Research suggests that endorsements should affect outcomes in low-information elections such as primaries, but that hypothesis has not yet been tested empirically. Based on a survey of 2002 congressional campaigns, this article describes the universe of individuals and groups that offer endorsements to primary candidates and analyzes their effects on primary election results. It finds that a primary candidate’s share of the partisan endorsements issued in the race significantly affects the candidate’s vote share, even controlling for campaign funds and candidate quality. Implications for theories of candidate emergence and success are discussed.
AnsolabehereStephenGerberAlan. 1996. The effects of filing fees and petition requirements on U.S. House elections. Legislative Studies Quarterly21:249-64.
2.
ArceneauxKevinKolodnyRobin. 2007. The messenger or the message? Group endorsements, heuristics, and grassroots campaigning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago.
3.
BanksJeffrey S.KiewietD. Roderick1989. Explaining patterns of candidate competition in congressional elections. American Journal of Political Science33:997-1015.
4.
BawnKathleenCohenMartyKarolDavidMasketSethNoelHansZallerJohn R.2006. A theory of parties. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia.
5.
BernsteinJonathan. 1999. The expanded party in American politics. PhD diss., University of California, Berkeley.
6.
BiancoWilliam T.1984. Strategic decisions on candidacy in U.S. congressional districts. Legislative Studies Quarterly9:351-64.
7.
BondJon R.CovingtonCaryFleisherRichard. 1985. Explaining challenger quality in congressional elections. Journal of Politics47:510-29.
8.
CanonDavid T.1993. Sacrificial lambs or strategic politicians? Political amateurs in U.S. House elections. American Journal of Political Science37:1119-41.
CohenMartyKarolDavidNoelHansZallerJohn R.2008. The party decides: Presidential nominations before and after reform. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
11.
FowlerErika FranklinGoldsteinKenneth M.2006. Free media in campaigns. In The electoral challenge: Theory meets practice, ed. CraigStephen C., 97-120. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
12.
GrossmanGene M.HelpmanElhanan. 1999. Competing for endorsements. American Economic Review89:501-24.
13.
HeatheringtonMarc J.LarsonBruceGlobettiSuzanne. 2003. The redistricting cycle and strategic candidate decisions in U.S. House races. Journal of Politics65:1221-34.
14.
HerrnsonPaul S.1988. Party campaigning in the 1980s. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
15.
HerrnsonPaul S.1990. Reemergent national party organizations. In The parties respond: Changes in the American party system, ed. MaiselL. Sandy, 41-67. Boulder, CO: Westview.
16.
HerrnsonPaul S.GimpelJames G.1995. District conditions and primary divisiveness in congressional elections. Political Research Quarterly48:117-34.
17.
JacobsonGary. 2001. The politics of congressional elections. 5th ed.New York: Longman.
18.
JacobsonGary C.KernellSamuel. 1983. Strategy and choice in congressional elections. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
19.
JewellMalcolm E.1999. Parties and candidate recruitment in American politics. In On parties: Essays honoring Austin Ranney, ed. PolsbyNelson W.WolfingerRaymond E., 89-109. Berkeley, CA: Institute of Governmental Studies Press.
20.
JewellMalcolm E.MorehouseSarah M.2001. Political parties and elections in American states. Washington, DC: CQ Press.
21.
KazeeThomas A.1983. The deterrent effect of incumbency on recruiting challengers in U.S. House elections. Legislative Studies Quarterly8:469-80.
22.
KazeeThomas A. (ed). 1994. Who Runs for Congress: Ambition, Context, and Candidate Emergence. Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.
23.
KazeeThomas A.ThornberryMary C.1990. Where’s the party? Congressional candidate recruitment and American party organizations. Western Political Quarterly43:61-80.
24.
KogerGregoryNoelHansMasketSeth. 2005. We appreciate your support: Information exchange and extended party networks. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC.
25.
KolodnyRobinLoganAngela. 1998. Political consultants and the extension of party goals. PS: Political Science & Politics31:155-59.
26.
KrasnoJonathan S.GreenDonald Philip. 1988. Preempting quality challengers in House elections. Journal of Politics50:920-36.
27.
LauRichard R.RedlawskDavid P.2001. Advantages and disadvantages of cognitive heuristics in political decision making. American Journal of Political Science45:951-71.
28.
LawlessJenniferFoxRichard. 2005. It takes a candidate: Why women don’t run for office. New York: Cambridge University Press.
29.
LazarusJeff. 2005. Unintended consequences: Anticipation of general election outcomes and primary election divisiveness. Legislative Studies Quarterly30:435-61.
30.
LupiaArthur1994. Shortcuts versus encyclopedias: Information and voting behavior in California insurance reform elections. American Political Science Review88:63-76.
31.
MaestasCherie D.FultonSarahMaiselSandyStoneWalter J.2006. When to risk it? Institutions, ambitions, and the decision to run for the U.S. House. American Political Science Review100:195-208.
32.
MaestasCherie D.RugeleyCynthia R.2008. Assessing the “experience bonus” through examining strategic entry, candidate quality, and campaign receipts in U.S. House elections. American Journal of Political Science52: 520-35.
33.
MasketSeth. 2009. No middle ground: How informal party organizations control nominations and polarize legislatures. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
34.
McdermottMonika L.2006. Not for members only: Group endorsements as electoral information cues. Political Research Quarterly59:249-57.
35.
MonroeJ. P.2001. The political party matrix. Albany: State University of New York Press.
36.
PowellRichard J.2000. The impact of term limits on the candidacy decisions of state legislators in U.S. House elections. Legislative Studies Quarterly25:645-61.
37.
SanbonmatsuKira. 2006. The legislative party and candidate recruitment in the American states. Party Politics12: 233-56.
38.
SchwartzMildred A.1990. The party network: The robust organization of Illinois republicans. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
39.
SkinnerRichard. 2007. More than money: Interest group action in congressional elections. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
40.
StoneWalter J.MaiselL. SandyMaestasCherie D.2004. Quality counts: Extending the strategic politician model of incumbent deterrence. American Journal of Political Science48:479-95.
