Abstract
Abstract
The influence of congressional primary elections on candidate positioning remains disputed and poorly understood. We test whether candidates communicate artificially “extreme” positions during the nomination, as revealed by moderation following a primary defeat. We apply a scaling method based on candidates language on Twitter to estimate positions of 988 candidates in contested US House of Representatives primaries in 2020 over time, demonstrating validity against NOMINATE (r > 0.93) where possible. Losing Democratic candidates moderated significantly after their primary defeat, indicating strategic position-taking for perceived electoral benefit, where the nomination contest induced artificially “extreme” communication. We find no such effect among Republicans. These findings have implications for candidate strategy in two-stage elections and provide further evidence of elite partisan asymmetry.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Reference94 articles.
1. Factional Conflict and Independent Expenditures in the 2018 Democratic House Primaries
2. Cowburn, M (2022) Partisan polarization in congressional nominations: how ideological & factional primaries influence candidate positions. Doctoral Thesis Freie Universität Berlin.
3. Getting Primaried
4. Kearney, MW (2018) rtweet: An implementation of calls designed to collect and organize Twitter data via Twitter's REST and stream application program interfaces.
5. Preference Gaps and Inequality in Representation
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献