Search

In this research we outline and evaluate a theory of the 'calculus of concession': when and why presidential primary candidates exit the race. Our explanation builds on prior studies of candidate attrition that traditionally emphasize money. However, we focus additional attention on the role of the press and its potential to influence a candidate's exit decision. Data from the 2000 Republican presidential nomination campaign are used to test a Weibull model of candidate exit. Our results suggest that money is a critical component. But our research also demonstrates that the influence of money on candidates' decisions depends on the candidate's competitive position in the race. The availability of financial resources is far more critical to a close runner-up than to a less established long shot. Conversely, news coverage is far more critical to the decisions of longshot candidates early in the campaign than it is to big-shot candidates later on. Keywords: presidential nominations; media coverage; money; competitive distance; winnowing

During the past two decades a new perspective known as nonlinear dynamics has caught the imagination of researchers in a number of disciplines of the physical sciences. Recently, some of the assumptions of this theory have begun to be applied to the social sciences, including economics, political science and public administration. We believe that the way the current presidential nomination system aggregates individual preferences into a social choice exhibits behavior consistent with nonlinear dynamics. We argue that the nomination system is characterized by two nonlinear processes: sensitive dependence and nonmonotonic behavior. In this paper, we present a nonlinear dynamical perspective for understanding presidential nomination processes. In particular, we address the question of whether very modest changes in parameters can produce major changes in the outcome of the campaign. We suggest that resource acquisition, resource allocations, vote outcomes, and media verdicts interact with each other in a complex and dynamic fashion that has dramatic effects upon the allocation of delegates, and hence, the final nomination outcome. KEY WORDS: social system, template, chaos theory, replicator, encoding, change

In presidential nomination campaigns, media coverage can influence candidates, resource allocations, their chances of success in subsequent contests, and thus the choice of the eventual nominee. In this study, we analyze the distribution of media coverage during four recent campaigns. The analysis demonstrates that state population is only one of a number of factors that influence the magnitude of coverage, thus individuals in certain states enjoy disproportionate influence over the selection of nominees. In addition, we find that contests that are part of a regional primary receive less coverage, ceteris paribus, than contests that are not. Thus, state-level policy-makers will find it locally disadvantageous to schedule their contests at the same time as neighboring states.

This research examines the influence of delegate selection mode on the financial allocations of presidential candidates. Candidates allocate much more money to primaries than to caucuses. This may be because of differences in campaign style and target audiences. However, most of the difference in spending can be explained in terms of candidates' basic goals: maximizing delegates and media coverage. Inherent differences between primaries and caucuses do influence campaign spending, but the combined impact of those differences is less than the combined impact of external factors.

This research addresses media coverage of Super Tuesday 1988 and the implications of a southern regional primary on campaign strategy. The creators of Super Tuesday hoped, by scheduling nearly all southern primaries on one day, that the news media would devote extraordinary attention to the South. Despite changes in sequence and selection mode that should have increased coverage, nearly all the southern and border states received substantially less media coverage than they did in 1984.

Research in the area of presidential primaries has consistently shown that nomination campaigns are dynamic and that viability is a major determinant of citizens' preferences among candidates. Most previous studies, however, have not incorporated both of these phenomena; they have employed models for only one point in time or they have excluded viability as an explanatory variable. In this research, we test a model of candidate preference to compare the influence of viability and other factors during three phases of the campaign. The results indicate that, the impact of viability increases as candidates' viability becomes more clear and decreases as the campaign progresses., Every four years the American people choose their president by voting first in primaries (or caucuses) and then in the general election. The former is at least as important in [...]