Primary Voters Versus Caucus Goers and the Peripheral Motivations of Political Participation
- Eitan Hersh
- … show all 1 hide
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
Depending on their state of residence, Americans can participate in Presidential nomination contests either by voting in a primary or by attending a caucus. Since caucus participation requires more time and effort than primary voting, it has long been thought that caucuses must attract a more partisan, activist, and politically extreme cohort of citizens than primaries. This paper challenges the view that more burdensome electoral institutions necessarily ought to attract more politically engaged citizens. I propose a theory of peripheral motivations that predicts caucus goers and primary voters will not differ in terms of their political attitudes or interest, but they will differ in their levels of community engagement. The key insight is that many of the reasons why citizens choose to participate or abstain from politics actually have little to do with politics. Analysis of two surveys from the 2008 Presidential election substantiates the theoretical expectations.
- Addonizio, E. M., Green, D, P., Glaser, J, M. (2007). Putting the party back into politics: An experiment testing whether election day festivals increase voter turnout. Political Science and Politics, 40(04), 721–727.
- Anderson, M. (2009). Beyond membership: A sense of community and political behavior. Political Behavior, 31(4), 603–627. CrossRef
- Ansolabehere, S. (2009a). Cooperative congressional election study, 2008: Common content. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Computer File, Release 1: February 2, 2009. [producer].
- Ansolabehere, S. (2009b). Guide to the 2008 cooperative congressional election study. Harvard: Harvard University.
- Ansolabehere, S., & Hersh, E. (Forthcoming). Who really votes. In P. M. Sniderman & B. Highton (Eds.), Facing the challenge of democracy: Explorations in the analysis of public opinion and political participation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
- Atekson, L. R., & Maestas, C. D. (2009). Meaningful participation and the evolution of the reformed presidential nominating system. Political Science and Politics, 42(1), 59–64. CrossRef
- Atkeson, L. R. (1999). Sure, I voted for the winner! overreport of the primary vote for the party nominee in the national election studies. Political Behavior, 21(3), 197–215. CrossRef
- Berinsky, A. J. (2005). The perverse consequences of electoral reform in the united states. American Politics Research, 33(4), 471–491. CrossRef
- Berry, J. M., Portney, K. E., & Thomson, K. (1993). The rebirth of urban democracy. Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
- Busch, A. E. (2008). The reemergence of the iowa caucuses: A new trend, an aberration, or a useful reminder? In W. G. Mayer (Ed.), The making of the presidential candidates 2008 (pp. 39–74). Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
- Citrin, J., Schickler, E., Sides, J. (2003). What if everyone voted? Simulating the impact of increased turnout in senate elections. American Journal of Political Science, 47(1), 75–90. CrossRef
- Clark, P. B., & Wilson, J. Q. (1961). Incentive systems: A theory of organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 6(2), 129–166. CrossRef
- Dale, A., & Strauss, A. (2009). Don’t forget to vote: Text message reminders as a mobilization tool. American Journal of Political Science, 53(4), 787–804. CrossRef
- DiClerico, R. E. (2000). In defense of the presidential nomination process. In: DiClerico, R. E., & Davis, J. W. (Eds.), Choosing our choices (pp. 51–78). Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.
- Geer, J. G. (1986). Rules governing presidential primaries. Journal of Politics, 48(4), 1006–1025. CrossRef
- Geer, J. G. (1988). Assessing the representativeness of electorates in presidential primaries. American Journal of Political Science, 32(4), 929–945. CrossRef
- Gerber, A. S., Green, D. P., Larimer, C. W. (2008). Social pressure and voter turnout: Evidence from a large-scale field experiment. American Political Science Review, 102(01), 33–48. CrossRef
- Gerber, E. R., & Morton, R. B. (1998). Primary election systems and representation. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 14(2), 304–324. CrossRef
- Grose, C. R., & Russell, C. A. (2008). Avoiding the vote: A theory and field experiment of the social costs of public political participation. Working paper.
- Highton, B. (2004). Registration and turnout in the United States. Perspectives on Politics, 2(3), 507–515. CrossRef
- Imai, K., King, G., & Olivia, L. (2007). Toward a common framework for statistical analysis and development. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 17(4), 892–913. CrossRef
- Kenney, P. J., & Rice, T. W. (1985). Voter turnout in presidential primaries: A cross-sectional examination. Political Behavior, 7(1), 101–112. CrossRef
- Knack, S., & Kropf, M. E. (1998). For shame! the effect of community cooperative context on the probability of voting. Political Psychology, 19(3), 585–599. CrossRef
- Krosnick, J. A., & Lupia, A. (2009). American national election study 2008 time series. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan. Computer file, Version May 11, 2009.
- Lengle, J. I., & Shafer, B. (1976). Primary rules, political power, and social change. American Political Science Review, 70(1), 25–40. CrossRef
- Lupia, A., Krosnick, J. A., Luevano, P., DeBell, M., Donakowski, D. (2009). User’s guide to the ANES 2008 time series study. University of Michigan and Stanford University.
- Marshall, T. R. (1978). Turnout and representation: Caucuses versus primaries. American Journal of Political Science, 22(1), 169–182. CrossRef
- Mayer, W. G. (1996). Caucuses: How they work, what difference they make. In W. G. Mayer (Ed.), Pursuit of the white house: How we choose our presidential nominees (pp. 105–157, Chap. 4). Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
- McAdam, D., Tarrow, S., Tilly, C. (2001). Dynamics of contention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
- Mendelberg, T. (2002). The deliberative citizen: Theory and evidence. Political Decision Making, Deliberation and Participation, 6(1), 151–193.
- Niven, D. (2001). The limits of mobilization: Turnout evidence from state house primaries. Political Behavior, 23(4), 335–350. CrossRef
- Norrander, B. (1989). Ideological representativeness of presidential primary voters. American Journal of Political Science, 33(3), 570–587. CrossRef
- Norrander, B. (1996). Presidential nomination politics in the post-reform era. Political Research Quarterly, 49(4), 875–915.
- Panagopoulos. C. (2010). Are caucuses bad for democracy. Political Science Quarterly, 125(3), 425–442.
- Parent, T., Wayne, J., Calvin, C., & Weber, R. E. (1987). Voting outcomes in the 1984 democratic party primaries and caucuses. American Political Science Review, 81(1), 67–84. CrossRef
- Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.
- Ranney, A. (1972). Turnout and representation in presidential primary electoins. American Political Science Review, 66(1), 21–37. CrossRef
- Redlawsk, D., Bowen, D., Tolbert, C. (2008). Comparing caucus and registered voter support for the 2008 presidential candidates in Iowa. Political Science and Politics, 41(1), 129–138.
- Rosenstone, S. J., & Hansen, J. M. (1993). Mobilization, participation, and democracy in America. New York: Macmillan.
- Shafer, B., & Wichowsky, A. (2009). Institutional structure and democratic values: A research note on a natural experiment. The Forum, 7(2), 1–23. CrossRef
- Squire, P. (2008). The Iowa caucuses, 1972–2008: A eulogy. The Forum, 5(4), 1–9. CrossRef
- Stone, W. J., Abramowitz, A. I., Rapoport, R. B. (1989). How representative are the Iowa caucuses?. In P. Squire (Ed.), The Iowa caucuses and the presidential nominating process (pp. 19–49). Boulde: Westview Press, Hugh.
- Stone, W. J, Rapoport, R. B., Abramowitz, A. I. (1992). Candidate support in presidential nomination campaigns: The case of Iowa in 1984. Journal of Politics, 54(4), 1074–1097. CrossRef
- Trish, B. (1999). Does organization matter? a critical-case analysis from recent presidential nomination politics. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 29(4), 873–896. CrossRef
- Verba, S., Schlozman, K. L., Brady, H. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
- Winebrenner, H. (1998). The Iowa precinct caucuses: The making of a media event. Ames: Iowa State University Press.
- Wolfinger, R. E., & Rosenstone, S. J. (1980). Who votes?. New Haven: Yale University Press.
- Primary Voters Versus Caucus Goers and the Peripheral Motivations of Political Participation
Volume 34, Issue 4 , pp 689-718
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- Presidential nomination contests
- Comparative electoral institutions
- Eitan Hersh (1)
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Department of Government, Harvard University, 1737 Cambridge Street, Cambridge, MA, 02138, USA