Primary elections in the United States reflect the most inclusive nomination process among political parties across democracies. The desire for mass participation in party nominations appears embedded in a widespread populist ideal. It remains unclear, however, the extent to which voters believe that elites should be able to influence the process. Using data from the 2018 Cooperative Congressional Election Study, we demonstrate that levels of political engagement, perceived ideological distance from the party, and partisanship predict the degree of support for popular selection of party nominees. We find key differences between the parties, with Republicans, particularly conservatives, more strongly opposed to elite influence. Surprisingly, most voters tend to have a pluralistic approach to selecting nominees, allowing for party officials and experts to weigh in on picking the party’s candidates. The findings have implications for how we conceive of political parties and the kinds of nomination reforms that might be embraced by voters.
AchenCHBartelsLM (2016) Democracy for Realists: Why Elections Do Not Produce Responsive Government. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
2.
AlmondGVerbaS (1963) The Civic Culture: Political Attitudes and Democracy in Five Nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
3.
BartelsLM (1988) Presidential Primaries and the Dynamics of Public Choice. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
4.
BawnKCohenMKarolDMasketS (2012) A theory of political parties: Groups, policy demands and nominations in American politics. Perspectives on Politics10(3): 571–597.
5.
BlaisAAchenCH (2019) Civic duty and voter turnout. Political Behavior41(2): 473–497.
6.
BoatrightRG (2013) Getting Primaried: The Changing Politics of Congressional Primary Challenges. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
7.
CainBEGrayC (2018) Parties by design: pluralist party reform in a polarized era. New York University Law Review93: 621.
8.
CainBE (2014) Democracy More or Less: America’s Political Reform Quandary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9.
CeaserJW (1982) Reforming the Reforms: A Critical Analysis of the Presidential Selection Process, 1982. Pensacola: Ballinger Publishing.
10.
CohenMKarolDNoelH, et al. (2008) The Party Decides: Presidential Nominations Before and After Reform. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
11.
DahlRA (2005) Who Governs? Democracy and Power in an American City, 2nd ed. New Haven: Yale University Press.
12.
DownsA (1957) An Economic Theory of Democracy. New York: Harper.
13.
DuvergerM (1954) Political Parties: Their Organization and Activity in the Modern State. London: Methuen & Co.
14.
EpsteinLD (1986) Political Parties in the American Mold. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
15.
FreemanJ (1986) The political culture of the Democratic and Republican Parties. Political Science Quarterly101(3): 327–356.
16.
GardbaumSPildesRH (2018) Populism and institutional design: methods of selecting candidates for chief executive symposium: a debatable role in the process. New York University Law Review93: 647–708.
17.
GerberASHuberGABiggersDR, et al. (2017) Why don’t people vote in U.S. primary elections? Assessing theoretical explanations for reduced participation. Electoral Studies45: 119–129.
18.
GreenDPPalmquistBSchicklerE (2002) Partisan Hearts and Minds: Political Parties and the Social Identities of Voters. New Haven: Yale University Press.
19.
GrossmannMHopkinsDA (2016) Asymmetric Politics: Ideological Republicans and Group Interest Democrats. New York: Oxford University Press.
20.
HazanRYRahatG (2010) Democracy Within Parties: Candidate Selection Methods and Their Political Consequences. New York: Oxford University Press.
HibbingJRTheiss-MorseE (2002) Stealth Democracy: Americans’ Beliefs About How Government Should Work. New York: Cambridge University Press.
23.
KamarckEC (2016) Primary Politics: Everything You Need to Know About How America Nominates Its Presidential Candidates, 3rd ed. Washington: Brookings Institution Press.
24.
KatzRS (2001) The problem of candidate selection and models of party democracy. Party Politics7(3): 277–296.
25.
KeyVO (1958) Politics, Parties and Pressure Groups, 4th ed. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Company.
26.
LevitskySZiblattD (2018) How Democracies Die. New York: Crown.
27.
McGheeEMasketSShorB, et al. (2014) A primary cause of partisanship? Nomination systems and legislator ideology. American Journal of Political Science58(2): 337–351.
28.
MasketSE (2009) No Middle Ground: How Informal Party Organizations Control Nominations and Polarize Legislatures. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
29.
MayerWG (2000) In Pursuit of the White House 2000: How We Choose Our Presidential Nominees. New York: Chatham House Publishers.
30.
NorranderB (2015) The Imperfect Primary: Oddities, Biases and Strengths in U.S. Presidential Nomination Politics, 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.
PolsbyNW (1983) Consequences of Party Reform. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
33.
RahatGHazanRYKatzRS (2008) Democracy and political parties: on the uneasy relationships between participation, competition and representation. Party Politics14(6): 663–683.
34.
SartoriG (1976) Parties and Party Systems: A Framework for Analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press.
35.
SchattschneiderEE (1942) Party Government. New York: Farrar and Rinehart.
36.
ShaferBE (1983) Quiet Revolution: The Struggle for the Democratic Party and the Shaping of Post-Reform Politics. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
37.
ShaferBE (1988) Bifurcated Politics: Evolution and Reform in the National Party Convention. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
38.
ShaferBEWagnerRL (2019) The Long War Over Party Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39.
SnyderJMTingMM (2011) Electoral selection with parties and primaries. American Journal of Political Science55: 781–795.
40.
SpiesDCKaiserA (2012) Does the mode of candidate selection affect the representativeness of parties?Party Politics20(4): 576–590.
41.
TolbertCJRedlawskDPBowenDC (2009) Reforming presidential nominations: rotating state primaries or a national primary?PS: Political Science & Politics42(1): 71–79.
42.
TrumanDB (1951) The Governmental Process: Political Interests and Public Opinion. New York: Knopf.
43.
UslanerEM (1999) The Movers and the Shirkers: Representatives and Ideologues in the Senate. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
44.
WareA (2002) The American Direct Primary: Party Institutionalization and Transformation in the North. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
45.
WilliamsonVSkocpolTCogginJ (2011) The Tea Party and the remaking of Republican conservatism. Perspectives on Politics9(1): 25–43.
46.
WilsonJQ (1962) The Amateur Democrat: Club Politics in Three Cities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
