Abstract
Rackaway characterizes Bernie Sanders’ challenge of Hillary Clinton for the 2016 Democratic Party’s presidential nomination and Donald Trump’s bid for the 2016 Republican Party’s presidential nomination as hostile takeover attempts. He argues that the combination of weak party organizations and strong partisanship makes such attempts increasingly likely. Rackaway provides evidence that a Republican Party rule change in delegate allocation inadvertently helped pave the way for a Trump victory, while Democratic Party contest rules made Sanders’ campaign strategy of focusing on caucuses unlikely to work to secure the Democratic nomination. Despite party organizations’ opposition to these hostile takeover attempts, their weakened state limits their ability to stop upstarts from taking over the party apparatus.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Abramowitz, Alan, John McGlennon, and Ronald Rapoport. 1981. A Note on Strategic Voting in a Primary Election. The Journal of Politics 43 (3): 899–904.
Aldrich, John H. 2009. The Invisible Primary and Its Effects on Democratic Choice. PS: Political Science & Politics 42 (1): 33–38.
Andrews, Wilson, Kitty Bennett, and Alicia Parlapiano. 2016. 2016 Delegate Count and Primary Results. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/elections/primary-calendar-and-results.html?_r=0. Accessed October 10, 2016.
Ansolabehere, Stephen Daniel, and Gary King. 1990. Measuring the Consequences of Delegate Selection Rules in Presidential Nominations. The Journal of Politics 52 (2): 609–621.
Cohen, Marty, David Karol, Hans Noel, and John Zaller. 2008. The Invisible Primary in Presidential Nominations, 1980–2004. In The Making of the Presidential Candidates, ed. William G. Meyer, 1–38. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Cook, Rhodes. 2004. The Presidential Nominating Process: A Place for Us? Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Enten, Harry. 2016. Bernie Sanders Continues to Dominate Caucuses, but He’s About to Run Out of Them. FiveThirtyEight.com . https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bernie-sanders-continues-to-dominate-caucuses-but-hes-about-to-run-out-of-them/. Accessed March 20, 2017.
Fairvote.org. 2016. 2016 Primary Rules and Types. http://www.fairvote.org/primaries#presidential_primary_or_caucus_type_by_state. Accessed March 17, 2017.
Fiorina, Morris P. with Samuel J. Abrams, and Jeremy C. Pope. 2005. Culture War? The Myth of a Polarized America. Hoboken, NJ: Pearson Longman.
Hedlund, Ronald D., Meredith W. Watts, and David M. Hedge. 1982. Voting in an Open Primary. American Politics Quarterly 10 (2): 197–218.
Herrera, Richard. 1994. Are “Superdelegates” Super? Political Behavior 16 (1): 79–92.
Hitlin, Robert A., and John S. Jackson. 1979. Change & Reform in the Democratic Party. Polity 11 (4): 617–633. doi:10.2307/3234340.
Kaufmann, Karen M., James G. Gimpel, and Adam H. Hoffman. 2003. A Promise Fulfilled? Open Primaries and Representation. The Journal of Politics 65 (2): 457–476.
Krieg, Gregory. 2015. Why There Are So Many Republicans Running in 2016. Mic.com . https://mic.com/articles/119530/the-real-reason-so-manyrepublicans-are-running-for-president-nbsp#.jKHzLoen2. Accessed March 20, 2017.
Marshall, Thomas R. 1978. Turnout and Representation: Caucuses Versus Primaries. American Journal of Political Science 22 (1): 169–182. doi:10.2307/2110674.
Mayer, William G. 2009. Superdelegates: Reforming the Reforms Revisited. In Reforming the Presidential Nomination Process, ed. Steven S. Smith and Melanie J. Springer, 85–108. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Mayer, William G., and Andrew E. Busch. 2003. The Front-Loading Problem in Presidential Nominations. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
McGhee, Eric, Seth Masket, Boris Shor, Steven Rogers, and Nolan McCarty. 2014. A Primary Cause of Partisanship? Nomination Systems and Legislator Ideology. American Journal of Political Science 58 (2): 337–351.
Meinke, Scott R., Jeffrey K. Staton, and Steven T. Wuhs. 2006. State Delegate Selection Rules for Presidential Nominations, 1972–2000. The Journal of Politics 68 (1): 180–193. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00379.x.
Norrander, Barbara. 1993. Nomination Choices: Caucus and Primary Outcomes, 1976–88. American Journal of Political Science 37 (2): 343–364. doi:10.2307/2111376.
NR Symposium. 2016. Conservatives Against Trump. National Review. January 21, 2016.
Oliver, J. Eric. 1996. The Effects of Eligibility Restrictions and Party Activity on Absentee Voting and Overall Turnout. American Journal of Political Science 40 (2): 498–513. doi:10.2307/2111634.
Panagopoulos, Costas. 2010. Are Caucuses Bad for Democracy? Political Science Quarterly 125 (3): 425–442.
Pomper, Gerald. 1979. New Rules and New Games in Presidential Nominations. The Journal of Politics 41 (3): 784–805.
Putnam, Josh. 2016a. 2016 Republican Delegate Allocation Rules by State. Frontloading HQ. http://frontloading.blogspot.com/p/2016-republican-delegate-allocation-by.html. Accessed March 10, 2017.
———. 2016b. 2016 Democratic Delegate Allocation Rules by State. Frontloading HQ. http://frontloading.blogspot.com/p/2016-democratic-delegate-allocation.html. Accessed March 10, 2017.
Redlawsk, David P., Caroline J. Tolbert, and Todd Donovan. 2011. Why Iowa?: How Caucuses and Sequential Elections Improve the Presidential Nominating Process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Schuman, Howard, and Stanley Presser. 1979. The Open and Closed Question. American Sociological Review 44 (5): 692–712.
Skelley, Geoffrey. 2016. The Modern History of the Republican Presidential Primary, 1976–2012. Sabato’s Crystal Ball. http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystallball/articles/the-modern-history-of-the-republican-presidential-primary-1976-2012/. Accessed April 20, 2017.
Snyder, James, and Michael Ting. 2011. Electoral Selection with Parties and Primaries. American Journal of Political Science 55 (4): 782–796.
Southwell, Priscilla L. 1986. The 1984 Democratic Nomination Process: The Significance of Unpledged Superdelegates. American Politics Quarterly 14 (1–2): 75–88.
———. 1988. Open Versus Closed Primaries and Candidate Fortunes, 1972–1984. American Politics Quarterly 16 (3): 280–295.
———. 1991. Open Versus Closed Primaries: The Effect on Strategic Voting and Candidate Fortunes. Social Science Quarterly 72: 789–796.
———. 2012. A Backroom Without the Smoke? Superdelegates and the 2008 Democratic Nomination Process. Party Politics 18 (2): 267–283.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Rackaway, C. (2018). Weak Parties and Strong Partisans. In: Rackaway, C., Rice, L. (eds) American Political Parties Under Pressure. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60879-2_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60879-2_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-60878-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-60879-2
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)