Modes of Elite Political Participation: Contributors to the 1972 Presidential Candidates

Brown, Chris; HEDGES, ROMAN; Powell, Lynda W.

doi:10.2307/2110865

Cited by 27 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although information about candidates in a large prenomination field tends to be low, potential contributors-particularly at the primary stage-are likely to be among the most actively involved and well informed (see, e.g.. Brown, Hedges, and Powell 1980). These characteristics make loyalty-based contributing all tbe more plausible; when highly committed voters are faced with information indicating a majority or trend away from their viewpoint, they may stand steadfast, increasing the intensity of commitment to their original views and rallying behind their candidate (see e.g., Fleitas 1971;Gaskell 1974;Ceci and Kain 1982;Mutz 1992;Price 1989).…”

Section: Motivations To Contributementioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Horse-Race Coverage on Campaign Coffers: Strategic Contributing in Presidential Primaries

Mutz

1995

The Journal of Politics

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The quantity of "horse-race" coverage of political campaigns has been amply documented, but its consequences for the dynamics of campaigns are less well understood. This study examines the effects of media portrayals of public support for candidates on the behavior of potential campaign contributors. This relationship is tested in the context of the four leading Democratic presidential primary candidates in 1988. A time-series analysis of contributor behavior suggests that horse-race spin-that is, the extent of media coverage suggesting a candidate is gaining or losing political support ^helps determine the frequency of campaign contributions. Consistent with previous research, some contributors are motivated to donate by coverage suggesting that their strongly favored candidate is losing ground, while other candidacies benefit from coverage suggesting increased viability. Overall, findings suggest that strategic considerations weigh heavily in decisions to donate money to political candidates. The quantity of "horse-race" coverage of political campaigns has been amply documented, but its consequences for the dynamics of campaigns are less well understood. This study examines the effects ofmediaportrayalsof public support for candidates on the behavior of potential campaign contributors. This relationship is tested in the context of the four leading Democratic presidential primary candidates in 1988. A time-series analysis of contributor behavior suggests that horse-race spin-that is, the extent of media coverage suggesting a candidate is gaining or losing political support ^helps determine the frequency of campaign contributions. Consistent with previous research, some contributors are motivated to donate by coverage suggesting that their strongly favored candidate is losing ground, while other candidacies benefit from coverage suggesting increased viability. Overall, findings suggest that strategic considerations weigh heavily in decisions to donate money to political candidates.o, 'bservers of American electoral behavior have long assumed that everyone loves a winner. This principle also has been assumed to apply to the behavior of campaign contributors. In 1932, an analysis of incentives underlying campaign contributions claimed that people "give much as they put money on a winning horse" (Overacker 1932, 190-91). More recent elections abound with claims that perceptions of public support bring with them tangible benefits in the form of financial contributions. This is popularly claimed to have occurred for Carter in 1976, for Anderson in 1980, and for Hart in 1984(Pomper 1989, although the precise mechanism or dynamics of the proposed effects were never documented.Horse-race campaign coverage, that is, news emphasizing who is ahead or behind, or gaining or losing ground, is the primary means by which people develop perceptions of the extent of mass public support for candidates. Although the extent of horse-race coverage has been well documented and widely disparaged as a pernicious force in contem...

show abstract

Section: Motivations To Contributementioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Horse-Race Coverage on Campaign Coffers: Strategic Contributing in Presidential Primaries

Mutz

1995

The Journal of Politics

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Contributions are also an important form of political participation, one with great consequences for the conduct of campaigns and the outcome of elections (Abramowitz 1988; Coleman and Manna 2000; Herrnson 2003; Jacobson 2003). Research has shown that individuals’ demographic characteristics affect their propensity to contribute, as well as how campaigns mobilize contributions (Brown, Hedges, and Powell 1980; Brown, Powell, and Wilcox 1995; Francia et al 2003; Mutz 1995; Verba, Schlozman, and Brady 1995).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Political Geography of Campaign Contributions in American Politics

Gimpel¹,

Lee²,

Kaminski³

2006

The Journal of Politics

124

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the geographic origins of individual campaign contributions to the Republican and Democratic parties and their candidates from 1992 to 2004. Results demonstrate that contributions are affected by how potential givers are situated in space. There is a geographic pattern to giving independent of wealth, age, occupation, and other individual characteristics that predict donations. Campaign contributors are not only people with resources and incentives to participate, but also part of networks in which social influence can be brought to bear in the solicitation of contributions. The article also shows that the Republican and Democratic donor bases are much more similar geographically than their bases of electoral support. campaigns need financial resources. This article sets campaign contributions in geographic context to answer two important questions about campaign contributions.First, where do parties and major party candidates raise their funds? Much ink has been spilled recently about the rivalry between "red" and "blue" electorates and the extent to which the parties have either distinctive or intersecting bases of mass support. Contributing, a demanding form of political participation, is not uniformly distributed throughout the population (Brady, Schlozman, and Verba 1999;Verba et al. 1993). While giving is undeniably associated with wealth, many people who can afford to give do not do so, while others give beyond their means. If the major parties have dissimilar geographic bases of electoral support, do they also have different bases of financial support? In an era when the two major parties appear to be well matched in their capacity to raise funds, determining where the gold is most profitably mined contributes to practical and scientific knowledge about politics.Second, does geographic context have an independent effect on campaign contributions? The geographic distribution of campaign contributions could be merely an artifact of the spatial distribution of individuals with the resources and inclination to give. However, there is good reason to expect otherwise,

show abstract

“…2. While this paper focuses on which candidate's donors support conditional on giving money, several studies also find that more ideologically extreme and wealthier individuals are more likely to become donors (Clyde Brown, Hedges, and Powell 1980;Verba, Schlozman, and Brady 1995 Magleby, Goodliffe, and Olson (2015) find that motivations between small and large donors at the presidential level are quite similar. 6.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Donation Motivations

Barber

2016

Political Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Understanding why donors give money to legislative candidates is vital for assessing how money influences politics. In this paper, I test theories of why political action committees (PACs) and individuals, the two largest sources of campaign money, contribute to legislative candidates. Using a variety of data at the state and federal level, I show dramatic differences between individual and PAC contribution patterns. An original survey of donors in the 2012 election cycle shows that individuals consistently rank ideological concerns as highly important when deciding where to give. Finally, using two different within-legislator designs, I show a causal relationship between incumbency, ideology, and contributions. These results provide the most direct and comprehensive test of contributor motivations to date.

show abstract

Modes of Elite Political Participation: Contributors to the 1972 Presidential Candidates

Cited by 27 publications

References 10 publications

Effects of Horse-Race Coverage on Campaign Coffers: Strategic Contributing in Presidential Primaries

Effects of Horse-Race Coverage on Campaign Coffers: Strategic Contributing in Presidential Primaries

The Political Geography of Campaign Contributions in American Politics

Donation Motivations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About