The primary question: is the presidential nominating process sufficiently democratic?

Date
2008
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Producer
Director
Performer
Choreographer
Costume Designer
Music
Videographer
Lighting Designer
Set Designer
Crew Member
Funder
Rehearsal Director
Concert Coordinator
Moderator
Panelist
Alternative Title
Department
Haverford College. Department of Political Science
Type
Thesis
Original Format
Running Time
File Format
Place of Publication
Date Span
Copyright Date
Award
The Herman M. Somers Prize in Political Science
Language
eng
Note
Table of Contents
Terms of Use
Rights Holder
Access Restrictions
Haverford users only
Tripod URL
Identifier
Abstract
For decades, political scholars focused their analysis of presidential campaigns on the general election and for the most part, disregarded the nominating process. However, as political scientists came to view the general election as simply the homestretch in a much longer marathon, greater attention has been paid to the primaries and caucuses that constitute the race for the nomination. This surge of interest in the nomination stage of the election was the result in part, of the delegate selection reforms of the 1960s and 1970s, which opened the process up to a much larger audience. This additional transparency combined with the horse race qualities of modem primary campaigns attracted greater media focus, and ultimately led to a larger body of academic literature. From the backyards and town halls ofNew Hampshire to the coast-to-coast marathon of Super Tuesday to the grandstanding ofthe national convention, analysis of the nomination process must take into account a shifting landscape of unpredictable, interdependent variables. Through each of several grueling stages, the nomination campaign showcases each party's respective strengths and weaknesses, and helps to shape the political focus of the general election. Even more significantly, the system that produces the president reflects our priorities in terms of the nature of the presidency and the character of the individual we ultimately elect. Consequently, a sophisticated understanding of the nomination process is crucial for the accurate perception of our democracy. Under the Constitution and by cultural consensus, the general election is expected to provide democratic representation, but the nominating process did not always carry those same expectations. In part this may be because, whether it consisted of congressional caucuses, conventions or primaries, political parties have historically dictated the nomination. However, over time, the nominating process has transformed, moving from the domain of the elite to a more inclusive grassroots paradigm. In the last fifty years, the role of rank-and-file voters has changed, raising the question ofhow democratic the process truly is, how much democracy produces the optimal result and whether the system is currently functioning at its greatest potential. Although political scientists now agree on the significance of the nomination process, there are divergent views on how it should be run and what its fundamental purpose should be. In this attempt to evaluate the level of democracy in the presidential nomination system, I will begin by laying out the historical development of the United States' method of presidential selection. I will then outline the relevant scholarly literature and establish four distinct schools of thought. Next I will describe my research design, which is intended to evaluate each school of thought's conclusions in light of a case study of the 2008 presidential primaries, using interviews, newspaper articles, and polling data. Finally, I will discuss which school of thought's analysis seems most valid in light of the 2008 presidential nomination race and propose appropriate subjects for future study.
Description
Citation