Synopses & Reviews
One of the truisms in American politics has been that "divisive" primaries hurt the party's prospects of winning the presidency in the general election. However, traditional definitions of divisive primaries focus too much on candidate behavior and not enough on the actual divisions and fractures within a party. The Invisible Hands of Political Parties in Presidential Elections proposes a new measure of party cohesion that instead looks at individual donors who are willing to contribute to multiple candidates during the early stages of the presidential primaries. The authors of this collection reveal how these preprimary donor networks can serve as an accurate barometer of party unity, providing a significant perspective on the changing roles of political parties in American government today.
Review
"Invisible Hands challenges the conventional wisdom regarding the effects that the nomination season has on a party's chances in the fall campaign in presidential elections. Dowdle and his colleagues combine a fresh approach, a wealth of unique data and sophisticated analysis to show that contested primaries may actually benefit the party and its candidate in the general election. This book is well written, and is a must read for any serious student of presidential campaigns and elections, political parties, and campaign finance." - Jody Baumgartner, Associate Professor, East Carolina University, USA
"The authors of this volume look to make a major contribution to our understanding of the potential impact of presidential nomination campaigns - mainly why it is that current measures of divisive primaries fail to predict the performance of the party's candidate in the general election. They address this puzzle in their book and they do so in a well-written, methodical, and creative manner. A solid piece of research for political scientists as well as students of politics." - Audrey Haynes, Associate Professor, University of Georgia, USA
Synopsis
This book looks at networks of individual donors during early stages of presidential primary electons to determine party unity. It directly challenges the commonly-held perception that a "divisive" primary is a problem for the political party in the general election.
About the Author
Andrew Dowdle is Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Arkansas, USA.
Scott Limbocker is a PhD student in the Department of Political Science at Vanderbilt University, USA.
Song Yang is Associate Professor of Sociology and Criminal Justice at the University of Arkansas, USA.
Karen Sebold is a Visiting Professor of Political Science at the University of Arkansas, USA.
Patrick A. Stewart is Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science at the University of Arkansas, USA.
Table of Contents
1. Why Contested Primaries May Not be Divisive Primaries
2. Refining (and Redefining) the Party
3. Multiple Donors and the Party as a Network
4. Multiple Donor Networks Begin to Shed Light on the Nomination Process; The 2004 Democratic Nomination Process
5. A Tale of Two Networks: The 2008 Nomination Process
6. A "Not-Romney" Explanation: The 2012 Republican Nomination Process
7. Multiple Donors and Their Place in the Partisan Universe