Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-5g6vh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T07:32:02.390Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Expectations and Preferences in Presidential Nominating Campaigns

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Larry M. Bartels
Larry M. Bartels*
Affiliation:
University of Rochester
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Survey data from the preconvention waves of the 1980 National Election Study are used to estimate the effect of expectations about who will be nominated on respondents' own preferences. The results confirm the conventional belief that bandwagons play an important role in nominating campaigns; at the same time, they suggest that the dynamics of the nominating process may be more subtle than simple bandwagon models would indicate. First, preferences are strongly and consistently projected onto expectations, making the relationship of central interest a reciprocal one. Second, the bases of candidate choice appear to change systematically with political circumstances. In close, volatile campaigns, support for bandwagon candidates (like George Bush in early 1980) is based largely on favorable expectations and on relatively general, diffuse political evaluations (e.g., “leadership”). By comparison, when expectations about the nomination are very one-sided, their impact on preferences approaches zero, and more specific, substantive political evaluations become increasingly important.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 79 , Issue 3 , September 1985 , pp. 804 - 815
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1985

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.)

References

Aldrich, J. H. Before the convention: Strategies and choices in presidential nomination campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980. (a)10.7208/chicago/9780226922447.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aldrich, J. H. A dynamic model of presidential nomination campaigns. American Political Science Review, 1980, 74, 651–669. (b)10.2307/1958148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, L. M. Presidential primaries and the dynamics of public choice. Doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, 1983.Google Scholar
Berelson, B. R., Lazarsfeld, P. F., & McPhee, W. N. Voting. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1954.Google Scholar
Brady, H. E. Knowledge, strategy, and momentum in presidential primaries. Working Paper, Graduate School of Public Policy, University of California, Berkeley, 1984.Google Scholar
Brady, H. E., & Sniderman, P. M. Left-shift: ideological maps of politics. Unpublished manuscript, University of California, Berkeley, and Stanford University, 1983.Google Scholar
Cannon, L., & Peterson, W. GOP. In Harwood, R. (Ed.). The pursuit of the presidency 1980. New York: Berkley Books, 1980.Google Scholar
Gopoian, J. D. Issue preferences and candidate choice in presidential primaries. American Journal of Political Science, 1982, 26, 523–546.10.2307/2110941CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harwood, R. (Ed.). The pursuit of the presidency 1980. New York: Berkley Books, 1980.Google Scholar
Lee, L. F. Simultaneous equations models with discrete and censored dependent variables. In Manski, C. F. & McFadden, D. (Eds.). Structural analysis of discrete data with econometric applications. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 1981.Google Scholar
Maddala, G. S. Limited-dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.10.1017/CBO9780511810176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markus, G. B., & Converse, P. E. A dynamic simultaneous equation model of electoral choice. American Political Science Review, 1979, 73, 1055–1070.10.2307/1953989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marshall, T. R. Presidential nominations in a reform age. New York: Praeger, 1981.Google Scholar
Matthews, D. R. “Winnowing”: The news media and the 1976 presidential nominations. In Barber, J. D. (Ed.). Race for the presidency: The media and the nominating process. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1978.Google Scholar
Page, B. I., & Jones, C. C. Reciprocal effects of policy preferences, party loyalties and the vote. American Political Science Review, 1979, 73, 1071–1089.10.2307/1953990CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, M., Conover, N., & Sheehan, M. The media at mid-year: A bad year for McLuhanities? Public Opinion, June/July 1980, 41–45.Google Scholar
Schram, M. Running for president: A journal of the Carter campaign. New York: Pocket Books, 1977.Google Scholar
Shanks, J. M., & Palmquist, B. Intra-party candidate choice in 1980: An early portrait of pre-convention preference. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association, Cincinnati, April 1981.Google Scholar
Stone, W. J., & Abramowitz, A. I. Winning may not be everything, but it's more than we thought: Presidential party activists in 1980. American Political Science Review, 1983, 77, 945–956.10.2307/1957568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Witcover, J. Marathon: The pursuit of the presidency 1972-1976. New York: New American Library, 1977.Google Scholar