The New Hampshire Effect in Presidential Nominations

Steger, Wayne P.; Dowdle, Andrew; Adkins, Randall

doi:10.2307/3219848

Cited by 18 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even when examining predicted changes in polls only one or two days later, we fail to find that increases in national news media exposure, while holding polling forces constant, produce any consistent future changes in public support. In combination with results from recent analyses (Cohen et al 2008;Steger et al 2004), there is little evidence that a gain in national news media exposure, in and of itself, provides any polling benefits within the invisible primary.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Our second analysis evaluates the relative contribution of national and early state performance on invisible primary campaign contributions. We analyze campaign contributions because cash reserves are another important predictor of nomination success (Steger et al 2004). Although the independence of their influence is rightly questioned (Cohen et al 2008), raising funds is still a necessary task that takes up a large portion of candidate efforts during the exhibition season.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Adkins and Dowdle (2001) found that after controlling for national poll standings and fund-raising numbers, New Hampshire and Iowa outcomes mostly improve predictions of candidate placement but do not modify the winner. At most, Steger et al (2004) and Steger (2007) find that New Hampshire has a "correcting" effect on candidate performance, where New Hampshire's contribution is much more influential among Democrats. In their analysis Cohen et al (2008) found that early state victories make significant contributions, but they also found these victories reflect national invisible primary forces such as a campaign's overall level of funding.…”

Section: Front-loading and The National Invisible Primarymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Indeed candidates for nomination often withdraw in this period, and party nominations are clinched within, what was until recently, mostly shorter and shorter time periods (Haynes et al 2004;Norrander 2006). Recent scholarship now emphasizes that a candidate's level of funding and national political support at the beginning of the primary season largely determine who wins the nomination Dowdle 2001, 2005;Cohen et al 2008;Mayer 1996Mayer , 2003Steger et al 2004;Steger 2007). As a result, long shots have less of a chance to compete with early front-runners (Steger 2000), leading some scholars to conclude that parties have essentially turned back previous electoral reforms (Aldrich 2009;Cohen et al 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent analyses of what predicts nomination success have painted the contribution of New Hampshire as small and Iowa as nonexistent (Adkins and Dowdle 2001;Steger et al 2004;Steger 2007), to the point some scholars liken these contests to "bumps in the road" Dowdle 2001, 2004). The minor role of these states thus pales in comparison to that of national party endorsements, campaign cash reserves, and national poll standings at the end of the invisible primary period.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Polls and Elections: Still Part of the Conversation: Iowa and New Hampshire's Say within the Invisible Primary

Christenson

Smidt

2012

Pres Stud Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We propose that the extant literature has underestimated the central roles of Iowa and New Hampshire within the invisible primary and, thus, party nominations. Since candidates and the news media focus disproportionately on these states early in the nomination season, impressions of candidate performance within these states have a disproportionate influence on the invisible primary long before their actual outcomes are observed. Using a Bayesian vector autoregression we find that polls within Iowa and New Hampshire have a more consistent influence on candidates' levels of national news media coverage and national polling than vice versa. We also find that campaign contributions are as responsive to early state polls as they are to national forces or campaign activities. Although these findings do not dispute that candidates need a broad basis of national support to win a party's nomination, they explain why candidates continue to campaign early and intensely in these first‐in‐the‐nation contests.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 95%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Front-loading and The National Invisible Primarymentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Polls and Elections: Still Part of the Conversation: Iowa and New Hampshire's Say within the Invisible Primary

Christenson

Smidt

2012

Pres Stud Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Visual priming and framing of the 2016 GOP and Democratic Party presidential primary debates

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In an on-demand media environment, the 2016 presidential primary debates provided a ratings and economic boost to host networks surpassing all prior primary debates and even major sporting events in viewership. In turn, millions of viewers were exposed to and subtly influenced by the ways in which these candidates were visually presented. We analyze how the Republican and Democratic presidential candidates were presented in their initial two debates (Fox News and CNN; CNN and CBS, respectively). Candidates are considered in terms of visual priming through aggregate camera time and average camera fixation time and how contenders were visually framed through the proportion of different camera shot types used (solo, split screen, side by side, multiple candidate, and audience reaction). Findings suggest that while the front-runners from both political parties benefited from preferential visual coverage, Donald Trump stood out in terms of the visual priming and framing that presented him as a serious contender.

show abstract

The Attrition Game: Initial Resources, Initial Contests and the Exit of Candidates During the US Presidential Primary Season

Norrander

2006

Brit. J. Polit. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In contests for the presidential nominations from the Democratic and Republican parties in the United States, the duration of candidacies determines both the winning candidate (i.e., the one who outlasts his or her opponents) and the amount of intraparty conflict before the nomination is bestowed. This article analyses how strategic considerations lead some candidates to exit the race more quickly than others. Factors which could shape such strategic considerations include initial candidate assets and characteristics (national poll standings, fund-raising totals and occupational background), initial contest outcomes (Iowa and New Hampshire) and structural variables (proportional representation delegate distribution rules, party, front-loaded calendar).Results from a duration model indicate that poll standings, money (in a curvilinear pattern), New Hampshire and Iowa results, occupational backgrounds and the front-loading of the primary calendar shaped the length of candidacies for presidential contestants from 1980 to 2004. Candidates lacking in initial assets or early victories leave the nomination race in a process most resembling a game of attrition.

show abstract

The New Hampshire Effect in Presidential Nominations

Cited by 18 publications

References 0 publications

Polls and Elections: Still Part of the Conversation: Iowa and New Hampshire's Say within the Invisible Primary

Polls and Elections: Still Part of the Conversation: Iowa and New Hampshire's Say within the Invisible Primary

Visual priming and framing of the 2016 GOP and Democratic Party presidential primary debates

The Attrition Game: Initial Resources, Initial Contests and the Exit of Candidates During the US Presidential Primary Season

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About