Public opinion on reforming U.S. primaries

IF 1.8 3区 社会学 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE Social Science Quarterly Pub Date : 2024-03-21 DOI:10.1111/ssqu.13370
Robert G. Boatright, Caroline J. Tolbert, Nathan K. Micatka
{"title":"Public opinion on reforming U.S. primaries","authors":"Robert G. Boatright, Caroline J. Tolbert, Nathan K. Micatka","doi":"10.1111/ssqu.13370","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ObjectiveFew studies have measured public attitudes about reform proposals for changing direct primaries. Despite strong public support over the past century for holding primaries, does the public want to change the direct primary, given its very low voter turnout and its potential role in fostering political polarization?MethodUsing a unique nationally representative survey of 3000 U.S. adults conducted in March 2023 by YouGov, this study shows that a majority of Americans support reform of primary elections.ResultsThe reforms which receive the greatest support are those that seem more “democratic” such as establishing national congressional primary and holding open primaries. There is lower support for reforms that give political parties more control over selecting candidates, such as state party conventions. There are significant differences between Republicans, Democrats, and independents, while factors such as interest, education, gender, and race have a minimal impact. Individuals living in states with nonpartisan primaries are more favorable toward this specific reform, ranked‐choice voting, and open primaries, but primary type was not significant in regression models.ConclusionsThe public is opposed to reforms that give parties more say in choosing candidates, consistent with public sentiment a century earlier when the direct primary was adopted.","PeriodicalId":48253,"journal":{"name":"Social Science Quarterly","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Science Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.13370","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveFew studies have measured public attitudes about reform proposals for changing direct primaries. Despite strong public support over the past century for holding primaries, does the public want to change the direct primary, given its very low voter turnout and its potential role in fostering political polarization?MethodUsing a unique nationally representative survey of 3000 U.S. adults conducted in March 2023 by YouGov, this study shows that a majority of Americans support reform of primary elections.ResultsThe reforms which receive the greatest support are those that seem more “democratic” such as establishing national congressional primary and holding open primaries. There is lower support for reforms that give political parties more control over selecting candidates, such as state party conventions. There are significant differences between Republicans, Democrats, and independents, while factors such as interest, education, gender, and race have a minimal impact. Individuals living in states with nonpartisan primaries are more favorable toward this specific reform, ranked‐choice voting, and open primaries, but primary type was not significant in regression models.ConclusionsThe public is opposed to reforms that give parties more say in choosing candidates, consistent with public sentiment a century earlier when the direct primary was adopted.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
公众对美国初选改革的看法
目的很少有研究衡量过公众对改变直接初选的改革提案的态度。尽管在过去的一个世纪中,公众对举行初选给予了强有力的支持,但鉴于直接初选的投票率非常低,而且有可能助长政治两极分化,那么公众是否希望改变直接初选呢?方法利用YouGov在2023年3月对3000名美国成年人进行的具有全国代表性的独特调查,本研究表明,大多数美国人支持初选改革。支持率较低的改革是让政党在选择候选人方面拥有更多控制权的改革,如州政党大会。共和党人、民主党人和无党派人士之间存在显著差异,而兴趣、教育、性别和种族等因素的影响则微乎其微。生活在无党派初选州的个人更倾向于这一特定改革、排序选择投票和公开初选,但初选类型在回归模型中并不显著。结论公众反对赋予政党在选择候选人方面更多发言权的改革,这与一个世纪前采用直接初选时的公众情绪一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
10.50%
发文量
111
期刊介绍: Nationally recognized as one of the top journals in the field, Social Science Quarterly (SSQ) publishes current research on a broad range of topics including political science, sociology, economics, history, social work, geography, international studies, and women"s studies. SSQ is the journal of the Southwestern Social Science Association.
期刊最新文献
Domains of baseless belief and the characteristics of believers Attitudes toward abortion legality and abortion regulation: Insights from a nationally representative study An advanced learning approach for detecting sarcasm in social media posts: Theory and solutions Not ready to make nice: Congressional candidates’ emotional appeals on Twitter Climate‐related disasters and transparency: Records and the United States Federal Emergency Management Agency
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1