Public support before the primaries is the strongest predictor of presidential candidate attrition and of the aggregate primary vote. Yet little is known about the factors that drive candidate preferences before the primaries. This article examines pre-primary candidate support in national Gallup polls for open presidential nomination races from 1976 to 2004. The study finds that candidate background characteristics have marginal effects on mass partisan support during the earliest phase of the nomination campaign and that campaign-related factors significantly affect pre-primary candidate support once the campaign begins. Prior levels of support, network news coverage, and party elite endorsements are significant factors in explaining variation in mass partisan support for candidates throughout the nomination campaign. The decisions of well-known, party “heavyweights” to enter or not enter the race affect the choices available to partisan voters and the overall competitiveness of the nomination campaign.
Abramowitz, Alan I.1987. Candidate choice before the convention. Political Behavior9:49-61.
2.
Abramowitz, Alan I.1989. Viability, electability, and candidate choice in a presidential primary election: A test of competing models. Journal of Politics51:977-92.
3.
Abramson, Paul, John Aldrich, Phil Paolino, and David Rhode.1992. "Sophisticated" voting in the 1988 presidential primaries. American Political Science Review86:55-69.
4.
Abramson, Paul R., John H. Aldrich, and David W. Rhode .1987. Progressive ambition among United States senators, 1972-1988. Journal of Politics49:3-35.
5.
Adkins, Randall E., and Andrew J. Dowdle .2000. Break out the mint juleps in New Hampshire? Is New Hampshire the "primary" culprit limiting presidential nomination forecasts?American Politics Quarterly28:251-69.
6.
Adkins, Randall E., and Andrew J. Dowdle .2001. How important are Iowa and New Hampshire to winning post-reform presidential nominations? Political Research Quarterly54:431-44.
7.
Adkins, Randall E., and Andrew J. Dowdle .2002. The money primary: What influences the outcome of presidential nomination fundraising? Presidential Studies Quarterly32:256-75.
8.
Adkins, Randall E., and Andrew J. Dowdle .2004. Bumps in the road to the White House: How influential were campaign resources to nominating George W. Bush?Journal of Political Marketing3:1-27.
9.
Adkins, Randall E., and Andrew J. Dowdle .2005. Overcoming pitfalls in forecasting presidential nominations. Presidential Studies Quarterly35:646-60.
10.
Aldrich, John.1980a. Before the convention: Strategies and choices in presidential nominations. Chicago: University of Chicago.
11.
Adkins, Randall E., and Andrew J. Dowdle. 1980b. A dynamic model of presidential nomination campaigns. American Political Science Review74:651-69.
12.
Alexander, Herbert.1984. Money and the presidential nominating process. In The presidential nomination process: Constitutional, economic and political issues, ed. Kenneth W. Thompson.Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
13.
Alexander, Herbert E., and Anthony Corrado .1995. Financing the 1992 election . Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
14.
Bartels, Larry M.1985. Expectations and preferences in presidential nominating campaigns. American Political Science Review79:804-15.
15.
Bartels, Larry M.1988. Presidential primaries and the dynamics of public choice . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University .
16.
Buell, Emmett H., Jr.1987. "Locals" and "Cosmopolitans": State newspaper coverage of the New Hampshire primary. In Media and momentum: The New Hampshire primary and nomination politics, ed. Gary R. Orren and Nelson W. Polsby. Chatham, NJ: Chatham House.
17.
Cohen, Marty, David Karol, Hans Noel, and John Zaller.2005. Mass politics vs. party autonomy: The dynamics of the invisible primary in presidential nominations, 1980-2004. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Washington, DC.
18.
Dowdle, Andrew J., Randall E. Adkins, and Wayne P. Steger .2006. Progressive ambition and presidential nominations, 1972-2004. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Philadelphia, PA.
19.
Haynes, Audrey A., Paul-Henri Gurian, Michael H. Crespin, and Christopher Zorn .2004. The calculus of concession: Media coverage and the dynamics of winnowing in presidential nominations. American Politics Review32:310-37.
20.
Hinckley, Katherine A., and John C. Green .1996. Fundraising in presidential nomination campaigns: The primary lessons of 1988. Political Research Quarterly49:693-718.
21.
Karol, David, Hans Noel, John Zaller, and Marty Cohen.2003. Polls or pols: The real driving force behind presidential nominations. Brooking Review3:36-39.
22.
Katz, Jonathan N. and Gary King.1999. A statistical model for multiparty electoral data. American Political Science Review93:15-32.
23.
Keech, William R., and Donald R. Matthews .1976. The party's choice. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
24.
Keeter, Scott, and Cliff Zukin.1983. Uninformed choice: The failure of the new presidential nomination system. New York: Praeger.
25.
Kenney, Patrick J.1993. An examination of how voters form impressions of candidates' issue positions during the nomination campaign. Political Behavior315:265-88.
26.
Kirkpatrick, Jeanne J.1976. The new presidential elite. New York : Russell Sage Foundation.
27.
Lenart, Silvo.1997. Naming names in a midwestern town: The salience of democratic presidential hopefuls in early 1992. Political Behavior19:365-82.
28.
Marshall, Thomas R.1983. Evaluating presidential nominees: Opinion polls, issues and personalities. Western Political Quarterly36:650-59.
29.
Mayer, William G.1996a. Forecasting nominations. In In pursuit of the White House: How we choose our presidential nominees, ed. William G. Mayer.Chatham, NJ: Chatham House, pp. 44-71.
30.
Mayer, William G.1996b. The divided Democrats: Ideological unity, party reform, and presidential elections. Boulder, CO: Westview.
31.
Mayer, William G., and Andrew E. Busch .2004. The front-loading problem in presidential nominations. Washington, DC: Brookings.
32.
Mutz, Diana C.1995. Effects of horse-race coverage on campaign coffers: Strategic contributing in presidential primaries. Journal of Politics57:1015-42.
33.
Mutz, Diana C.1997. Mechanisms of momentum: Does thinking make it so? Journal of Politics59:104-25.
34.
Newport, Frank.1999. Republican frontrunner one year before presidential election almost always has won nomination. Gallup Monthly. November.
35.
Norrander, Barbara.1986. Correlates of vote choice in the 1980 presidential primaries . Journal of Politics48:156-66.
36.
Norrander, Barbara.1993. Nomination choices: Caucus and primary outcomes, 1976-1988 . American Journal of Political Science37:343-64.
37.
Norrander, Barbara.2000. The end game in post-reform presidential nominations. Journal of Politics62:999-1013.
38.
Norrander, Barbara.2006. The attrition game: Initial resources, initial contests and the exit of candidates during the U.S. presidential primary season. British Journal of Political Science36:487-507.
39.
Patterson, Thomas E.1980. The mass media election. New York: Praeger.
40.
Peabody, Robert L., Norman J. Ornstein, and David W. Rhode .1976. The United States Senate as a presidential incubator: Many are called but few are chosen. Political Science Quarterly91:237-58.
41.
Peffley, Mark.1985. The voter as juror: Attributing responsibility for economic conditions. In Economic conditions and electoral outcomes: The United States and Western Europe, ed. Heinz Eulau and Michael Lewis-Beck.New York: Agathon.
42.
Polsby, Nelson W.1983. Consequences of party reform. New York : Oxford University Press.
43.
Popkin, Samuel.1991. The reasoning voter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
44.
Robinson, Michael J., and Margaret Sheehan .1983. Over the wire and on TV: CBS and UPI in Campaign `80. New York: Russell Sage.
45.
Schlesinger, Joseph A.1966. Ambition and politics: Political careers in the United States. Chicago: Rand McNally.
46.
Steger, Wayne P.2000. Do primary voters draw from a stacked deck? Presidential nominations in an era of candidate-centered campaigns. Presidential Studies Quarterly30:727-53.
47.
Steger, Wayne P.2002. A quarter century of network news coverage of candidates in presidential nomination campaigns. Journal of Political Marketing1:91-116.
48.
Steger, Wayne P.2006. Stepping stone to the White House or tombstone on presidential ambition? Why senators usually fail when they run for the White House. American Review of Politics27:45-70.
49.
Steger, Wayne P.2007. Who wins nominations and why? An updated forecast of the presidential primary vote. Political Research Quarterly60:91-9.
50.
Steger, Wayne P. forthcoming. Inter-party differences in elite support for presidential nomination candidates. American Politics Research.
51.
Steger, Wayne P., Andrew J. Dowdle, and Randall E. Adkins .2004a. Gaining traction: How do frontrunners surface before the presidential primaries ? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association, Chicago, IL.
52.
Steger, Wayne P., Andrew J. Dowdle, and Randall E. Adkins .2004b. The New Hampshire effect in presidential nominations. Political Research Quarterly57:375-90.
53.
Steger, Wayne P., John Hickman, and Ken Yohn.2002. Candidate competition and attrition in presidential primaries, 1912-2000. American Politics Research30:528-54.
54.
Stone, Walter J.1983. Party, ideology, and the lure of victory: Iowa activists in the 1980 prenomination campaign. Western Political Quarterly35:527-38.
55.
Stone, Walter J., Ronald Rapoport, and Lonna Rae Atkeson .1995. A simulation model of presidential nomination choice. American Journal of Political Science39:135-61.
56.
Zaller, John.1991. Information, values, and opinion. American Political Science Review85:1215-37.
