Change and Continuity in the 2012 and 2014 Elections by Paul R. Abramson & John Aldrich & Brad T. Gomez & David Rohde

Author:Paul R. Abramson & John Aldrich & Brad T. Gomez & David Rohde [Abramson, Paul R.]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Published: 2015-04-15T04:00:00+00:00

Whether experienced politicians actually run for the House or Senate is not an accident. These are significant strategic decisions made by politicians, and they have much to lose if they make the wrong choice. The choices will be governed by factors related to the perceived chance of success, the potential value of the new office compared to what will be lost if the candidate fails, and the costs of running.31 The chances of success of the two major parties vary from election to election, both locally and nationally. Therefore, each election offers a different mix of experienced and inexperienced candidates for the House and Senate from the two parties.

The most influential factor in whether a potential candidate will run is whether there is an incumbent in the race. High reelection rates tend to discourage potentially strong challengers from running, which in turn makes it even more likely that the incumbents will win. In addition to the general difficulty of challenging incumbents, factors related to specific election years (both nationally and in a particular district) will affect decisions to run. For example, the Republican Party had particular difficulty recruiting strong candidates in 1986 because of fears about a potential backlash from the Iran-Contra scandals. And the 2008 decline in experienced candidates just cited was likely mainly due to the minority Republicans being unable to recruit strong candidates in many districts because the electoral environment was perceived to be negative for their party. On the other hand, recent research indicates that potential House candidates are most strongly influenced in their decision by their perceived chances of winning their party’s nomination.32 Moreover, the actions of incumbents may influence the choices of potential challengers. For example, building up a large reserve of campaign funds between elections may dissuade some possible opponents, although analysis of Senate contests (which usually involve experienced challengers) indicates that this factor does not have a systematic impact in those races.33

As we have seen, most congressional races do not involve challengers who have previous office experience. Given their slight chance of winning, why do challengers without experience run at all? As Jeffrey S. Banks and D. Roderick Kiewiet pointed out, although the chances of success against incumbents may be small for such candidates, such a race may still be their best chance of ever winning a seat in Congress.34 If inexperienced challengers were to put off their candidacies until a time when there is no incumbent, their opposition would likely include multiple experienced candidates from both parties. Moreover, as David Canon demonstrated, previous office experience is an imperfect indicator of candidate quality, because some candidates without such experience can still have significant political assets and be formidable challengers.35 For example, four former television journalists who had never previously held office won House seats in 1992, and three of them defeated incumbents. They were able to build on their substantial name recognition among voters to win nomination and election.36 For more recent examples, consider two 2000 contests, one from each chamber. The

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.