowitz, A. 2008. Don’t Blame Primary Voters for Polarization. The Forum 5 (4):1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ansolabehere, S., and Hersh, E.. 2012. Validation: What Big Data Reveal About Survey Misreporting and the Real Electorate. Political Analysis 20 (4):437–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, R. 1985. The Struggle to Remain the Party of Choice. Washington Post, 12 August 12.Google Scholar
Fiorina, M., and Abrams, S.. 2012. Disconnect: The Breakdown of Representation in American Politics. Julian J. Rothbaum Distinguished Lecture Series. Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
Fiorina, M. P., and Levendusky, M. S.. 2006. Disconnected: The Political Class Versus the People. Red and Blue Nation 1:49–71.Google Scholar
Geer, J. G. 1988. Assessing the Representativeness of Electorates in Presidential Primaries. American Journal of Political Science 32 (4):929–945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, S. J. 2015. Institution of Nomination and the Policy Ideology of Primary Electorates. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 10 (4):461–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, S. J., and Tausanovitch, C.. 2015. A Disconnect in Representation? Comparison of Trends in Congressional and Public Polarization. The Journal of Politics 77 (4):1058–1075.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirano, S., Snyder, J. M., Ansolabehere, S., and Hansen, J. M.. 2010. Primary Elections and Partisan Polarization in the US Congress. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 5 (2):169–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackman, S., and Vavreck, L.. 2009. The 2008 Cooperative Campaign Analysis Project, Release 2.1. Palo Alto, CA: Yougov/polimetrix.Google Scholar
Jacobson, G. C. 2012. The Electoral Origins of Polarized Politics: Evidence from the 2010 Cooperative Congressional Election Study. American Behavioral Scientist 56 (12):1612–1630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaufmann, K. M., Gimpel, J. G., and Hoffman, A. H.. 2003. A Promise Fulfilled? Open Primaries and Representation. Journal of Politics 65 (2):457–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keisling, P. 2010. To Reduce Partisanship, Get Rid of Partisans. New York Times.Google Scholar
Key, V. 1956. American State Politics: An Introduction. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Mann, T. E. 2007. Polarizing the House of Representatives: How Much Does Gerrymandering Matter? In Red and Blue Nation?: Characteristics and Causes of America’s Polarized Politics v.1, edited by P. Nivola and D. Brady, 263–283. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.Google Scholar
Martin, J. 2013. GOP Scrambles to Fix its Primary Problem. Politico.Google Scholar
McGhee, E., Masket, S., Shor, B., Rogers, S., and McCarty, N.. 2013. A Primary Cause of Partisanship? Nomination Systems and Legislator Ideology. American Journal of Political Science 58 (2):337–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norrander, B. 1989. Ideological Representativeness of Presidential Primary Voters. American Journal of Political Science 33 (3):570–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norrander, B. 2015. The Imperfect Primary: Oddities, Biases, and Strengths of US Presidential Nomination Politics. Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polsby, N. W. 1983. Consequences of Party Reform. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Putnam, J. 2016. Can Bernie Sanders Change How The Democratic Party Chooses Presidential Nominees? Here’s What You Need to Know. Washington Post, 25 July.Google Scholar
Sides, John, Tausanovitch, Chris, Vavreck, Lynn, and Warshaw, Christopher. 2017. Replication Data for: On the Representativeness of Primary Electorates, doi: 10.7910/DVN/OQ64S8, Harvard Dataverse, V1, UNF:6:QYksjbwFF8Qier7d0Sl+lA==.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tausanovitch, C., and Warshaw, C.. 2013. Measuring Constituent Policy Preferences In Congress, State Legislatures, and Cities. The Journal of Politics 75 (2):330–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vavreck, L., 2007. The exaggerated effects of advertising on turnout: The dangers of self-reports. Quarterly Journal of Political Science 2 (4):325–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Will, G. 2016. The Gift of Trump’s Ramshackle Campaign. National Review.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: Link

Sides et al. Dataset

Dataset

https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/OQ64S8
Link
Supplementary material: PDF

Sides et al. supplementary material

Appendix

Download Sides et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 154.3 KB