The Not-So-Simple Calculus of Winning: Potential U.S. House Candidates' Nomination and General Election Prospects

Abstract

As the individual qualities of potential House candidates improve, their prospects in both the nomination and general election go up. The same is not true, however, for two key characteristics of the district context in which potential candidates might run: the party of the potential candidate in relation to the incumbent and the partisan makeup of the district. The direction of the effects of both incumbency and district partisanship on prospects, in contrast to the effects of quality, depends upon the stage of the election process. Using a survey of district informants in a random sample of House districts, we find that incumbent and potential‐candidate quality both affect potential candidates’ prospects of winning, with “strategic qualities” generally having a stronger direct effect than “personal qualities.” District partisanship has offsetting and strong effects on potential candidates’ chances in both stages: Nomination prospects decline as the partisan makeup of the district favors the potential candidate, while general election chances increase as district partisanship becomes more favorable. An expected parabolic relationship between chances of winning the seat and district partisanship clearly emerges in the analysis. These effects are fundamental to our understanding of the sources of competition in U.S. House elections.

District Complexity as an Advantage in Congressional Elections

“…First, we examine whether district complexity affects the probability that a quality challenger emerged. Quality challengers (operationalized as candidates with previous office-holding experience) typically enter when conditions are favorable for defeating an incumbent (Bianco 1984;Bond, Covington, and Fleisher 1985;Jacobson 1989;Kernell and Jacobson 1983;Maisel and Stone 1997;Stone and Maisel 2003). Additionally, we include a small extension to the strategic politician thesis (Kernell and Jacobson 1983).…”

The Sense of a Woman: Gender, Ambition, and the Decision to Run for Congress

“…If men and women aspire to different levels of office (e.g., men national-level office, women local-level office) it would be difficult to distinguish whether differences between men and women are motivated by gender, or simply differences 236 POLITICAL RESEARCH QUARTERLY 2 See Maestas, Maisel and Stone 2005;Maisel and Stone 1997;Stone and Maisel 2003;Stone, Maisel, and Maestas 2004. 3 Logit analysis of response patterns indicated significant biases (p < .05) associated with legislative professionalism (-1.43 in the types of offices they seek.…”

“…As the long-term strategic landscape changes from being the most dismal to the most favorable, the predicted probability of being ambitious for the House increases from 36 to 76 percent. Thus, a significant explanatory factor in accounting for progressive ambition is a strategic calculation that reflects relatively fixed attributes of the opportunity structure, including the partisan makeup of the district (Stone and Maisel 2003).…”

Why Do Experienced Challengers Do Better than Amateurs?

“…6 Recent work indicates that incumbent vulnerability is not strictly a political phenomenon. Rather, factors relating to incumbents' and challengers' perceived personal characteristics, such as integrity, problem-solving skills, and ability to work with others, are also significantly related to whether challengers decide to run (Stone et al 2004;Stone and Maisel 2003). However, they cannot be included in an analysis without an exogenous indicator.…”