Two Parties, Two Types of Nominees, Two Paths to Winning a Presidential Nomination, 1972-2004
Contrary to findings that show the contemporary nomination process, regardless of party, favoring early frontrunners, this article shows that the eventual Democratic nominee is typically different from and often travels a different path to victory than the eventual Republican nominee. Since 1972, th...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Presidential studies quarterly 2007-06, Vol.37 (2), p.203-227 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 227 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 203 |
container_title | Presidential studies quarterly |
container_volume | 37 |
creator | BERGGREN, D. JASON |
description | Contrary to findings that show the contemporary nomination process, regardless of party, favoring early frontrunners, this article shows that the eventual Democratic nominee is typically different from and often travels a different path to victory than the eventual Republican nominee. Since 1972, the eventual Democratic winners began as relatively unknown candidates with single‐digit support who emerge as the frontrunner late in the process, sometimes just before the voting begins in Iowa and New Hampshire and sometimes just after the first votes are cast. John Kerry is only the latest Democratic example. In contrast, Republican winners have been national figures and have consistently been the early favorites a year before any votes were cast or large sums of money raised. To date, the accuracy of partyless models is driven largely by Republican successes. These models may be better at predicting Republican nominees than predicting Democratic nominees. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1111/j.1741-5705.2007.02594.x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_59763411</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A165362688</galeid><jstor_id>20619314</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>A165362688</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c7994-a3e7698cc6da9e1471b6b29e8a70721c13ed733ae2bc66614322208bc142cdb13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNk1uPEjEUgCdGE9fVn2Ay8cHEuDP2MtNOH3xA4gKRsOii-GKaUg5YHKbYDln493YcxWAw0j709n1NT3NOFMUYpTi0V6sU8wwnOUd5ShDiKSK5yNLdvejicHA_ukCUoSQTuHgYPfJ-hRDKBKUX0ZfJnY3HytUG_FXcLCb7DfjYLuKRXZsKfm-PVf3Vx7WNp6aqTLWMVTx24M0cqtqosqVVbWx1FWPBSRIekz2OHixU6eHJr_Ey-nj9dtLtJ8Ob3qDbGSaaC5EligJnotCazZUAnHE8YzMioFAccYI1pjDnlCogM80YwxklhKBipnFG9HyG6WX0vL134-z3Lfharo3XUJaqArv1Mhec0Qz_H6SMCyoYC-Czv8CV3boqBCEJzlnBEWmgpIWWqgRpqoWtndJLqMCp0lawMGG7g1lOGWFFEfj0BB_6HNZGnxReHAmBqWFXL9XWezm4HZ3P9gfns296x-zLf7OdybR7_iuK3vCYTU6x2pYlLEGGDOneHPNFy2tnvXewkBtn1srtJUayKQa5kk3OyybnZVMM8mcxyF1QX7fqXfjh_dmeHN--b2bBf9r6K19bd_AJYlhQnP0JxfgQwuFcuW-SccpzOR315LD_7vOHT9dcjukPZwQeZg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>215687026</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Two Parties, Two Types of Nominees, Two Paths to Winning a Presidential Nomination, 1972-2004</title><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>EBSCOhost Political Science Complete</source><source>HeinOnline</source><creator>BERGGREN, D. JASON</creator><creatorcontrib>BERGGREN, D. JASON</creatorcontrib><description>Contrary to findings that show the contemporary nomination process, regardless of party, favoring early frontrunners, this article shows that the eventual Democratic nominee is typically different from and often travels a different path to victory than the eventual Republican nominee. Since 1972, the eventual Democratic winners began as relatively unknown candidates with single‐digit support who emerge as the frontrunner late in the process, sometimes just before the voting begins in Iowa and New Hampshire and sometimes just after the first votes are cast. John Kerry is only the latest Democratic example. In contrast, Republican winners have been national figures and have consistently been the early favorites a year before any votes were cast or large sums of money raised. To date, the accuracy of partyless models is driven largely by Republican successes. These models may be better at predicting Republican nominees than predicting Democratic nominees.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0360-4918</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1741-5705</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1741-5705.2007.02594.x</identifier><identifier>CODEN: PSQUDS</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Malden, USA: Blackwell Publishing Inc</publisher><subject>Candidates ; Carter, Jimmy (American president) ; Caucuses ; Competition ; Democratic parties ; Elections ; Fund raising ; Interest groups ; Kerry, John ; Lieberman, Joe ; Longitudinal studies ; McGovern, George ; Nomination ; Nominations ; Political campaigns ; Political candidates ; Political history ; Political Parties ; Political support ; Polls ; Presidential elections ; Presidential nominations ; Presidents ; Primaries & caucuses ; Primary elections ; Republican parties ; Senators ; U.S.A ; Vice presidents ; Voting ; Voting Behavior</subject><ispartof>Presidential studies quarterly, 2007-06, Vol.37 (2), p.203-227</ispartof><rights>Copyright 2007 Center for the Study of the Presidency</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright Center for the Study of the Presidency Jun 2007</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c7994-a3e7698cc6da9e1471b6b29e8a70721c13ed733ae2bc66614322208bc142cdb13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c7994-a3e7698cc6da9e1471b6b29e8a70721c13ed733ae2bc66614322208bc142cdb13</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/20619314$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/20619314$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,1417,12845,27924,27925,45574,45575,58017,58250</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>BERGGREN, D. JASON</creatorcontrib><title>Two Parties, Two Types of Nominees, Two Paths to Winning a Presidential Nomination, 1972-2004</title><title>Presidential studies quarterly</title><addtitle>Presidential Studies Quarterly</addtitle><description>Contrary to findings that show the contemporary nomination process, regardless of party, favoring early frontrunners, this article shows that the eventual Democratic nominee is typically different from and often travels a different path to victory than the eventual Republican nominee. Since 1972, the eventual Democratic winners began as relatively unknown candidates with single‐digit support who emerge as the frontrunner late in the process, sometimes just before the voting begins in Iowa and New Hampshire and sometimes just after the first votes are cast. John Kerry is only the latest Democratic example. In contrast, Republican winners have been national figures and have consistently been the early favorites a year before any votes were cast or large sums of money raised. To date, the accuracy of partyless models is driven largely by Republican successes. These models may be better at predicting Republican nominees than predicting Democratic nominees.</description><subject>Candidates</subject><subject>Carter, Jimmy (American president)</subject><subject>Caucuses</subject><subject>Competition</subject><subject>Democratic parties</subject><subject>Elections</subject><subject>Fund raising</subject><subject>Interest groups</subject><subject>Kerry, John</subject><subject>Lieberman, Joe</subject><subject>Longitudinal studies</subject><subject>McGovern, George</subject><subject>Nomination</subject><subject>Nominations</subject><subject>Political campaigns</subject><subject>Political candidates</subject><subject>Political history</subject><subject>Political Parties</subject><subject>Political support</subject><subject>Polls</subject><subject>Presidential elections</subject><subject>Presidential nominations</subject><subject>Presidents</subject><subject>Primaries & caucuses</subject><subject>Primary elections</subject><subject>Republican parties</subject><subject>Senators</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><subject>Vice presidents</subject><subject>Voting</subject><subject>Voting Behavior</subject><issn>0360-4918</issn><issn>1741-5705</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><sourceid>PQHSC</sourceid><recordid>eNqNk1uPEjEUgCdGE9fVn2Ay8cHEuDP2MtNOH3xA4gKRsOii-GKaUg5YHKbYDln493YcxWAw0j709n1NT3NOFMUYpTi0V6sU8wwnOUd5ShDiKSK5yNLdvejicHA_ukCUoSQTuHgYPfJ-hRDKBKUX0ZfJnY3HytUG_FXcLCb7DfjYLuKRXZsKfm-PVf3Vx7WNp6aqTLWMVTx24M0cqtqosqVVbWx1FWPBSRIekz2OHixU6eHJr_Ey-nj9dtLtJ8Ob3qDbGSaaC5EligJnotCazZUAnHE8YzMioFAccYI1pjDnlCogM80YwxklhKBipnFG9HyG6WX0vL134-z3Lfharo3XUJaqArv1Mhec0Qz_H6SMCyoYC-Czv8CV3boqBCEJzlnBEWmgpIWWqgRpqoWtndJLqMCp0lawMGG7g1lOGWFFEfj0BB_6HNZGnxReHAmBqWFXL9XWezm4HZ3P9gfns296x-zLf7OdybR7_iuK3vCYTU6x2pYlLEGGDOneHPNFy2tnvXewkBtn1srtJUayKQa5kk3OyybnZVMM8mcxyF1QX7fqXfjh_dmeHN--b2bBf9r6K19bd_AJYlhQnP0JxfgQwuFcuW-SccpzOR315LD_7vOHT9dcjukPZwQeZg</recordid><startdate>200706</startdate><enddate>200706</enddate><creator>BERGGREN, D. JASON</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Inc</general><general>Blackwell Publishing</general><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><general>Center for the Study of the Presidency</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8GL</scope><scope>ATWCN</scope><scope>IBG</scope><scope>IHI</scope><scope>ISN</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88F</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>EHMNL</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>M1Q</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQHSC</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200706</creationdate><title>Two Parties, Two Types of Nominees, Two Paths to Winning a Presidential Nomination, 1972-2004</title><author>BERGGREN, D. JASON</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c7994-a3e7698cc6da9e1471b6b29e8a70721c13ed733ae2bc66614322208bc142cdb13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Candidates</topic><topic>Carter, Jimmy (American president)</topic><topic>Caucuses</topic><topic>Competition</topic><topic>Democratic parties</topic><topic>Elections</topic><topic>Fund raising</topic><topic>Interest groups</topic><topic>Kerry, John</topic><topic>Lieberman, Joe</topic><topic>Longitudinal studies</topic><topic>McGovern, George</topic><topic>Nomination</topic><topic>Nominations</topic><topic>Political campaigns</topic><topic>Political candidates</topic><topic>Political history</topic><topic>Political Parties</topic><topic>Political support</topic><topic>Polls</topic><topic>Presidential elections</topic><topic>Presidential nominations</topic><topic>Presidents</topic><topic>Primaries & caucuses</topic><topic>Primary elections</topic><topic>Republican parties</topic><topic>Senators</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><topic>Vice presidents</topic><topic>Voting</topic><topic>Voting Behavior</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>BERGGREN, D. JASON</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: High School</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Middle School</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Biography</collection><collection>Gale In Context: U.S. History</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Canada</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Military Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>UK & Ireland Database</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>Military Database</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>History Study Center</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><jtitle>Presidential studies quarterly</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>BERGGREN, D. JASON</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Two Parties, Two Types of Nominees, Two Paths to Winning a Presidential Nomination, 1972-2004</atitle><jtitle>Presidential studies quarterly</jtitle><addtitle>Presidential Studies Quarterly</addtitle><date>2007-06</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>203</spage><epage>227</epage><pages>203-227</pages><issn>0360-4918</issn><eissn>1741-5705</eissn><coden>PSQUDS</coden><abstract>Contrary to findings that show the contemporary nomination process, regardless of party, favoring early frontrunners, this article shows that the eventual Democratic nominee is typically different from and often travels a different path to victory than the eventual Republican nominee. Since 1972, the eventual Democratic winners began as relatively unknown candidates with single‐digit support who emerge as the frontrunner late in the process, sometimes just before the voting begins in Iowa and New Hampshire and sometimes just after the first votes are cast. John Kerry is only the latest Democratic example. In contrast, Republican winners have been national figures and have consistently been the early favorites a year before any votes were cast or large sums of money raised. To date, the accuracy of partyless models is driven largely by Republican successes. These models may be better at predicting Republican nominees than predicting Democratic nominees.</abstract><cop>Malden, USA</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Inc</pub><doi>10.1111/j.1741-5705.2007.02594.x</doi><tpages>25</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0360-4918 |
ispartof | Presidential studies quarterly, 2007-06, Vol.37 (2), p.203-227 |
issn | 0360-4918 1741-5705 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_59763411 |
source | Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Access via Wiley Online Library; Jstor Complete Legacy; EBSCOhost Political Science Complete; HeinOnline |
subjects | Candidates Carter, Jimmy (American president) Caucuses Competition Democratic parties Elections Fund raising Interest groups Kerry, John Lieberman, Joe Longitudinal studies McGovern, George Nomination Nominations Political campaigns Political candidates Political history Political Parties Political support Polls Presidential elections Presidential nominations Presidents Primaries & caucuses Primary elections Republican parties Senators U.S.A Vice presidents Voting Voting Behavior |
title | Two Parties, Two Types of Nominees, Two Paths to Winning a Presidential Nomination, 1972-2004 |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-20T11%3A01%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Two%20Parties,%20Two%20Types%20of%20Nominees,%20Two%20Paths%20to%20Winning%20a%20Presidential%20Nomination,%201972-2004&rft.jtitle=Presidential%20studies%20quarterly&rft.au=BERGGREN,%20D.%20JASON&rft.date=2007-06&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=203&rft.epage=227&rft.pages=203-227&rft.issn=0360-4918&rft.eissn=1741-5705&rft.coden=PSQUDS&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1741-5705.2007.02594.x&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA165362688%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=215687026&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_galeid=A165362688&rft_jstor_id=20619314&rfr_iscdi=true |